Subway, McDonald's And Burger King Sued Over GPS Tracking Patent... Or Something
from the stupid-patent-of-the-month dept
GPS technology has been around for a while. Wikipedia puts the start of development at 1973. But it wasn't until the 1990s that it became available for consumer use. And even then, it took some time before the government removed restrictions on accuracy that it had on its use by civilians. (The government had added an intentional error to the signal that made GPS variably inaccurate up to 50 meters.)
With the loosening of restrictions on GPS came furious development in consumer applications—and a flurry of patents.
Which brings us to this month's Stupid Patent of the Month. The dubious honor goes to U.S. Patent No. 6,442,485, "Method and apparatus for an automatic vehicle location, collision notification, and synthetic voice," filed in 1999. The "Background of the Invention" talks about a need for an automatic voice system that could speak for a driver involved in a collision and transmit location details to 911. For example, the patent says that "[i]t would be desirable to have an automatic vehicle location and collision notification system that would ascertain if a vehicular collision had occurred and communicate directly with an emergency facility."
But after this background, the patent devolves into a wilderness of made-up words and technobabble. The patent includes fabricated phrases such as "Location Comparator-Indicator Module" and "Automatic Speed Controlled Location Detection Module." (Google searches of these phrases turns up nothing other than results related to the patent.) Reading the patent to try to figure out what it means becomes an exercise in cross-referencing and guesswork. Even worse, key terms in the claims (this is the part of the patent that is supposed to clearly explain what that patent covers) don't even appear in the description of the purported invention. This means that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to understand what the claims mean and to guess how a court might interpret them.
This sort of made-up gobbledygook is likely what has allowed NovelPoint Tracking LLP, the owner of this month's Stupid Patent, to sue over 90 companies for infringement. The latest round of lawsuits, filed on March 27, 2015, includes companies such as Subway (the sandwich artists, not a company related to transportation), McDonald's, and Burger King.
And what do these fast food franchises have to do with vehicle location, collisions, and synthetic voices? With respect to Subway, NovelPoint claims that Subway's Windows phone mobile application infringes NovelPoint's patent.
Here's the description of Subway's app from Microsoft's website:
Don't know where to find a local Subway? We're here to help. This app will display a list of local Subway locations along with the ability to get directions and let your friends know where to meet you.
We don't know what, exactly, NovelPoint thinks it owns, but it looks like it is accusing Subway of infringing because it has an app that shows a map with directions. And given the incomprehensibility of its patent, it can get away with this, at least enough to secure a quick settlement and get out before a court rules that no, in fact, it doesn't own a map with directions.
And indeed that is what appears to have happened. Of the almost 100 cases NovelPoint has filed, exactly none of the cases has had a decision on the merits of NovelPoint's claims. From what we can see, all of the cases have settled very quickly, most likely for small nuisance sums.
Patent owners shouldn't be able to get away with this. Patents should be clear and understandable. If new words are used, they should be defined. And if words already exist in the relevant art, they should be used. NovelPoint's patent is a great example of how using fake terms can be used to obfuscate what the patent actually claims, and then used to claim infringement by something no one would have considered the patent owner to have invented. We have laws that should prevent this sort of gaming. The Patent Office and courts need to start actually enforcing them.
Reposted from the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Deeplinks blog
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
Filed Under: gps, location, patents, stupid patent of the month
Companies: burger king, mcdonald's, novelpoint, novelpoint tracking, subway
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Surprise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I 100% Agree, But...
Talk about gaming the system: lawyers making laws is a perfect game scenario.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I 100% Agree, But...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I 100% Agree, But...
(Sorry. I couldn't resist.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Likely
Not likely. That would be against the patent office's own best interests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Likely
Why yes, of course you can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Bwah to the ha ha.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I think she's qualified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Are you sure that is allowed?
You see some folk think innuendo and vague references are quite sufficient and get all uppity when someone calls bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
My intent in originally commenting was not to come to the defense of patents in general, and this one in particular, but to note that an argument from someone without a technical background on a subject requiring a technical background misses the mark.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your own statement shows this patent is utter crap.
The entire point of a patent is to describe a invention that is non-obvious to someone skilled in the art such that the person skilled in the art could understand it.
The patent system is not a system to create jobs for patent lawyers skilled in navigating it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This patent is a technical matter, and one is to foolish critique a technical discussion if they have a non-technical background.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why should I give hot air the same weight as data? Present the facts or blow it out yer ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it me...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is it me...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is it me...
'OnStar was formed in 1995 as a collaboration between GM, Electronic Data Systems and Hughes Electronics Corporation.
...
In 1996, GM North America Operations President Rick Wagoner officially launched OnStar at the Chicago Auto Show. OnStar delivered its first product and service to the market in 11 months, in the fall of 1996 for model year 1997 Cadillac DeVille, Cadillac Seville and Cadillac Eldorado models.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is it me...
OnStar uses a real human voice to notify emergency services of a collision.
I'm not current on what is allowed, but automated notifications to 911 services in the US were not allowed in the late 90's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Is it me...
AFAIK no auto dialer of any kind can call a US emergency service provider, and that's been federal law for all my life! You'd be surprised at how many salespeople of alarm systems represent that the alarm panel sends it's signal to emergency services. That's illegal: the signals must go to a 3rd party monitoring service who is supposed to qualify the signal and then notify emergency service. (Not saying that always works, but that's another story.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Subway has only itself to blame for this one
Oh..., the app doesn't do that???
Sounds like it might be time to contact and get some assistance from the Newegg legal team, to digest and pass some more patent trolls, as I hear those same trolls make great fertilizer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Following that, take a course in expressing yourself without resort to gutter language. Otherwise, your comments come off as juvenile and mean-spirited.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I love McDonalds services.
https://mcdvoice.zone/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]