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)."

10 of 504 comments (clear)

  1. "Surfacing, Captain" by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Man, people who deliberately use "submarine patents" to try and make money off a popular technology really bug me. As do "technology companies" whose sole business model is to own patents. They wait and see, and if the tech becomes successful, they pounce. If it flops they stay away and let the infringer take the loss.

    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.

    Now it may be that they have had suit against Toyota ever since the hybrid came on the market, and this is just a recent expansion of that suit, in which case they are not being weasels...

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
    1. Re:"Surfacing, Captain" by dotwaffle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a UK citizen, I'm unfamiliar with US law - how long does a US patent last? I assumed it was 5 years, considering this patent was filed in 1991 (if I read correctly) it must be at least 15 years monopoly - something that seams completely unfair to the progression of business...

      Maybe the US (and indeed most countries) need to re-evaluate the law pertaining to patent law, what it was created for, and what it should cover today. Also, copyright law needs looking at - I'm pretty disgusted with the UK version as it stands, I'm sure the US has an equally if not worse one. 25 years or death plus 5 years sounds fair. After then, it doesn't mean no-one owns it, it means everyone owns it, surely?

  2. Limited problem by overshoot · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It also expires in three years.

    This actually looks like a reasonable patent -- the inventor did come up with a reasonably novel approach to getting decent efficiency out of electric motors under varying load conditions, and published it via the patent system long ago.

    The auto companies pay plenty in patent royalties every year, and if they'd negotiated terms before using this (which may well be tracable to their designs) then I doubt they'd have had to pay much. They may not have to pay all that much now, hard to say.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  3. Re:/tin hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know why you got modded funny. It should be a well know fact (especially to /.ers) that OPEC buys up every alternative energy/locomotion patent it can get its hands on, and then calls it "Research".

    I'm gonna go research a Mountain Dew...

  4. Another example of patents in good use by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thank heavens we have those patents to encourage innovation. The invention would never have happened otherwise.

    --


    Believe with me, my saplings.
  5. Re:Limit patent transferability by syslog · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Who would buy the company if the patents that made it supposedly successful were not applicable upon purchase?

    Mind you, I *am* against the current patent system, I just don't think your suggestion would fly ;)

    -naeem

  6. Re:The patent by Inspector+Lopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... however, this "constantly engaged planetary gear" has exactly the same function as a conventional differential, which connects a drive shaft to two wheels, permitting the wheels to spin at different speeds (particularly useful for cornering). In fact, this is mentioned within the patent text. The only difference is that this planetary gear assembly is coaxial.

    I'm a little puzzled by the timing of this suit, which has emerged a full five years after Prius models have been available, and I don't think it was particularly secret that they were developing hybrid vehicles before 2000. (I own a 2000 model myself.) Did Solomon forget they had this patent? Wouldn't the doctrine of laches apply here? http://www.lectlaw.com/def/l056.htm.

    Even in 1990 (when the patent was issued) wouldn't a gear assembly like this have been obvious to any knowledgable practitioner of the art?

  7. Hybrids aren't that big a deal. by MaWeiTao · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm all for innovation, enhanced fuel efficiency, alternative fuels and all that. However, I have a fundamental problem with hybrids. Hybrids are an overly complex method for squeezing out a little extra mileage.

    There are two reasons why they've been attractive. The first is that they're fashionable, especially with the celebrities driving around in them. But even then, the Prius has been more successful than any other hybrid not because it's superior, but simply because the styling is different from most cars. It looks futuristic, it looks like a hybrid. the car is essentially a fashion statement.

    The second, less perceptable reason for your average consumer, is that hybrids don't feel like they're equipped with a small gasoline engine. The fuel efficiency all comes from the fact that the engine is small, not that there's some great leap in technology in the car. The distinction is that the electric motor provides additional power preventing the car from feeling too sluggish. In some cases the electric motor can motivate the car on it's own, but that only applies to the Prius and Ford hybrids, the Civic still needs the engine to get it going. It's only under a limited set of circumstances that the engine can fully take over anyway.

    Then there's the premium a hybrid commands over a normal car, and the fact that the batteries themselves are extremely expensive, and are rated for, at most, 100,000 miles only under ideal circumstances. Then there's the fact that batteries can be highly polluting, both during manufacturing and disposal.

    If you wan't real fuel efficiency buy a car with a 1 liter engine like are available in Europe. The car is going to be extremely sluggish, but it will get you from point A to point B. You can drive it like a normal car and still expect the kind of mileage hybrids struggle to match. If you want to go one up on that, get a small-displacement diesel which get even better mileage. Although, those cars tend to pollute considerably.

    As an interim step I think hybrids are perfectly fine. My concern is that hybrids are going to turn into cash cows for automakers and they're going to get fixated on them neglecting development of far superior technologies.

    What I predict is that the American automakers will go nuts over hybrids like they did over SUVs. By the time they've saturated the market with them and have to offer massive discounts to get them off their lots the foreign automakers will already be introducing new technologies. Man, I'd like to know what kind of idiots are running those companies.

  8. Re:Don't laugh! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Plug-in hybrids are a lame idea, especially in the US where electricity is more expensive than gasoline.

    Electricity is often about 10 cents/KWh. A gallon of gasoline holds about 34 KWh, so at $2.50/gal that's 7.3 cents/KWh.

    The deal is that most of the thermodynamic losses involved in creating electric power happen before you pay for it. You might get 80% of the electrical power you pay for delivered to your tires after battery and motor losses. With gasoline, your engine is lucky to extract only 25% of the fuel's energy as useful work. That would make your fuel costs for a gasoline powered car at least twice as expensive than an electrically powered one for the same amount of work done.

  9. Regenerative braking? by whitroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I beg your pardon, but I have seen vehicles with regenerative braking my entire *life*... and I'm well into my fifties.

    Or are 100% of all non-steam locomotives too "old tech" for the folks here?

    Please note, btw, that ALL "diesel locomotives" are actually 'hybrids", using a diesel engine to generate electricity to run electric motors.

    I'd say that prior art takes regenerative braking out of the so-called infringement.

              mark "yes, I am into trains...."