Slashdot Mirror
Boeing Granted Patent On Mobile Wireless Lan
xoip writes "Boeing Corporation has been granted Patent number 6,990,338 Mobile Wireless Local Area Network and Related Methods. The Luddite Lounge questions the wisdom of granting a patent that leverages existing technology and grants protection based on the application of this technology."
A decent federal judge would look at that and say that the patent only applies to aircraft networks, since the gist of it seems to be that this technique is only really applicable to aircraft systems. I can't imagine a single reason why you'd need something special for a train or bus considering you don't have to turn off mobile, networked devices on either of those modes of transportation.
Yes, it's stupid, but at least this doesn't seem to be a blatant as "we patent the idea of putting a server on something with wings, wheels or a rudder."
Who has a patent on installing wireless networks in non-moving objects ... like buildings and such?
Mobile wireless local area network and related methods
Abstract
A wireless local area network adapted for use by users traveling on a mobile platform such as an aircraft. The network includes a network server located on the mobile platform, and at least one network access point connected to the server and accessible wirelessly by at least one user portable electronic device over one of a plurality of non-overlapping network frequency channels. The RF characteristics of this wireless network are specifically tailored to meet applicable standards for electromagnetic compatibility with aircraft systems and RF exposure levels for passengers and flight crews.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A wireless local area network adapted for use by users traveling on a mobile platform, the network comprising:
a network server located on the mobile platform; and
a plurality of network access points each independently associated with a specified cell area on the mobile platform, each being connected to the server, each network access point being accessible wirelessly by a predetermined number of user portable electronic devices per network access point, over one of a plurality of wireless channels having non-overlapping frequencies; and
wherein each of the network access points is configured to wirelessly communicate with said portable electronic devices within an associated one of a plurality of cell areas on the mobile platform, and is further configured to communicate with said portable electronic devices that are roaming into a second one of said cell areas on the mobile platform from a first one of said cell areas on the mobile platform.
2. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein the network access points are spaced apart within an interior area of the platform.
3. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein at least one of the access points is configured so that a line replaceable unit of an aircraft system and an antenna of the access point are separated by a distance at which a field strength of the antenna is less than interference thresholds of the line replaceable unit.
4. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the network access points comprises an antenna mounted in an overhead area of the mobile platform.
5. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the network access points is configured to provide a wireless link only to portable electronics devices predetermined to meet predetermined standards for at least one of interference, health and safety.
6. The wireless local area network of claim 5, wherein each of the network access points is further configured to ignore any portable electronic devices not predetermined to meet the predetermined standards.
7. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the network access points is configured to transmit and receive signals using a spread-spectrum modulation method.
8. The wireless local area network of claim 7, wherein each of the network access points is configured to transmit and receive signals using direct sequence spread spectrum transmission.
9. The wireless local area network of claim 8, wherein at least one of the channels is assigned to more than one of the access points.
10. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the access points comprises an antenna configured to communicate over a channel not being used by an adjacent access point antenna.
11. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the access points transmits at a radiated power between 1 and 5 milliwatts.
12. The wireless local area network of claim 1, wherein each of the access points communicates with the portable electronic devices at frequencies at and above about 2.40 GHz.
Back in 1997, several companies that know did wifi for car travel. Basically, it was being funded by some saudi prince so that the cars would remain in communication. Likewise, a company that worked with in 1998 approached Denver RTD to do wifi on buses. Showed them it, but did not land the contract due to the costs of putting wifi on the light poles. But both of these were prior art.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You patent wifi on a plane?
I'll patent wifi on a train!
I'll patent wifi in a box.
I'll patent wifi with a fox!
Plane, train, box, fox!
Can I patent wifi socks?
"It's a wonderful idea. But it doesn't work." -- Tad Danielewski
That wireless LAN! That wireless LAN! I do not like that wireless LAN!
Would you, could you, ping a plane? Would you, could you, ping a train?
I will! I will! I will patent them on a plane, I will patent them on a train. I will patent LANs here and there, I will patent wireless everywhere!
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
where a logical person could deduce a result of said existing technologies
In the U.S., the standard used is a "practitioner having ordinary skill in the art", (US Code Title 35, Section 103) not a "logical person".
To counter the other usual nonsense propagated by Slashdot headlines, claims may be dependent, in that some claims state what is conventional or known, and then a later claim describes a (novel and non-obvious) extension or improvement that constitues the grounds for novelty and non-obviousness. The common technique in Slashdot articles is to mention only the general claim, such as Claim 1 in this case, and crying "how obvious! That's been around since the stone age!" without mentioning the dependent claims 6, or 9, where the non-obvious part is stated.