Boingo Awarded a Patent For Hotspot Access

Boingo has scored a patent for accessing a Wi-Fi hotspot by a mobile device. The patent, no. 7,483,984, was issued in January, but Boingo only started talking about it recently. The patent application was filed in December 2002. According to the company, the methods covered by the patent include: "...accessing wireless carrier networks by mobile computing devices, where a client software application hosted by the device accesses carrier networks using wireless access points. For example, when a computer — or netbook, smartphone or any other Wi-Fi-enabled device — is in a location where there are multiple signals, the patented technology looks at each signal and alerts the user which signal will work, showing the signal as an understandable name and ID for the user.The patent covers all wireless technologies and spectrums, as well as any mobile device that access wireless hotspots." The company is not saying anything about whether or how they will attempt to wield this patent.

Dead on arrival...

[Anonymous Coward]

The independent claims contain the key limitation:

wherein two or more carrier network identifiers associated with a common carrier network system are aggregated to generate a carrier network system identifier that is included in the user selectable list

so if you see multiple Starbucks SSIDS, you just display one on the list to pick from.

it would seem, therefore, that if you do not perform this step of aggregating the two or more network identifiers associated with a common network system, you've avoided this patent.

HINT: show 'em all, even if it means showing multiple Starbucks.

My favourite carrier when I'm on the road? LINKSYS

Re:Wiki says FAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you went to all that effort, but you couldn't even skim the summary? Boingo didn't patent the hotspot, they patented a method to have a single signon for multiple wifi (or other spectra) carriers.

Not that this is a sustainable patent (it seems pretty obvious to anyone skilled in the art).

Re:Can we bring back real patent examiners now?

[Dachannien]

My guess without looking up the prosecution history on Public PAIR (which anyone could do when the system is up) is that the key limitation here is that you have to get carrier network information from an access point database using the carrier network identifiers as a key.

Unfortunately, some internal databases at the USPTO have been down all day today, and that includes the databases that supply data to Public PAIR.

Re:Dead on arrival...

[radtea]

The independent claims contain the key limitation

Yeah, but you have to understand that none of the /. editors knows anything about patents, which is why summaries on patent-related stories always cite completely irrelevant information that has nothing at all to do with what is actually patented. This despite nearly a decade of people who DO know something about patents pointing it out.

It's kind of sad, really. Nerds are supposed to be all up on the facts, but as patent stories on /. make clear, the editors and most of the readership don't care about facts at all, which is why they insist on treating totally unrelated information, like the patent abstract, as if it had something to do with what is actually being patented. It doesn't, and anyone who knows anything about patents knows that.

Re:Boingo.

[$pace6host]

I was traveling a bit recently, and a lot of the WiFi hotspots in airports, restaurants and hotels were free (or included with whatever purchase you were already making). Most of the ones that weren't could be accessed with Boingo, so I looked into it a little. It seems that their "innovation" is that they are a network of networks. The actual WiFi service provider that you use might be AT&T or Wayport, but a Boingo subscription gets you access to all of them. I think the patent is intended to cover their method of identifying Boingo-member networks and listing those. They have special software you can download for that, though you don't need it. You can simply use the advertised SSIDs of the WiFi hotspots themselves. Their "innovation" is looking up the SSIDs in the network database for you, to automatically identify which networks are part of Boingo, consolidating the list, and then letting you have preferences as to which networks show up on the top of the list. I prefer open standards myself. I also prefer to places that offer their WiFi for free - so I decided not to subscribe and they can keep their patented technology.

Did anyone actually read the patent?

[Logos]

Yes I know, this is /. and no one read the article, let alone the actual patent - however the article (and the /. excerpt) are very misleading about what was patented. Reading the actual [uspto.gov] patent, it appears that the patent was granted on a method for the user to create an account with the patent-holder and then use the patent-holders software to access any number of various for-pay and other wifi hotspots without having to manage the individual credentialing, network configuration and associated billing. I am not a lawyer, or a patent attorney -- and I'm not a big fan of software patents in general -- but this doesn't sound anything like: "patenting wifi hotspot access". More like: "patenting an integrated, account-managed, token passing, billing system for accessing multiple diverse wifi-hotspot vendor systems". I.e. Much narrower and a based on a product built on basic wifi access. In short: Boingo was granted a patent on their software that makes it easier to manage all those wifi accounts you have to set up if you travel a lot and use a bunch of different carriers. Not wifi access in general. The editors should consider amending the front page summary because its very misleading.

Re:Dead on arrival...

[whoever57]

What is claimed in the patent is doing ALL of the following in a single product:

- Scanning for access points or looking them up from a storage medium
- Looking up access rights for the access points from a database
- Listing access points to the user, where access points belonging to the same provider are shown as a single item.

Some claims ar more specific, but i think doing only 2 of the 3 things above should not count as infringement or prior art.

I don't know about the database either, but adding the database doesn't seem very inventive. Prior art doesn't have to be identical and there was a case that concluded that putting together two existing technologies to create a new product or device was not, per se, sufficiently inventive.

Re:Can we bring back real patent examiners now?

[loutr]

The beam is invisible, you (and the cat I guess) can only see the "bright pattern of light". One of my friend does exactly that with his cat, it's funny as hell watching him jump around trying to catch it :) I'll tell him to buy a license right away so he can keep on exercizing his cat.

Re:Can we bring back real patent examiners now?

[psxndc]

This patent is beyond the Patent Office's usual idiocy and right up there with "method for playing with a cat with a laser". I mean really, displaying a list of accessible networks using perfectly standard techniques?

And yet you - like every other slashdotter - will base you opinion on /.'s summary and not the claims themselves.

 

1. A method of displaying to a user a list of carrier networks available for access, comprising:

(a) detecting carrier network signals by an access client transmitted from a plurality of carrier networks;

(b) determining carrier network identifiers by the access client using the carrier network signals;

(c) getting carrier network information from an access point database by the access client using the plurality of carrier network identifiers, wherein the carrier network information includes information indicating whether the access client is authorized to access a carrier network of the plurality of carrier networks; and

(d) generating a user selectable list of carrier network identifiers by the access client using the carrier network information,

(e) wherein two or more carrier network identifiers associated with a common carrier network system are aggregated to generate a carrier network system identifier that is included in the user selectable list.

 

(letters added for your reference). Steps c - getting it from an access point database? - and e - where 2 carrier newtork identifiers are aggregated? - don't seem like the normal way of picking a wifi spot. Add in that these are carrier networks, not the hotspots themselves, and it seems a little less obvious and a lot more specific. You can all put down your torches and pitchforks now.