Obviously, No One Ever Would Have Thought Of Remote Controlled Sex Toys Without This Patent
from the how-stimulating dept
Alright, people, strap in and keep the laughter to a minimum because we're going to talk dildos here. Specifically, remotely operated dildos, and other sex apparatuses, including those operated by Bluetooth connections or over the internet. It seems that in 1998, a Texan by the name of Warren Sandvick applied for a patent that casts an awfully wide net over remotely controlled sexual stimulation, specifically any of the sort that involves a user interface in a location different from the person being stimulated. You can find the patent at the link, but here's the abstract:
An interactive virtual sexual stimulation system has one or more user interfaces. Each user interface generally comprises a computer having an input device, video camera, and transmitter. The transmitter is used to interface the computer with one or more sexual stimulation devices, which are also located at the user interface. In accordance with the preferred embodiment, a person at a first user interface controls the stimulation device(s) located at a second user interface. The first and second user interfaces may be connected, for instance, through a web site on the Internet. In another embodiment, a person at a user interface may interact with a prerecorded video feed. The invention is implemented by software that is stored at the computer of the user interface, or at a web site accessed through the Internet.Great, except that nothing in the above is an actual invention; it's essentially an acknowledgement that a dildo could be controlled remotely and an attempt to lay claim to that function exclusively. The description of the art outlaid in the patent rests solely on the claim that sexual stimulation devices have always been either self-stimulation devices or that any remotely operated stimulation devices still required close proximity. But it all rests on what you consider a stimulation device. Take this language from the patent, for instance.
These stimulation aids, however, require that the operator directly engage the stimulation aid. Only several stimulation aids are known that allow the stimulation aid to be operated by a remote controller-type device, such as shown in U.S. Pat. No. 4,834,115 to Stewart entitled “Penile Constrictor Ring,” U.S. Pat. No. 4,412,535 to Teren entitled “Remotely Controlled Massaging Apparatus,” U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,978,851 and 3,874,373, each to Sobel and entitled “Massaging Apparatus,” and U.S. Pat. No. 5,454,840 to Krakovsky et al. entitled “Potency Package.” Nonetheless, these prior art devices all have the disadvantage that the operator must be in close proximity to the recipient.Great, except the smart phone, and even cell phones prior, could be considered prior art to this patent as well. After all, a person might suggest to another person that they put their phone on vibrate and shove it down their shorts while at work while the first person text-messages them all day, setting the phone off and creating stimulation. It's the same thing. The fact that a phone's primary function isn't sexual arousal doesn't really matter. And I'm not the only one who thinks so.
seriously, how is this claim for a sex toy (priority 1998) not just claiming a telephone being used "creatively"? pic.twitter.com/RwLC8pPpSr
— Vera Ranieri (@vranieri) July 23, 2015
And yet, in 2002 the USPTO granted the patent to Sandvick, who in turn sold it to a company called TZU, who is now filing lawsuits against six companies that have or will soon be offering remotely-operated sexual stimulation products. Those companies have such varied products as bluetooth controlled vibrators, programmable and remotely controlled dildos, and even, from one company, software apparently for remote hand-holding (complaints included in the link above). All this over a delightfully broad patent granted to someone for his non-invention and now employed by a third party simply to extract money out of businesses actually making products. And not just any businesses, either. The types of businesses seem to suggest that TZU knows exactly what kind of shaky ground it's on.
More than anything, the TZU phenomenon seems to be one more data point suggesting that as it becomes harder to win high-stakes patent suits, the best business model for trolls may be to seek small payouts from companies that are ill-equipped to afford a legal defense. Basic Google-level research suggests that five of these six defendants can't possibly have significant sales at this point.Anyone actually want to argue that the founding fathers' intention in patent law would be to make sure that companies couldn't create devices for your significant other to buzz your naughty bits?
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: obviousness, patents, remote control, sex toy, warren sandvick
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
One person can have an innovative idea, but if half a dozen have the same idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One person can have an innovative idea, but if half a dozen have the same idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One person can have an innovative idea, but if half a dozen have the same idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One person can have an innovative idea, but if half a dozen have the same idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is this the cumming of Skynet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is this the cumming of Skynet?
Not anything moral, I'm just guessing they're of a school of thought that really wants to make sure we don't fuck up with AI and screw ourselves over in some manner or another instead of reaping the benefits AI could potentially provide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remote careless approval
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remote Controlled Sybians.
But seriously, there were Sybians that were attached by wire (or radio controlled) by an operator several feet away, and sometimes even behind one-way glass. This was in the late 80s/early 90s, but definitely way before 1998.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ 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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Incidentally, you might able to find it on asstr.org if you aren't afraid of getting on any government watchlists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Phone
That even appeared in a movie. Keeping the Faith I think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Limited market for the patent holder
In Texas it is illegal to have more than six dildos per household.
In Arizona it is illegal to have more than two.
You can google it yourself, but here is one source as an example.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Limited market for the patent holder
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Over-broad" hardly covers it
Oh, I think this patent covers much more than dildos. As I read it, it covers movies with girls in bikinis, television shows with jiggle, 98.73% of the internet, every porno mag in existence, telephone "amusements", and whichever hand you favor (with its system of remote control nerve wiring).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like the other AC said...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ring seduction clip from Flash Gordon 1980.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7Kx4XIs2tU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alright, people, strap in and keep the laughter to a minimum because we're going to talk dildos here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Alright, people, strap in and keep the laughter to a minimum because we're going to talk dildos here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]