IBM's But-I-Only-Got-The-Soup Patent

theodp writes "In an Onion-worthy move, the USPTO has decided that IBM inventors deserve a patent for splitting a restaurant bill. Ending an 8+ year battle with the USPTO, self-anointed patent system savior IBM got a less-than-impressed USPTO Examiner's final rejection overruled in June and snagged US Patent No. 7,457,767 Tuesday for its Pay at the Table System. From the patent: 'Though US Pat. No. 5,933,812 to Meyer, et al. discussed previously provides for an entire table of patrons to pay the total bill using a credit card, including the gratuity, it does not provide an ability for the check to be split among the various patrons, and for those individual patrons to then pay their desired portion of the bill. This deficiency is addressed by the present invention.'"

Actually that's not a bad idea

[elrous0]

There really isn't a convenient way to split a check and allow the parties to all still pay with a credit card (at least not in any of the restaurants I've ever been too). We live in a credit card/debit card world now (even the Salvation Army now accepts them [npr.org]) and that sort of thing is actually needed.

Re:So what's the invention?

[Anonymous Coward]

Never have I felt so strongly the "Read The Fucking Article" needed to be spelled out.

"Ending an 8+ year battle..."

[geekmux]

Economy is in the toilet, unemployment setting records, hundreds of billions in bailouts, and we've got IBM over here fighting for 8+ years over this?.

Holy....Shit.

IBM deserves more than this patent, but I don't feel like going to jail.

Re:Actually that's not a bad idea

[Theaetetus]

Yeah, what the hell. We do this all the time at lunch. Splitting a bill is remarkably easy.

Splitting a bill evenly is remarkably easy. Getting separate checks ahead of time is remarkably easy, though a bit of a hassle for the waitstaff. Splitting a bill unevenly is a bit more of a hassle - "Mr. Waiter, please take these cards: Joe will pay $14.51, of which $2.37 is tip; Frank will pay $12.97, of which $2.06 is tip; George will pay $13.61, but refuses to tip because he's a jerk; Ed will pay..."

This invention, aside from any issues with obviousness, allows them all to pay at the table by swiping their cards and putting how much they individually want to pay. Takes any chance for confusion out of the waiter's hands.

Downside: also takes any chance for avoiding fraud out of the waiter's hands. "Hey, this credit card says 'Mary Smith' and you're all men!"

Re:WTF??

[Theaetetus]

'Though U.S. Pat. No. 5,933,812 to Meyer, et al. discussed previously provides for an entire table of patrons to pay the total bill using a credit card, including the gratuity

Since when has paying a restaurant bill with a credit card for a group been patented? Does this mean that I'm paying royalties every time I treat my friends when we go out to eat??

Separate checks, please!!

What gets me is you directly quoted the article, implying that you read it, and even plucked out a quote from the 7th paragraph of the detailed description, but never realized that the Meyer patent (and this one) isn't on a process, but a portable payment unit, kind of like the ones at most cash registers in convenience stores.

Re:For everything else, there's the patent office

[MobyDisk]

I've worked with point-of-sale systems that allowed this at the register. Is it novel because it happens at the table? Gah! That's patentable?

Maybe if we stopped granted patents for these trivial things, people would be forced to innovate for real. And lots of lawyers would have to go out and do something productive in society.

(Sorry, getting down from the soap box)

Re:Go to restaurant

[Archimagus]

This patent seems legit to me. It is not a process patent on splitting the bill. It is a patent for a device at the patrons table where they could enter there credit card and choose how much they wish to pay. I am sure there is a patent for all those self checkout lines at every grocery store chain. This is the same thing except for restaurants and it allows multiple credit cards to be used toward paying the same bill.

Re:Go to restaurant

[squizzar]

It's a patent on a calculator. The machine adds the values that are taken from each card, rather than the waiter. How is it not bleeding obvious.

Some things should be a given when using electronics. Basic mathematical operations such as adding and taking away (no matter how big/small/accurate/fast the calculation) should not be enough to make a patent unique.

prior art

[2gravey]

There's already a method of paying at the table and it does include splitting the bill between as many patrons as you like. They call it "cash".

Re:NO IT'S NOT!!!! Damn...

[cayenne8]

"Think about being out with a large group, trying to make it somewhere by a certain time, trying to hunt down the waitstaff because everyone's ready NOW..."

I don't think it is that big a deal...I've gotten used to no split checks in New Orleans, most restaurants I go to do not split checks.

Simple...you add in the 20% tip to the total, split that evenly amongst the people there...pay and go.

The only time you usually have a problem with this, is if you have a table full of chicks, who insist on whipping out the calculators and separating everything out to the penny.

I mean geez...if you can't afford to go out to eat with the group, don't go. Sure sometimes you pay a little more...some times a little less..but, it adds up in the end.

Re:Not a problem here

[ubercam]

Since we're on the topic of Germans, sorry to be the German grammar Nazi (again), but your sig...

You can't say "nicht ein" in German, it's always shortened to "kein" + the appropriate adjective ending.

Das ist keine Unterschrift.

Sorry, I couldn't let that one go!

Re:NO IT'S NOT!!!! Damn...

[billcopc]

If the waiter isn't willing to produce individual checks, I wouldn't be willing to produce a 20% tip. How hard is it to hit "Print" in-between each item ?

Re:Actually that's not a bad idea

[ThosLives]

The car: As a whole, not patentable. Various components in the car: patentable (for instance, differential gear).

Lightbulb: patentable - the combination of electricity and filament producing light was not an obvious result at the time of invention.

Refrigerator: As a whole, not patentable (the principles of refrigeration were already known at the time). Various components to make the refrigeration system work - patentable.

Washing Machine: again, as a whole, not patentable, though various components inside might be.

There is a subtle distinction in there. The idea "a machine that automatically agitates clothes in soapy water" is an obvious extension of what people did by hand. Particular components that make that work, though, should be patentable. And I mean things like "use a crank mechanism to cyclically agitate the clothes inside a rotating drum that can centrifugally get rid of the water", not things like "use an electric motor to turn the crank". Basically specific, unique solutions to a problem space, not the problem space itself.

That, in my mind, is the delineation of a good patent opposed to a dubious one.

Re:NO IT'S NOT!!!! Damn...

[vux984]

I mean geez...if you can't afford to go out to eat with the group, don't go. Sure sometimes you pay a little more...some times a little less..but, it adds up in the end.

No it doesn't. Some of my friends pound back 9$ drinks through a meal, others drink water. Some order steak EVERY time, others order a chicken salad, or a club sandwich.

And there is no reason someone who orders 25$ worth of food should have to split the bill evenly with the guy who had a $30 entree and another $50+ in booze. And when we go out to dinner -again- it won't even out, it will just get further out of balance. Because we consistently pick the same items and drink choices.