Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents Technology

Motorola Patent Uses Neck Tattoo As Microphone 51

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the zaps-user-when-visiting-bing dept.
nk497 writes "A Motorola Mobility patent application proposes using an 'electronic skin tattoo' as a smartphone microphone and wireless transceiver. The temporary tattoo would also include a 'power supply configured to receive energizing signals from a personal area network,' according to the filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office. It would be applied to 'a throat region of a body' — otherwise known as the neck. Motorola thinks the technology would be ideal for noisy environments, such as large stadiums and busy streets, or in emergency situations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Motorola Patent Uses Neck Tattoo As Microphone

Comments Filter:
  • OCTattoos (Score:4, Informative)

    by xenoc_1 (140817) on Saturday November 09, 2013 @06:49PM (#45379661)

    Peter F. Hamilton's OCTattos from his Commonwealth Saga become reality.

    • Peter F. Hamilton's OCTattos from his Commonwealth Saga become reality.

      At one time I would have preferred neural nanonics. But I'm not so sure any more. The way things are going we'd end up with thought police.

    • by xhrit (915936)
      More like Rick Priestley's Skinplants & Electoos from Warhammer 40k: Rogue Trader, circa 1987.
    • by flyneye (84093)

      It might as well be, this creates the possibility of sending your personal privacy square to hell.
      What idiot wants to use this? Turn your body into a broadcasting station that anyone with some gumption could tap at will.
      Way to go Motorola, do you still have the taste of ass on your lips? Did the NSA buy you dinner first? Go Die.

  • by PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) on Saturday November 09, 2013 @07:02PM (#45379719)

    . . . neckbeards . . .

  • Time to learn to type with my dick.

  • by rollingcalf (605357) on Saturday November 09, 2013 @07:09PM (#45379747)

    Without a working model, all they have is words and diagrams on paper that might not work in practice. But that piece of paper gives them the right to sue somebody else who implements the concept and makes it work.

    They need to bring back the working model requirement. If there is no working model, grant the patent provisionally. Don't let the patent holder sue before they have a working model, and if they don't build a working model by a specific deadline (say 5 years) the patent goes up for auction, with proceeds going to the patent owner. Or they can sell the patent before the 5 years are up. The new owner must have a working model before they can sue.

    That way inventors can still get paid for a useful invention even if they don't have the resources to build the working model themselves.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      > If there is no working model, grant the patent provisionally.

      No. Of they can't demonstrate their idea, it shouldn't be patentable. You should have to have a working prototype or no patent. And I want to say a $10k fine.

      • Or a fine based on your company's annual revenue.

      • Under the rule I proposed, the patent holder can't sue before the working model is demonstrated. While the patent is provisional, its 20-year expiration clock is ticking, the information is public, and others can't be sued for infringing it. So there would be advantages to the public and disadvantages to the patent holder for acquiring a patent before the working model is ready.

        • by gl4ss (559668)

          what actually happens is nowadays is that first someone patents the idea.

          then someone patents how the idea is probably practical.

          then someone actually makes the scifi idea of the first thing ACTUALLY work and ends up paying the prior two patent holders who had no fucking idea whatsoever about how to make it work.

          the patent system is _supposed_ on paper be set up so that based on this patent Nokia, Sony or whoever COULD ACTUALLY BUILD THE THING - not just the inventors themselves, but anyone sufficiently com

    • Indeed. Are the patent trolls now going to scour Sci-Fi books and start patenting the ideas in the fiction?

      • How about going through Sci-Fi books and patenting EVERYTHING left and right - androids to zappers?
        And just letting them run out.

        Most of those things won't be nowhere near a working model for centuries - and should they one day be invented they'd automagically be in public domain due to their patents having already run out.

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Saturday November 09, 2013 @07:16PM (#45379777)

    I.e. one where they have at least kinda-sorta-maybe some prototype, or is it one of those that are currently so en vogue, i.e. one of the kind that some markedroid had too much coke one day and came to the revelation that this would be just too cool and we should patent it before someone else does?

  • by Skiron (735617) on Saturday November 09, 2013 @07:19PM (#45379793) Homepage
    When people can't connect to facebook, I guess
  • without a product is pretty useless.. I could watch the last 20 yrs worth of sci-fi and patent a crap load of ideas with theoretical concepts, but, no implementation means nothing.
  • How would this affect your Essence rating?

    I mean, as a magic user I'm conflicted. The spirits like tattoos but not so much cyberware, and this sounds like both.

  • On it except for one very brief mention in the 2nd to last paragraph unlike The Register article [theregister.co.uk] calling it a Google patent... which since they own Motorola, it is. Slippery slopes indeed. From the article I'm linking, the patent filing [uspto.gov].

  • This should be mandatory for all politicians, preists, police, and running for office candidates.
  • The key word here is Patent APPLICATION. A very small percentage of patent applications are actually approved by the USPTO.

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...