Intel Patents the "Digital Browser Phone"

tibbar66 writes, "This sounds like an invention that has been invented many times before (e.g. Skype). Yet on October 10, 2006 Intel was granted a patent for a 'digital browser phone.' The patent was filed on Feb. 25, 2000. Here's the abstract: 'A telephone system wherein all the functions of a digital telephone can be accessed and implemented on a personal computer alone, thereby eliminating the need for a telephone set. By means of the computer display and mouse, keyboard or other input/output command devices, a user accesses and implement all digital telephone functions without the physical telephone set, the personal computer also providing the audio function. A graphical representation of a telephone set or other telephone-related form is provided on the computer display and accessed by the mouse, keyboard or other command device, this being accomplished by a computer program providing graphical interface implementation. A significant advantage of the system is computer access to and utilization of digital telephone functions from a remote location with communication via Internet, LAN, WAN, RAS or other mediums.'"

Comments

Actually it's Intel

[grimmy]

If the submitter RTFP they would have seen that it was Intel, not M$.

Re:Actually it's Intel

[kripkenstein]

If the submitter RTFP they would have seen that it was Intel, not M$.

Indeed. But if the patent office doesn't read the proposals, why should the Slashdot submitter? (Granted, the other option is that the patent office did read the proposal, but the patent office worker was so ignorant it sounded like a new idea to him/her.)

Currently there are so many variations on this theme already in existence (Skype, Jajah, even Ekiga etc., in a sense), that it boggles the mind such a patent was granted. Yet, TFP says that the filing date was "February 25, 2000". How many of those were around circa 2000? Skype only began around 2002-2003 IIRC...

Re:Actually it's Intel

[statusbar]

I helped port one from win3.1 to win95 in 1996... It worked over the LAN and Internet... It looked like a phone... It supported GSM encoding, and full-duplex audio if your sound card was good enough. The company name was 'Telit', and does not exist anymore.

From archive.org:

• 1996
• 1997
• The feature list

--jeffk++

Re:It's an intel patent not MS

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

So we get a Slashdot post about the USPTO not looking at the patent application properly, where the poster (or /. editor) did not look at it either. My brain hurts.

Whatever, as someone else here said, Vocaltec started the ball rolling back in 1995. Maybe they only patented in Israel, not the US, but that won't help Intel here.

More Slashdot ignorance

[dilute]

For a community so up in arms about patents, the level of ignorance here about patents is astounding.

What a patent actually COVERS is what is in the CLAIMS. The abstract means NOTHING. Here is the text of the three principal claims of this patent:

1. An apparatus, comprising: an interface to connect to a synchronous digital link and to send and receive digital signals to and from a telephone switch over the synchronous digital link; a controller to generate graphical display information and events based on the digital signals received over the interface; and logic to communicate over an asynchronous digital link, to convert the digital signals to an asynchronous format, and to transmit the digital signals and the graphical display information and events over the asynchronous digital link, wherein the logic is arranged to receive key press and hook state commands over the asynchronous digital link.

3. A method, comprising: receiving digital data from a public branch exchange (PBX) over a synchronous digital communication link; generating graphical display information and events based on the received digital data; transmitting the graphical display information and events over an asynchronous Internet protocol (IP) link; receiving a key press and hook state command over the asynchronous Internet protocol (IP) link; translating the key press and hook state command to a different format; and transmitting the translated key press and hook state command to the PBX over the synchronous digital communication link.

6. A computer readable medium including instructions that, when executed, cause a computer to: convert received light events and display updates to a graphical format; cause a first display device to display a digital telephone including the light events and display updates; convert received input device data that is related to the displayed digital telephone into a packetized format, wherein the input device data includes a key press and hook state commands over asynchronous Internet protocol (IP) link; and transmit the packetized input device data over the asynchronous Internet protocol (IP) link.

Also, the patent was based on an earlier application filed on February 25, 1999. For most purposes, the date against which to shoot with any invalidating prior art would have to be Feb. 25, 1998 or earlier. Having to go back these two additional years makes it much harder to shoot down this patent than it would be if the relevant time frame was 2000, as implied by the lead post.

I don't know if the patent is valid or not, but it certainly has a lot more merit than suggested.

Plus, as has been pointed out above, the patent owner was Intel, not the hated Microsoft.

But, after all, this is Slashdot, so why be burdened by any actual facts?