Slashdot Mirror


Alexander Graham Bell - Patent Thief?

DynaSoar writes "MSNBC is carrying an AP article reviewing a book, due out January 7, that claims to show definitive evidence that Bell stole the essential idea for telephony from Elisha Gray. Author Seth Shulman shows that Bell's notebooks contain false starts, and then after a 12-day gap during which he visited the US Patent Office, suddenly show an entirely different design, very similar to Gray's design for multiplexing Morse code signals. Shulman claims that Bell copied the design from Gray's patent application and was improperly given credit for earlier submission, with the help of a corrupt patent examiner and aggressive lawyers. Shulman also claims that fear of being found out is the reason Bell distanced himself from the company that carried his name. And if Gray Telephone doesn't seem to roll off the tongue, Shulman also noted that both of them were two decades behind the German inventor Johann Philipp Reis, who produced the first working telephony system."

3 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, but Gray didn't invent the telephone.... by tjstork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even the article concedes that Gray's invention wasn't for spoken words over the phone, it was for multiplexing morse code signals to make a more efficient telegraph. Sure, Gray may have been the better technologist, but Bell should get some larger props for seeing the point that you wouldn't need telegraphs any more at all. Saying that Gray invented the telephone because Bell borrowed some of his ideas is like saying that Reimann invented Relativity because Einstein used some of his math. In both cases, it was the application and vision of a technology that is more interesting than the mechanism itself. Neither Bell nor Gray's inventions are even relevant now, but the idea of spoken communications at a distance is.

    --
    This is my sig.
  2. Re:Antonio Meucci invented the t by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Anytime an invention is mentioned, it seems to become an ethnic an nationalistic pissing contest. It starts with a reference to an American inventing something, then some European chimes in with "A European did it first." Then some black nationalist chimes in with "It was actually invented by a black man working for the so-called inventor." And on..and on. So, I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you. But I will point out the illogic of the idea that someone invented this almost a full 50 years before anyone else, and quote the wikipedia entry on the gentleman at hand:

    However, many modern scholars outside of Italy do not recognize the claims that Meucci's device had any bearing on the development of the telephone. Tomas Farley also writes that, "Nearly every scholar agrees that Bell and Watson were the first to transmit intelligible speech by electrical means. Others transmitted a sound or a click or a buzz but our boys [Bell and Watson] were the first to transmit speech one could understand."
    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  3. Re:The most interesting thing about this controver by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you've got it backwards, actually. Implementation is cheap, once the idea is understood. If the only barrier was implementation, then there would be nothing new, only things that we knew could be done, that we have finally become able to produce.

    The reason for the patent system is to keep people from hiding their ideas away. The alternative to the patent system isn't free information, but severely protected, jealously guarded information. Products would be more expensive, because you'd have to safeguard the ideas that went into them by building misdirection into the product. Ideas could actually be lost, in cases where the inventor dies with his secret, which, of course, he'd be unable to share with anyone without endangering his livelihood.

    I don't disagree that the patent system is completely screwed up right now, but the solution is not to throw it away. It has a purpose.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.