I'm going to patent flying cars. Once someone actually makes one, I'll make a killing.

Patent. Sue. Profit.

This is par for the course for Apple. They steal some other company's idea, mass produce it, get sued for patent infringement, then pays out a big settlement-but not as big as the profit on the product whose idea they stole.

This is par for the course for Microsoft. They steal some other company's idea, mass produce it, get sued for patent infringement, then pays out a big settlement-but not as big as the profit on the product whose idea they stole, or will just buy the company outright.

Absurd, the patent office okaying an "idea".

A specific implementation, along with technical underpinnings, would have been okay but considering this was granted 20 years ago, this is highly doubtful.

Although, annoyed that I didn't patent this "gravity" thing to collect from every living (and dead) person on Earth.

@trai_dep: Well, technically, Microsoft will steal from Apple. But, yeah.

Waitamoment... over 20 years, and the patent's still valid? It's 20 years from earliest filing date or 17 years from issue date... so did they use continuations or such to keep it from issuing for over three years?

A >20-year-old patent being valid is indicative of someone probably not playing by the rules.

@dougm: Without knowing much about this case, are you suggesting that Klausner Technology one of those patent trolls that comes up with "Wouldn't it be nice if..." ideas, then wait for a company to develop, manufacture and market it?

Hey, if you can extort $600 million from the Blackberry makers for imagining a hand-held email device, then why not?

Obviously I took the wrong career path. I should have gone to law school and become a patent lawyer. It seems to be a profitable profession/industry these days.

As for Apple/ATT.. If they lose the lawsuit, it really won't hurt them financially. I'm sure they'll find a way to pass off the legal costs to the consumer. Be sure to check your monthly statements for mysterious and obscure fees/taxes.

Some of you guys are missing the point. This isn't a flying car scenario. The guy invented the generic idea and figured out how to make it all fit together. Look up the patent.

Moreover, Apple knew about this since when they tried briefly to make PDAs the got the license from him, as THE INVENTOR.

It may be hard to grasp, but not all cool inventions come from huge corporations. More often than not they are paying fees to someone.

@LatherRinseRepeat: "legal research and development fee" :-p

dude flying cars are REAL. I watch the science channel. :cool:

@FLConsumer: Thats par for the course for everyone these days, no need to bash apple or ms over it.

Alot of companies these days are nothing but patent trolls who hord over BS patents until a big company actually makes a product and then sues them.

MS just got sued and LOST because during a Vista install they ask for a password twice...someone patented that idea and somehow managed to win in court over an idea that is so basic its absurd.

@Charles Duffy: The guy has more than one patent, natch.

I need to patent invisible clothes. Perfect for the girls who love to tease!

The firm I work for has had "visual voice mail" since at least 2003. It might have been 2002. Can't remember.

Oh, and the relevant patent is not the one cited, but this one and its continuations. 5,283,818 ED Texas is a hotbed for patent litigation.

I "do" legal research for patents, but I am not an attorney.

Here is the patent in question: [www.google.com]

this is NOT even close to visual voicemail. if it goes to a jury trial Klausner Technologies will lose

@agb: If I read the patent (and its corollaries) correctly, some guy in '77 "patented" accessing data using integrated chips. That's it. No chip design, no algorithms, nothing specific besides using an electronic device to store various sorts of data. It's literally, Let's use electronic devices to store (fill in the blank) data!! He then rolls off 20 different kinds of data. Phone numbers. Dictionaries. Bibles.

I hope Apple fights this on principle and nukes the bast*rd, rendering his children bereft and impotent. It's SO absurd.

@agb: Actually, that is NOT the patent in question. If you read the article, you'll notice that it's for Patents 5,572,576 and 5,283,818. Available at the following links:

[www.google.com]
[www.google.com]

It is a wonder that any advances in technology are ever made when a group of lawyers think up something, patent it and wait till someone else actually uses it for some good then sues them.

@OldTimer: The other side of the coin, of course, being that it's a wonder that any advances in technology are ever made when an inventor-engineer, whose mind is brimming with great ideas, doesn't bother trying to create or develop them because some large corporation will simply steal their intellectual property and that person won't be compensated for it.

@ecwis: Both cites you have share the same problem as AGB's cite. They speak in generalities, not specifics. Basically some guy sat down and sketched out different ways one might do this. The kind of thing that would happen at any brain-storming session if non-technical (and there's the rub) people attacked the problem.

Akin to charting out Anti-Gravity Cars by stating,
1) Get vehicle
2) Attach to vehicle a means to bypass gravity
3) Provide propulsion to Anti-Gravity car
4) Get funding from Japanese or European car companies since US companies are too stupid to realize potential of any vehicle that lacks >20 cup holders and gets <10MPG.

Okay, Point #4 addresses funding, not inventing, but you get the point.

Again, freaken obscene that the patent office approved this. But I'm going to the patent office as we speak: Jetsons, here we come!