Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cingular Patents the Emoticon?

Posted by Zonk on from the no-words dept.

massysett writes "Mobile phone carrier Cingular Wireless may have managed to get a patent on the emoticon. The patent describes a system for selecting a displayable icon to indicate the mood or emotion of the user. It also covers text-based emoticons, 'so presumably sending :) via an SMS - if selected via a dedicated or softkey, would be a breach of the patent in future.'" My response? >:/

8 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Funny

    Prior art!

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  2. Good luck enforcing this one! by gasmonso · · Score: 5, Funny

    They can stick that patent in their (_|_).

    http://religiousfreaks.com/
    1. Re:Good luck enforcing this one! by ettlz · · Score: 5, Funny

      And they can kiss my shiny hello.jpg (=O=).

  3. Patent review by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They really need to beef up their standards for patent review. Stuff like this should never even get through. People shouldn't have to spend money battling these patents in court. I think cingular should be fined for even submitting a patent which is quite obviously not novel, and just an attempt to patent something that's already used everywhere in order to squeeze money out of others

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  4. Comic Book Guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "There Is No Emoticon For What I Am Feeling!"

  5. Not a patent - an application only by ChartBoy · · Score: 5, Informative
    The "patent number" cited in the article is not a patent number. It is an application number (the US has recently started publishing applications in keeping with the rest of the world). This is the application.

    US utility patent numbers have sequential numbers and are currently in the 6 million range. Application numbers have a year (2006) and a serial number within the year (15812).

  6. Correct application number and link by HDlife · · Score: 5, Informative
    The APPLICATION NUMBER is 20060015812

    This just published and is years from becoming a patent. This is just a laundry list of claims that they want, not that they will get.

    You can see it here: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html/

  7. headline/summary is WRONG WRONG WRONG by amliebsch · · Score: 5, Informative
    How the hell could a patent clerk look at this and stamp it?
    It hasn't been stamped. It is just an application.

    Did they even look at it?
    They are looking at it.

    Do we have any recourse or any way to fire these morons?
    They haven't done anything.

    Why in the name of all that is holy did this GET patented?
    It isn't patented.

    Patents are out of control... I'm just wondering if anyone has any input on how the hell they get by with this bullshit.

    This headline, summary, and post represent the very worst of slashdot. A blatantly wrong headline and summary are posted that just coincidentally happen to inflame the commenters, who immediately posture and condemn without knowing any more about the subject than the misleading headline. A correction, if it is ever made, is already off the front page, and all these geeks who sincerely believe themselves to be rational and intellectually superior go off believing a complete falsehood, because it validates their beliefs.

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.