Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Patents 'Buy Stuff Wirelessly, Skip Lines' Tech

Posted by Zonk on from the be-nice-if-we-ever-see-it dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Apple is looking to patent a process that will save customers the hassle of waiting to order a cup of coffee at a local Starbucks. Even better: The technology would let you jump the line of those ordering in person. 'Customers might tap a button to order their favorite drink, say a double-shot mocha, as they stroll up to the nearest coffee shop. When the drink is ready go to, the device--such as an iPhone--would chime or blink to let the thirsty one know it's time to scoop up the order at the counter. The patent puts Apple's partnership with Starbucks in a new light. The technology promises to morph Apple from the business of simply selling gadgets and music and movies that can be played on those devices into an intermediary in all kinds of exchanges.'"

3 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Obvious patents by WillRobinson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think this is an obvious patent. Wish I would have decided to be a lawyer instead of a technical person. My retirement would be much better.

    1. Re:Obvious patents by Sparks23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not quite the same thing. The example given by another poster of Japanese cellular phones (which can function as something akin to credit cards, train passes, and generally do the sorts of things our wireless providers are not yet dreaming of) is more accurate.

      What I find sad is less specifically that Apple's patenting this and more that we've come to a situation where companies HAVE to try and patent anything they do in litigational self-defense, lest they end up like RIM with the endless stream of "Your Blackberry infringes on our never-used patent, you pay us money now!" lawsuits they suffer. Half of the meaningless patents we see these days are for protecting some process, specifically so that someone ELSE doesn't patent it and try to sue you. (And probably the other half are specifically being patented in hopes that eventually someone will have actionable infringement and can be sued.)

      This totally misses the point of what the patent system was intended for, and absolutely nobody wins. But the fact that the patent system is fundamentally broken at this point is not exactly news...

      --
      --Rachel
  2. Re:Unbelievable by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Repeat after me: any patent which is summarized by a reporter relates in no way to the actual patent. Unless you've read the entire patent or at least ALL of the claims, you have no idea what the patent is about. Typically I can find at least 3 ways to summarize even really good and innovative patents that would make people pick up their pitchforks and torches. It's just too easy to do, and it turns out that it gets Slashdot some extra readership. :-/