Slashdot Mirror
Toyota Prius Under Fire For Patent Infringement
tekiegreg writes "According to Auto Service World, Toyota (and possibly other hybrid companies) are guilty of violating a patent with their Prius hybrid Systems. The patent in particular looks like it covers most of how the drive-train and even the braking system of a Toyota Prius functions. The implications of which are big if there is no deal or settlement made (such as ceasing of hybrid vehicles in the United States)."
So if you want a visual of what they're actually talking about, look here because that damned patent site refers to images that are nowhere to be found. I think that linked diagram refers to the numbers that the patent information initially state about the design of it.
My work here is dung.
The article just says that Solomon is taking their complaint to the ITC to block Toyota from importing more vehicles. ITC can't rule guilt or fine Toyota. If Toyota manufactured the vehicles here, it likely would circumvent anything the ITC could do. There has been no admission of guilt by Toyota so the only other place guilt can be determined is in a court of law. Until the case currently in US District Court is ruled on, there is no guilt. Only accusations.
No. In the case of the article it just would mean Toyota couldn't import hybrid vehicles of this design (presuming they don't license the patent and settle the District Court case). They would either have to make them state-side or find a different design. Beleive it or not, there is more then one way to design a hybrid vehicle. This ruling wouldn't have an immediate effect on other manufacturers of hybrid vehicles although it might set a precident for future litigation.
> Unfortunately, I think reclaiming breaking
> energy with an electric motor was thought of,
> and used much earlier then that.
Around 1870 in fact.
sPh
I know I saw Telma retarders on buses, long before 1990. They work on the same principle.
Yes, and yes. The thing in question here is Toyota's Power Split Device, which is a constantly-engaged planetary gear set that acts as a transmission and drives (or is partially driven by) the electric motor/generator. Which appears to be exactly what the patent describes.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
If you take a look at the patent holding companies website (Solomon Technologies inc. ) it looks like they developed the technology and have been implementing it (in sailing vessels) for some time.
:-) )
From their FAQ:
What is the Electric Wheel(TM)?
The Electric Wheel(TM) is a new technology motor (first patented in 1991) that significantly improves and exceeds the net horsepower output of existing electric and fossil fuel motors. Solomon Technologies currently provides three series of motor systems built on this technology; the ST37, the ST58 and the ST74. They have been designed for use in marine environments. The ST58 combines variable torque converters, brushless motors with Neodymium Iron Boron (NeFe B) magnets, and a powerful regenerative feedback function that converts the motor(s) into a generator of electricity to recharge the batteries while under sail, and provide electrical power to other appliances on the boat.
So looks like they are legit (or are a very elaborate front
I respect the rights of patent owners, and I'm not sure how you could legally sanction this berhaviour without harming patent holders' legitimate rights, but the practice is just plain sleazy.
If a product that uses your patent without an agreement in place is on the market for X months and you, the patent holder, do not challenge such use, a license is automatically granted for that product.
If you have reason to believe a product is using your patent, you can file a challenge with the patent office stating so. The company offering the product has to respond saying that they are or are not violating your patent. If they say they are not, the previous "X month" window gets extended to the full term of the patent for that product. If they aren't using your patent, this has no effect. If they are using your patent, and tell the patent office they aren't, you now have the full term of the patent to prove them wrong.
You can only exercise this challenge Y times over the life of the patent. Y will not include any challenge that is upheld, either initially or after the fact.
Cobasys, a Texaco subsidiary, holds a patent for NiMH batteries. One of the reasons for the hybrid itself is that it carefully skirts this patent by having the internal combustion engine as the prime mover. A battery-only or battery-mostly vehicle might be subject to prohibitive license fees. This is why pluggable hybrids have not been commercially produced either.
Oil company conspiracy? You decide...
[Their] patent is pretty complete, but only filed in 1990.
Unfortunately, I think reclaiming [braking] energy with an electric motor was thought of, and used much earlier [than] that.
I seem to recall an article that was published in the late 1980s in Popular Science profiling a prototype hybrid car that was called the Uniq. It had regenerative braking.
Rail locomotives have had "Dynamic braking" for decades, in which energy is reclaimed from the wheels, but it is subsequently burned off in a huge resistor, but it is at least half of the formula.
So that takes regenerative braking itself off the table as far as prior art. That leaves the combiner gearbox.
The Uniq used no combiner gearbox, and neither do Honda's hybrids. Toyota has done a better job at marketing their hybrid drive, but Hondas are actually getting better MPG without the combiner gearbox (though a pure electric mode is not possible).
The bottom line is: There is some prior art; it is probably not enough to help Toyota with their immediate problem, but not all hybrids are affected.
www.wavefront-av.com
EPO and for that matter every country (or at least the vast majority) use a first to file system. So an inventor often gets punished because big company X can file before they can since they have the money to start what is a very costly procedure. In the US Patent System, it is a first to invent. If two entities have filed for the same patent an interference procedure is followed where the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) will hold a hearing and make a determination based on the facts presented by both who was the first to actually invent the application.
Under the US Patent System, it counts as prior art if it was published by "others" (this means any person or group of persons different from the applicant) before the invention of the device. This is called 102(a) and they can swear behind this using the whole first to invent idea. Initially, items are considered "invented" when tey are filed. It also counts if a publication is made or it is in "use" (in the terms of in the public already) by anyone (including applicants) more then 1 year prior to the earliest US filing date. This is a 102(b) and a so-called "statutory bar". There is no way to swear behind these kinds of references. The final one that is commonly used is if a published US application or Patent was filed before the filing date of the current invention by another (this also applies to WIPO filing dates). This is called a 102(e) and like 102(a) is based on invention date so it can also be sworn behind.
I think you need to clarify the prototype being officially made statement. I cannot speak certainly for EPO or other patent offices, but the general idea is that the item described in the Patent Application has actually been invented. As such, there had better be a prototype of some sort sitting around somewhere. Most all patent laws center around a publication or existance of an item that is known to the public in same.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
The Prius does not reduce emmisions. It reduces emmisions at the tailpipe compared to a conventional system.
When you consider the emmisions cost of the entire system, production, energy production/transmission and disposal, the current commercially available hybrids are unmitigated environmental disasters hidden by ignorance, smoke and mirrors.
How to get 10 mpg better milage while reducing emmisions from a standard, gasoline burning Accord:
Regear and retune the engine to give maximum efficiency while producing the same level of performance as a Prius.
Notice in the above post that the driver achieved his milage in the Prius through modification of his driving technique.
As a demonstration I once achieved 40 mpg from an completely box stock, 1976 Ford Fiesta on the open road simply by driving with my mind on efficiency rather than performance. If I had modified the car to run in this manner innately it would have reduced its emmisions greatly as well.
The Prius owner quoted above is an efficiency minded fellow who drove his car with his mind on driving as efficiently as possible. It is a biased anecdote.
Gas powered CRX drivers reported getting 60 mpg with low overall emmisions. The cars were simply tuned for economy rather than performance as well as being smaller and lighter than a Prius. It did not sell well, because it lacked performance. Buyers of this car, and the buyers of the Prius, are innately people who are willing to sacrifice performance for efficiency and the purported benefits of the hybrid system come mostly from this sacrifice of performance, not from the hybrid system.
Give me a blank sheet of paper and I will design you a vehicle that can sustain 30 mph on only 60 watts of power, is fueled by pizza and exhausts relatively small amounts of CO2 balanced by the carbon cycle.
But you would not likely buy such a vehicle because it would not make you happy.
The current line of hybrids are designed to make people happy by giving them the impression that they are achieving reduced fuel use and emmissions over some other system.
As an engineer I love electrics and hybrids and have been involved with them since the mid 70s. They are elegant. I appreciate that elegance.
But the claims surrounding the current crop of hybrids are faith based, not engineering based.
And people will defend their faith no matter.
KFG
All the marketing hype and perceived value to a Prius has always been centered on city traffic.
.my average 10 minute drive
.is combusing less fuel because some of the energy contributing to the work is coming from a battery.
.
Where cars themselves are especially stupid, and if you look at the packaging of a Prius it is obviously not a city commuter model but is equiped as a long range family hauler, because that is what people expect and will put their money down for.
. .
You are efficiency and environmentally concious and you drive ten minutes to work, including two to three minutes stopped at lights and a train crossing?
I would be ashamed of such an admission and all of your Prius, used as such, represents nothing but fuel waste in the first place.
the Prius gasoline engine TURNS OFF. So typically, I spend 2 to 3 minutes of my average 10 minute drive not poluting at all.
Are you aware of the fuel and emmissions costs of simply turning on a gasoline engine? They can exceed those of an engine idling for a minute or two. You would gain more benefit from this is you commuted on the Long Island Expressway, not in your short commute.
Also, a very simple engineering fact is that the amount of polution released in the atmosphere is directly related to the amount of fuel that is combusted.
No, this is intuitively obvious, but it is a simple engineering fact, that is to say empirical, that it is not always true, because a gasoline burning engine does not operate with a flat burning efficiency curve.
. .
Which energy was produced by the elves that live under my bed?
Thus the Prius will be expelling less waste (pollution) than the other vehicle.
From its tailpipe. This is not at all the same thing as saying that its use expells less pollution. You have fallen prey to the smoke and mirrors. You are expelling that added pollution into my backyard instead of yours. I don't necessarily appreciate your treating me in such a fashion.
Even if that difference is less than 1%, it's still better than nothing.
Have you ever driven a conventional gas engineed car designed and tuned to your particular commute and measured it's fuel efficiency and emmissions against the Prius?
You are, I'm afraid, one of these people who see certain gross functions of the vehicle and translate that into a feeling that you are coming out ahead, without actually knowing that you are.
Your use is faith based.
You can crunch all the numbers you want on emmisions and functioning of the Prius system. .
Q.E.D.
KFG