RIM Pushing For Airlines To Force Mobile Devices Into Flight Mode
from the but-why-a-patent? dept
RIM, who is obviously no stranger to patent troubles (on both sides of patent litigation, it should be remembered), has apparently filed for a patent on a system on airplanes that would force mobile devices into "flight mode" where they wouldn't interfere with cockpit instruments. While there's still plenty of debate over how much interference mobile devices really cause on airplanes, this system would allow aircraft crew to set a signal that would force all complying devices to switch into "flight mode," turning off any potential interference. It would also make the devices flash a green light, so cabin crew can check to make sure the devices are safe. Of course it would be some time before all devices agreed to match any such standard -- but that raises another issue: why patent this? If you're trying to create a standard that everyone will agree to, a patent seems like a waste of time and money. If you're going to charge a royalty, many device makers will simply decide not to go along with the plan, harming any chance of really making this a standard -- and it really only is useful if it's a standard. If you're not going to charge a royalty, why patent it? Besides, it would seem like there's plenty of prior art on this idea as well. The patent application was filed in December of 2004 (following a provisional patent app in May of 2004). However, months earlier we were already talking about a similar system that would silence mobile phones in movie theaters.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
EMP...
/runs to patent office
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Banking on big government
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yah Right!
Seems nice...
Hey, the EMP Ideia is not bad... but stick it to the movies theatre... i think it's safer... :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Standard operating procedure in mobile phone busin
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Standard operating procedure in mobile phone b
It's just like how Linus holds the rights to "Linux" and therefore everyone can use it, but if Microsoft held the rights to "Linux" then no one could. The holder of the rights can choose to give them away.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FCC Website
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIM
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why Patent?
When I worked at IBM, they had (at least) a two-tiered intellectual property system. Things they thought were really valuable would be patented. Things they thought were less valuable would be published in a technical disclosure magazine, presumably to easily establish prior art.
I got a software patent when I worked there, so I got to see some of the process necessary to get a patent. It was so complicated that I can see why they might just disclose some items that they thought wouldn't justify the work necessary to get a patent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]