Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents

BountyQuest CEO Patenting Lighting Toilet Water 183

Posted by Hemos from the excellent-use-of-time dept.
theodp writes "Charles Cella, CEO of the widely-hyped Jeff Bezos and Tim O'Reilly funded patent reform vehicle BountyQuest, has filed for a number of patents since BountyQuest's demise, including one that covers illuminating water in a toilet bowl (see FIG. 7). Cella's co-inventors include principals of Color Kinetics, which has come under fire for strong-arm patent tactics and whose Board colorfully likens its IP to nuclear weapons."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BountyQuest CEO Patenting Lighting Toilet Water More

BountyQuest CEO Patenting Lighting Toilet Water

Comments Filter:

  • Prior Art (Score:3, Funny)

    by Indy Media Watch ( 823624 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:33AM (#12335795) Homepage
    Bah!

    When I was young, we used to chug a pitcher of Plutonium and really light up the bowl.

  • Illuminating Water? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I think they can have that patent

  • Full of shit (Score:4, Informative)

    by Nazi Pope ( 878657 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:35AM (#12335818)

    This guy is full of [shadowbrowser.com]
    shit


    Have a read down the list below. If this patent is granted, we will all be
    taking dumps in the dark.


    The items in question:


    57. A method of providing illumination for a toilet, comprising: providing a
    light system with a plurality of LEDs and a processor for controlling a color of
    light from the LEDs; and disposing the light system in connection with a toilet.

    58. A method of claim 57, wherein disposing the light system comprises disposing
    it on the seat of the toilet.

    59. A method of claim 57, wherein disposing the light system comprises disposing
    it in the toilet bowl.

    60. A method of claim 57, wherein disposing the light system comprises disposing
    it in a rack above the toilet bowl.

    61. A method of claim 57, wherein disposing the light system comprises disposing
    it in connection with an odor control facility.

    62. A system for providing illumination for a toilet, comprising: a light system
    with a plurality of LEDs and a processor for controlling a color of light from
    the LEDs; and a toilet, wherein the light system is disposed to illuminate a
    portion of the toilet.

    63. A system of claim 63, wherein the light system is disposed on the seat of
    the toilet.

    64. A system of claim 63, wherein the light system is disposed in the toilet
    bowl.

    65. A system of claim 63, wherein the light system is disposed in a rack above
    the toilet bowl.

    66. A system of claim 63, wherein the light system is disposed in connection
    with an odor control facility.


    • Re:Full of shit (Score:3, Funny)

      by Tx ( 96709 )
      IOW he's trying to patent any use of LED lighting anywhere in or around a toilet. Surely the requirement for inventions not to be obvious would prevent this patent from being granted.

      63. A system of claim 63, wherein the light system is disposed on the seat of
      the toilet.

      I like the recursive nature of this item though, maybe the guy is a GNU fan.

      • Re:Full of shit (Score:3, Interesting)

        by back_pages ( 600753 )
        Surely the requirement for inventions not to be obvious would prevent this patent from being granted.

        I've said this countless times and my goal is to be eventually moderated Redundant instead of alternating between Troll and Informative.

        [Crash course]"Obvious" as regards a US patent means that you can produce multiple pieces of prior that can be combined to produce the claimed invention, AND you have documented motivation in the prior art (very preferably in one of those references).[/Crash course]

        See f

    • 67. A system for providing illumination for a toilet, comprising: a school of sharks with frickin' lasers beams attached to their heads.
    • Imagine the endless hours of fun you'll have creating a short in one of these toilets so that when your drunken buddies go pee......ZAPP!!!

      • Myth: Busted (Score:3, Informative)

        by don_carnage ( 145494 )
        Err...Mythbusters busted that myth. See the "Peeing on the third rail" episode. Apprarently, the urine stream is not solid, but rather made up of droplets after a certain distance. Informative!
        • The difference in distance, height-wise, between the toilet and the ground (where the 3rd rail is) might be big enough that the droplets wouldn't have that "certain distance" in which to form. IDK, just speculation.
        • Mythbusters busted that myth. See the "Peeing on the third rail" episode.

          I have issues with their test method. Their fake, gravity-powered bladder is no match for a real, muscle-powered bladder. The correct next step would be to film a real guy peeing to see if the stream is solid, not to move the rail up to within an inch of their dummy. But I guess they didn't have time to do that or something, so instead they go with the cheap, easy way out so they can show their dummy getting 'electrocuted' in front o

          • Re:Myth: Busted (Score:3, Informative)

            by don_carnage ( 145494 )
            There was another episode in which they followed-up on that "third rail" experiment using Adam as the test dummy. Hilarity ensued. He actually did get shocked by the electric fence, but then he was inches from it.
    • Does that mean if I go out and get drunk, then have a "technicolor yawn" while "praying to the porcelin god" that I am infringing on his patents and he can sue more for royalties?

      If I take my "technicolor yawn" and send it to his home address am I no longer liable for royalties?

    • Re:Full of shit (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This guy is full of shit

      No pun intended (?).

    • Re:Full of shit (Score:2, Informative)

      by Robotz ( 451860 )
      Wouldn't this toilet seat count as prior art? http://www.kiss-textil.de/galactikaen.htm [kiss-textil.de]
    • Most swimming pools have lights which illuminate the water. People frequently pee in swimming pools, making them a kind of toilet. There's your prior art

  • I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geminidomino ( 614729 ) * on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:36AM (#12335824) Journal
    Is this him trying to get an utterly absurd patent to forward the cause of patent reform, or is he just the sort of whore who would take a CEO position at a patent-reforming company, then start patenting willy-nilly when it went belly up?
    • I don't know, but I smell money.

      I'm going to apply for a patent for "Method and Process for Modifying the Air Flow Characteristics of Olfactory Sensors"

      ... then I can start charging all the little brats for picking their noses.

  • inovation (Score:4, Funny)

    by ExKoopaTroopa ( 671002 ) <tkoopa@@@gmail...com> on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:37AM (#12335830)
    for all those who think that the sun shines out of their backside ...
  • Is persistantly glowing toilet water, so when that Charles Cella goes in and drops that big brick (that he's so full of) and water splashes his undercarriage, he can walk around with a glowing backside!
  • I filed a patent for turning the lighted water in a toilet bowl yellow.

    What kind of stupid moron thinks this patent is worth the paper its written on? Is there a large market for lighted toilet water? What kind of competition is out there?
    • Illuminating is nothing. They need to project advertising and video. I'm sure that accuracy will increase, especially with "targeted" ads, and even when the video isn't visible (due to a seated delivery position), the flickering glow and audio from below will have a significant relaxing effect.
      • We should collectively patent a method of projecting multimedia applications/adverts such as Flash on toilet water.

        It gives a whole new meaning to the web banner ads begging to "hit the cockroach", "shock the monkey" or "swat the fly".

        Now we will have "sink the battleship" or "put out the fire". Men at urinals everywhere will try to "shoot down the zero" or rack up points pissing down animated flies.

        Dunno what we would do for the women...

  • Here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FhnuZoag ( 875558 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:39AM (#12335842)
    Yet another stupid patenting case. It's all getting pretty monotonous.

    What we really need is a patent that *hurt*. Nothing will get rid of this ridiculous system, until we find a way to grab the legislators in the balls.

    Maybe we need to play dirty. We need patents that compromise the US's national defense. Patents that prevent the IRS from doing its job. Patents that hurt lawyers, and politicians, and people in charge of the system who have no idea what they are doing.

    • Re:Here we go again (Score:3, Interesting)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      We need patents that compromise the US's national defense. Patents that prevent the IRS from doing its job.

      Those wouldn't help, as Congress could just authorize eminent domain and expense a token "just compensation".

      • perhaps instead of small ip hoarding companies such as eolas suing microsoft, they should go after their customers - the US government. This would be much better for all involved (except microsoft, who it would hurt the same, prehaps more). hopefully the us goverment would get off their arse and get rid of software patents and supid patents in other fields.
        • perhaps instead of small ip hoarding companies such as eolas suing microsoft, they should go after their customers - the US government.

          Customers aren't liable for a business' violating a patent. To wit, Polaroid v. Kodak: Kodak made an instant camera that violated Polaroid's patent on same. Kodak had to stop making the infringing cameras and their film plus pay Polaroid damages + interest plus had to buy back all the infringing Kodak cameras from people that bought them. Side note: It's often amusing to s

          • Anyone who infringes a patent is liable, even if he bought an infringing item or method from a vendor. The vendor is liable for contributory infringement. In practice, the inventor usually prefers to sue the vendor rather than pursue a huge number of customers whose liability will be quite small.

            For an example of the patent holder pursuing the end user, look up the Solaia [manufacturing.net] case.
            • Anyone who infringes a patent is liable, even if he bought an infringing item or method from a vendor. The vendor is liable for contributory infringement. In practice, the inventor usually prefers to sue the vendor rather than pursue a huge number of customers whose liability will be quite small. For an example of the patent holder pursuing the end user, look up the Solaia case.

              How about an example that amounts to more than extortion? Solaia has only threatened legal action and received out of court sett

    • Sovereign immunity (Score:3, Informative)

      by redelm ( 54142 )
      Sorry, won't work. The US Federal government has the right to use any patent it wishes, royalty-free.

      Lawyers & politicians haven't been doing much new and innovative that might be stopped by patent. That's one of their many problems.

      • Sorry, won't work. The US Federal government has the right to use any patent it wishes, royalty-free.

        Well, it might work... assuming the current government motto of "outsource everything" comes into play. Take for example, Private Military Companies [globalsecurity.org]. If the army wants to sidestep Geneva conventions and public oversight by outsourcing the ugly parts to corporations, then someone should be able to patent something important to effectively toss a sabot into the machinery [wordorigins.org].

        Left as an exercise to reader: After d

  • I like pictures. Now while I can go to the site, no pictures show up. Anyone got a mirror somewhere?
  • ...so long as he doesn't infringe my patent on Improvement in Method of Leaving Things Well Enough Alone.

  • Is there an invention here? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by russotto ( 537200 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:42AM (#12335859) Journal
    Or is it just a bunch of blue-skying about lighting things up?

    I think this is the sort of patent Justice Bradley described as the "foam" of the "advancing wave of improvement".

    1) People like things lit
    2) There's lots of ways of lighting things now.
    3) Here, we'll broadly patent lighting up a whole bunch of things.
    4) PROFIT

    Though I think the "inventor" must have been forced at gunpoint to write this patent... consider the line "Example: as your tidy bowl reached the terrifying point of not flooding the sewer lines with chlorine at every flush, your tiny tricolor LED would pulse RED hues to alert you."
    • i'm thinking they just found SOME way to light things in water, or under water, with a microchip. Once discovered, you've got to CYA just in the off chance that it's used for something that actually makes money. You'll see EVERYTHING on there: shaving cream, perfume, any container, any container with a liquid.

      I'd be inclined to think someone told them "It's a good idea. Better include everything AND the kitchen sink on your patent." So they did.

  • K***** (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Just try patenting the illumination of plumbing fixtures. I work for a lighting company. One of our main clients is a plumbing fixture manufacturer whose name begins with K.

    We light commodes, suanas, showers, baths, and faucets all day long, and we won't stop anytime soon.

    See you at the National Homebuilders Show.

    (FYI, colors you will never see in our displays illuminating commodes or tubs: yellow or red. Think about it.)
    • www.kohler.com
    • If you aren't already using bowl, seat, or rack-mounted, microprocessor-controlled LEDs to do this job, then you aren't demonstrating prior art.
      • Of course, but the biggest objection, other than tis patent is stupid, is that putting the controller in the seat isn't terribly novel or non-obvious.

        Any moron with a little cash can file one of these patents. I'm hoping someone slaps this one down, and hard. I'm also not holding my breath.
    • You might find it worth your time to consult your company's lawyer and direct them to 37 CFR 1.99 [uspto.gov]

      Patent examiners are generally given about 10 hours to conduct a prior art search. If they find it, they find it. If they don't, they go home to their families and private lives at the end of the day like anyone else. If you have a financial interest in the prior art, make a simple submission under 37 CFR 1.99. If you have non-secret information, like publicly available product manuals, blue prints, or oth

  • Am I in trouble? (Score:5, Funny)

    by digidave ( 259925 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:44AM (#12335875)
    If he has a patent on lighting toilet water and I have lights in my swimming pool... does that mean I can be sued if I pee in my pool?

    Oh wait, prior art. I did that twenty five years ago. *Whew*

  • Let's be honest about this (Score:5, Funny)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:45AM (#12335880) Homepage Journal
    This shit is very illuminating!

  • Prior art device to create lighted target in bowl (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It attached to the seat lid and shined a light into the bowl to provide a "lights out" target for stand-up pee-ers to aim at.

    I saw this at least 5 years ago.

    Also, Japan is so far ahead of the US for toliet automation -they haves seats/toliets that have lights, sprayed perfumes, measure blood pressure, urine sugar, fecal blood, spray water on your ass after you're done, etc, etc, etc.
  • Sorry but it looks like he's trying to make all case modders pay him on his patent.

    The glowing toilet crap is just that, crap. And about as likely to sell.

    But, from what I read, "All your case mods are belong to him."

  • Next on the patent list...? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Linker3000 ( 626634 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:48AM (#12335905) Journal
    ...lighting a fart?

    Unless someone claims prior (f)art??!!

    Sorry.

  • Bring on the Vogon construction fleets. (Score:3, Funny)

    by TractorBarry ( 788340 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:49AM (#12335915) Homepage
    Lighting toilet water ? Patenting it ? America truly leads the world in innovation.

    Bring on the Vogon construction fleets. Truly our species no longer has any worth.
  • That would have been a shocking development. Is there a massive crack problem in the patent office? It's like Eric Idle on SNL talking about how the USA has been using the English language without paying any royalites.
  • So that's what backlit Taco Bell-and-coffee-induced diarrhea looks like...
    Just what the world needs, a better lighting on our turds.
    Brilliant.

  • This is absurdly pointless... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by alchemist68 ( 550641 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:50AM (#12335920)
    Why would anyone want to illuminate the poo floating or sunken in toilet bowl water? Is this guy patenting this for sake of doing it?

    FYI, most poo is brown (depending on your diet and health) and emits low molecular weight volatile organic compounds (this is why you smell it). I don't need to see it in the dark in the middle of the night. The next thing you know, they'll attach a linux cluster to it with sensors and cataloging every loaf-pinching session for monitoring your health, nutrient uptake, excretory efficiency rating, etc... Then when you're sick, the toilet can forward all the data to the doctors at the hospital.

    "Yup Mr. Smith, it's right here in your toilet's log, your daily intake of fiber decreased over a 7 month period. We recommend that you buy 42 coconuts with the soft fiberous shell intact, and eat the shreaded fiber for one week. This will remove all of the undigested red meat that is obstructing your bowels."

    Worse yet, I actually took the (wasted) time to write this scenerio.

  • don't mix claims no. 6 and 12 together!!! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by capsteve ( 4595 ) * on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:51AM (#12335930) Homepage Journal
    look at the ingredients they intend to illuminate... i hope it's not all together...

    6. A method of claim 5(container contains a fluid), wherein the fluid is selected from the group consisting of water, ammonia, bleach, window cleaner, insect repellant, insect killer, lotion, soap, liquid soap, kitchen cleaner, bathroom cleaner, shaving gel, cleaning fluid, lighter fluid, furniture polish, wood treatment, paint, primer, drain cleaner, disinfectant, room deodorizer, carpet deodorizer, room scent, perfume, cologne, shaving foam, toilet cleaner, aerosol, skin care fluid, suntan lotion, shampoo, surface cleaner, and liquid wax.

    12. A method of claim 1(lighting a product), wherein the household product is selected from the group consisting of a pencil, a pen, a fork, a knife, a spoon, a kitchen utensil, a whisk, a broom, a bottle, a glass, a mug, a coffee maker, a toothpaste tube, a dispenser, a shampoo bottle, a soap holder, a razor, an electric razor, a hair dryer, a picture frame, a marker, a jar, a makeup facility, a perfume dispenser, a brush, a lipstick, and a candle.

    IMHO the USPTO is giving out too many highly specific applications patents. maybe if i specify that my lighting system only illuminates the "toiletbowl-bound stream of urine just before surface impact, thereby creating a firework like display" i'll get a patent for lighting a toiletbowl too! then i can sue anyone who turns the light on to pee!
    • Actually, if you had a rapidly scanning laser positioned just above the waterline in the bowl, trained to scan for a few cm above the waterline, then you would get a very funky display.

      Use 2 or 3 and gradient the colours for that final touch.

      You're onto a winner there!

  • Color Kinetics patent issues (Score:4, Informative)

    by GodBlessTexas ( 737029 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:53AM (#12335939) Journal
    It looks as if Color Kinetics is about to have much, if not all, of their IP portfolio ruled invalid because of a plethora of existing prior art from as far back as the 1970's. All of this has come to light (no pun intended) after their lawsuit with Super Vision International. With that in mind, I don't now how to take this one. Is this a stupid patent that just injures Color Kinetics IP case more, or are they serious? Wouldn't the existing LED based technology that is used to illuminate pools be considered prior art, i.e. the Boca Flash products?
    • Jesus F Christ.

      Two companies involved in a multi-million dollar lawsuit over who has monopoly rights on lighting an assortment of meaningless tat with a bunch of LEDs.

      Let us hope that such government by the legal profession and for the legal profession will never vanish from this earth.

  • Two actual bona fide applications for this patent (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:55AM (#12335959)
    A couple of "real" uses for this patent include:
    1. Spectroscopic analysis of waste products to determine the health of the depositor. There has been some serious R&D on home healthcare monitoring system that analyze waste products (glucose in urine, fiber or blood in the stool, etc.). One scheme is optical or fluorescent spectroscopy of the bowl contents and LEDs could be the light source.
    2. Germicidal lighting: if they use a UV-C LED (280 nm wavelength), then this system could help kill bacteria and viruses in the bowl (And give a nice oval tan on the sitter's butt).
    • Spectroscopic analysis of waste products to determine the health of the depositor. There has been some serious R&D on home healthcare monitoring system that analyze waste products
      I wouldn't describe it as prior art, per se, but every endurance athlete in the world knows how to extract basic health/hydration information from the colour / consistency of urine.

      PS : If you get into the "consistency" bit, you're in big, big trouble.
    • [...]if they use a UV-C LED (280 nm wavelength)[...]

      Are such things actually available yet? The shortest wavelength LED I'd been able to find for sale thus far was, as I recall, around 340nm, and THEY were $50US each...

  • A bit about multi-color LED lighting (Score:5, Informative)

    by maggard ( 5579 ) <michael@michaelmaggard.com> on Monday April 25, 2005 @09:56AM (#12335963) Homepage Journal
    For those out of the loop on this...

    LEDs emit light, directly or indirectly, only on a few narrow wavelengths. Therefore unless you're looking for just those few colors you're going to have to do mixing of multiple LEDs to get intermediate shades.

    Complicating things further is that not all wavelengths are emitted equally strongly, and also that the human eye doesn't perceive all color equally strongly. This isn't a case of RGB, or CMY, it's a few off-variations of differing intensities.

    Therefore to produce a specific shade, say Corporate Logo Color, Pantone #22578, isn't a no-brainer. The same is true for visually smoothly fading from shade to shade, it's not just a matter of turning down Bank A and turning up Bank B. Instead some calculations need to take place to make it all look decent, and that is the space where Color Kinetics has got their patents.

    BTW, for those interested, Color Kinetics makes a home product series, "Sauce". These are night-lights & light bulb replacements that can be set to strobe, flicker, cross-fade in different ranges, etc. They're pricey at US $10-20, are available at many toy stores, and tend to crap out after a year or two of use (the blue goes.)

    I use mine in my bathroom as a ever cross-fading night light, also set to one shade or another on on an empty white living room wall to 'punch it up'. I've friends who use their's for mood lighting in their bedroom.

    • But at least the "Sauce" ramge of things do exactly that: pure ramping of the different PWM-controlled LEDs. The spectrum that the toys go through is not percieved as a constant hue-speed change, but it changes abruptly sometimes. I was very disappointed with this...
  • There, now you don't need to RTFA ;-)
  • and you can truly shed some light on a lot of crap.

    Sorry.
  • if it is meant seriously or not. Of course the thing the /. poster caught about toilets is 1% of the total. It has some interesting ideas like lighting a bottle of wood stain so you can see the color and making spray from a spray can look like rainbows. But of course 99% silly and obvious, if LEDs and processors were cheap.. on the other hand if you are talking about lighting your house with such a processor and aimable leds or projectors (and I've been interested in the projector side for a while) then
  • Finally i have something to aim at when it's 2AM, it's dark and i'm piss drunk (no pun intended).

    But semi-seriously, this thing will really take off once they get Billy Mays [atmospheric-violence.com] to sell it over an infomercial.

  • Is this [mkp.net] prior art? The bottom of the page says " Copyright © 1994-2005 mkp.net....". So it's been up since 1994 or at least from a few years. Although the site says illuminated toilet, not illuminated toilet *water*, it does seem like pretty much what the patent says. (Note: It's not exactly a complete implementation of illuminated toilet/water, but the idea is there on the webpage and that's all that matters.)
    (Also note to the webmaster: sorry for slashdotting your site, dude.)

  • Interesting Colr Kinetics LED patent history (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mononoke ( 88668 ) on Monday April 25, 2005 @10:15AM (#12336088) Homepage Journal
    Color Kinetics has a long history of overly broad patent schemes. Some were so bad that a their competitors in the LED lighting field [svision.com] were forced to form an alliance to combat the CK's over-reaching patent strategies.
  • How else could GI Joe [imdb.com] avoid the shark?
  • After reading that I pictured the TV commercial that offers to help you patent your own ideas. When it shows the people holding up popular products screaming "That was my idea!"

    That will be me now every time I light up the toilet bowl after a trip to Taco Bell.

    Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
  • ... that this is someone who is trying to point out just how ludicrous the US patent system is.

  • Recent advances in semiconductors--LEDs are chips that glow when current runs through them--make that possible. Mueller and Lys anticipated those advances when they first tinkered with LEDs ten years ago [i.e. 1992 approx.] as students at Carnegie Mellon University.

    Wow!

    In 1997 he and Lys formed Color Kinetics to explore ways to control LEDs with microprocessors and software.

    There are ways for microprocessors to control voltages or currents? Incredible!

    [H]e and Lys figured out how to yoke together red, g

  • I have prior art, thanks to grain alcohol and a devil may care attitude:

    Toilet Water Colored a Brilliant Luminescent Orange-Red [bobbyisosceles.com]

  • OK so if you have a container in your house, with liquid, and a light, your breaking his copy right? Well If you use LEDs, just use xenon lights then.

    Seriously this type of enlightened bullcrapp is a joke. Really bring out the seriousness of our patent system where as someone can actually patent this stuff. If current LEDs where available in the 70's prior art would have ruled this out.

    This patent thing has gone way too far-nothing new, but when the tax paying dollars are going to verify these types of
    • No, if you had read the patent you would know that the patent is on the COMBINATION of lighting and a processor. Its not just a light in a container.

      I can think of several valuable uses for a technology of this kind - such as changing the lighting in a refrigerator that holds temperature sensitive materials after a temperature spike. Or by causing individual medicine or food containers that had become dated, spoiled, contaminated, recalled, mishandled or tampered with to glow red.

      The problem I have with
  • *Toilet plays music and shoots colorful fountains of water.*
    Toilet: I am honored to accept your waste.
    Homer: Whoa! They're years ahead of us.

    Kids, watching TV: Hey look, Dad's on TV.
    *Zipper noise.*
    Kids, Marge: AAAAAHAHHHAHAH!

    Anyways, we still haven't caught up with the East's clearly superior lavatory technology. Until then, I say, good luck!
    • Heh, that's one of my favorite Simpsons moments.

      You forgot to mention, however, that the camera was *inside* the bowl, looking up through the water.

      I'd go into more detail, but I had a bad experience with a certain website, with "cx" as its domain name, as a child....

  • Claim 1 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tuxedobob ( 582913 ) <tuxedobob@mac . c om> on Monday April 25, 2005 @10:32PM (#12344010)
    Claim 1 sounds not unlike a light switch or an internal refrigerator light, using a generic definition of "processor".

    1. A method of providing illumination (light) for a household product (wall), comprising: providing a light system (lamp) under the control of a processor (light switch + person) for providing illumination (light) of a selected color (white); and disposing the illumination system in proximity to the household product to light a feature of the household product (putting the lamp near a wall).

    Don't like a wall being considered a household object? Fine, pick something else.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Close