Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Patents Putting Handprints On Laptops

Posted by kdawson on from the hands-off dept.

theodp writes "You can still leave your handprint in cement at Grauman's Chinese Theater. But as of Tuesday, you best not do the same on a laptop, lest you infringe on IBM's new patent for the Portable Computer with a Hand Impression, an 'invention' that Big Blue explains makes balancing the portable computer on a user's hand easier."

141 comments

  1. I don't get it... by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's in "Your Rights Online", so clearly kdawson wants us to be outraged... Is it because he thinks the idea is dumb, or that the patent is dumb? It's hard to tell in this case, since it seems to be a reasonable idea, and a reasonable patent...

    1. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it seems to be a reasonable idea, and a reasonable patent... Well, it depends on what effect patents are supposed to have. If you think they're supposed to encourage people to publish what they'd otherwise try to keep as trade secrets, then patenting something which is very obvious when inspected isn't reasonable. If you think they're supposed to let people hold progress hostage by recording their daydreams, it's very reasonable.
    2. Re:I don't get it... by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Funny

      I agree. IBM deserves a hand for this. I'm sure it will leave a lasting impression on the laptop market.

    3. Re:I don't get it... by cerelib · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have to agree. This is a pretty straight forward improvement to an invention patent. The patent seems to be specific on many details of implementation. It is also specific enough that it probably can't rule out any possible use of a hand impression on a portable device. While it may not be the most novel and innovative idea, it is a far cry from the software/process patents that usually appear in the "Your Rights Online" section.

    4. Re:I don't get it... by farker+haiku · · Score: 0, Troll

      But... it's a patent... about computers!! Clearly if you aren't outraged you don't belong here.

      --
      Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
    5. Re:I don't get it... by reebmmm · · Score: 4, Insightful
      NOTE*

      publish what they'd otherwise try to keep as trade secrets

      Not everything that is patentable (or ought to be patentable) must also be trade secret. This is a perfect example (actually most any mechanical invention is a good example). Once it's sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc. it would lose any and all protection.

      Now, arguably, one of the purposes of patents is to encourage people to disclose EARLIER rather than later. Here, you probably see this disclosure before you've actually seen it sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc.

      obvious when inspected
      Just about EVERYTHING seems obvious once you see it. That's the whole reason why the patent law painstakingly tries to AVOID doing your above analysis.

      hold progress hostage by recording their daydreams

      I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.

      Moreover, this is hardly a "daydream" which seems to imply fanciful idea. There's probably almost NOTHING stopping them from implementing it right now. There are probably lots of real estate agents, contractors, etc. that would love to have a laptop that they could hold and show when there is not a table nearby.

      Finally, nothing stopped someone from introducing this idea (without patent protection) before this patent. So as far as I can tell, to the extent this moves progress forward and giving other people ideas, the publication of the patent has done it's job.

      * Like a good slashdotter, I have not actually looked at the patent or RTFA.
    6. Re:I don't get it... by mea37 · · Score: 1

      Aaaaand... for those of us who know that neither of those is the purpose of a patent?

    7. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Patents are supposed to promote progress, by imposing restrictions for a couple decades. This only makes sense if what's being restricted would have been restricted for longer/forever (trade secrets), or wouldn't have existed at all. Given that people like to invent things just for fun, and that there was plenty of innovation before patents were invented, I suspect that that second category is close to empty.

    8. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not everything that is patentable (or ought to be patentable) must also be trade secret. This is a perfect example (actually most any mechanical invention is a good example). Once it's sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc. it would lose any and all protection. The protection isn't (supposed to be) the point. The societal benefit received in exchange for the sacrifice of granting that protection is the point.

      Now, arguably, one of the purposes of patents is to encourage people to disclose EARLIER rather than later. Here, you probably see this disclosure before you've actually seen it sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc. But this is a much lesser disclosure, in that there are heavy restrictions on what you can do with it.

      Just about EVERYTHING seems obvious once you see it. So patents ONLY provide a benefit when the patented thing would otherwise never be invented (or at least not be invented for another several years).
    9. Re:I don't get it... by skarphace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.
      How could you possibly know this? Industrialization is younger then 200 years and normal 'inventionalism'(yeah, I pulled that out of my butt) never really started until then. There were the occasionally blacksmiths but nothing really all that interesting.

      How could you possibly know that progress isn't moving slower because of patent law?

      I may even like to bring up the booming asian bootleg market. Their level of innovation is skyrocketing by leaping off of other people's patentable ideas and improving them. That alone may be a good argument that patents are not helping innovation.
      --
      Bullish Machine Tzar
    10. Re:I don't get it... by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Most of the outrage around here (and in the world in general) seems to fall into the "Too busy being outraged to pay attention" category.

    11. Re:I don't get it... by reebmmm · · Score: 1

      How could you possibly know this?

      Fine, I accept your premise that the reality without a patent system is unknowable under modern concepts of industrialization. The grandparent is also wrong by exactly the same argument (if not more wrong as described below) since there's no way to know whether innovation is in fact being held hostage by the patent system.

      But, the evidence we do have basically shows: increases in technologies coinciding with increases in patent filings. The last 100 years have been a boon for both. While Pre-modern patent law shows slow steady growth on par with historical trends for the previous ten thousand years. Someone can feel free to find those charts for me--I know they're out there.

      Draw whatever conclusions you want.
    12. Re:I don't get it... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      and a reasonable patent...

      This is Slashdot. A 1903 article might look something like this: "Two Cycle repairman brothers have somehow patented a novel invention of a a system of aerodynamic control that manipulates a flying machine's surfaces. It looks obvious and it seems to me that this already exists and is called a bird. Can anyone say Prior art?"

    13. Re:I don't get it... by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Given that people like to invent things just for fun, and that there was plenty of innovation before patents were invented, I suspect that that second category is close to empty. And I suspect that you're wrong.

      Is an invention still an invention if it is never produced? The knowledge that somebody else is going to produce a copy of your invention when they see it, combined with the knowledge that the competition will make your idea unprofitable means that many innovative things have been brought to market, or brought to market sooner (with fairer distribution of the profits) because of patent.

      The fact that many, many bad patents are issued does not mean that patents are bad.

      In this particular case, you have a market for laptops, none of which have hand shaped impressions on them. If it turns out that this is something everyday people actually want in their laptops and just didn't know it yet, this patent has contributed to the greater good. Without it, there is a good chance that nobody would have bothered to try producing such a device.
    14. Re:I don't get it... by reebmmm · · Score: 1

      But this is a much lesser disclosure, in that there are heavy restrictions on what you can do with it.

      And, commensurate with that less disclosure is narrower patent scope. I don't see the issue. Large number of claim limitations just means that there's less patent protection and more alternatives.

      So patents ONLY provide a benefit when the patented thing would otherwise never be invented (or at least not be invented for another several years).
      Well, again, how do you know that a priori? How can you possibly know something "will never be invented (or at least not be invented for several years.)" If you're able to make those predictions, quick, start investing your money.

      Now, the SCOTUS has recently held that something will be obvious (thus not patentable) when it is obvious to try. But, the obvious to try standard needs something more the mere post-fact reasoning. For example, if people know that doing X will provide some known result with pretty good reliability, and it's known that there are only 100 ways to do X, then the fact the X^3 may not have been done before will not make it non-obvious (i.e. it will be obvious since it was obvious to try).

      I'm really glad you're not creating patent policy.
    15. Re:I don't get it... by mea37 · · Score: 1

      Getting companies to reveal what they otherwise might not is one element of how patents acheive their one of their goals -- to ensure the public gets something in exchange for the grant of protection. But that is secondary. It is not why the grant of protection was given.

      Believe it or not, many patent-protected inventions took an up-front investment that no company would have tried to protect without patent law. Sometimes because the novel elements would be obvious to anyone buying/using the invention. Sometimes because the risk of protecting it as a trade secret just doesn't justify the investment.

      The patent's purpose is to ensure the inventor -- be it an individual with limited resources for production, marketing, etc. or be it a large company that has deep pockets but that always has to look for a profit -- has the chance to profit from his/her/its work.

      But by all means, go on "suspecting".

    16. Re:I don't get it... by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      Given that people like to invent things just for fun, and that there was plenty of innovation before patents were invented, I suspect that that second category is close to empty.
      I call that logic the "lone genius in his shed" fallacy.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:I don't get it... by anexkahn · · Score: 1

      Patents are here to allow the inventor to have a temporary monopoly on their idea as to give them enough time to make money on it.

      If no one can make any money, why should a company innovate? The system breaks down when patent trolls manage to get stupid patents pushed through the system....or patents that probably should have expired....or overly broad patents.

      If one has to worry about selling their new innovation because their afraid that it might infringe on some unknown patents, that stifles innovation. Saying that things have been fine for the last 200 years so why change it is an example of complacency and lack of innovation. Personally I think the idea of the hand print on the laptop is an interesting idea, and assuming there is no prior inventor, they should hold the patent on this....but I don't know if they should hold the patent for 20 years... See the link below for some information on patents: http://www.library.gatech.edu/search_locate/techres/patentfacts.htm

      --
      Curious about Storage and Virtualization? Check out
    18. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      And, commensurate with that less disclosure is narrower patent scope. I don't see the issue. Large number of claim limitations just means that there's less patent protection and more alternatives. No, it's a lesser disclosure than just showing (selling) an implementation. Because you're not allowed to actually *use* that disclosure without paying up (if they're even willing to sell licenses).
    19. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      Patents are here to allow the inventor to have a temporary monopoly on their idea as to give them enough time to make money on it.

      If no one can make any money, why should a company innovate?

      Um, it is possible to make money without having a monopoly, by being better at what you do than your competitors are. One of the ways to be better is to be innovative. Something of any complexity still takes time to get right.

      Personally I think the idea of the hand print on the laptop is an interesting idea, and assuming there is no prior inventor, they should hold the patent on this....but I don't know if they should hold the patent for 20 years...

      Why? It's not like adding handprints to things requires enormous R&D costs that can only be recovered with the ability to charge monopoly rents...

      "Entitlement is the cancer that is destroying our society."

    20. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, many patent-protected inventions took an up-front investment Sure.

      that no company would have tried to protect without patent law. Well, how can we know that either way, without something to compare against?

      Sometimes because the novel elements would be obvious to anyone buying/using the invention. Sometimes because the risk of protecting it as a trade secret just doesn't justify the investment.

      The patent's purpose is to ensure the inventor -- be it an individual with limited resources for production, marketing, etc. or be it a large company that has deep pockets but that always has to look for a profit -- has the chance to profit from his/her/its work.

      Doing that by granting a two-decade monopoly seems to be a bit of a "nuclear option". Sure it solves the immediate problem, but it also has lots of nasty fallout. Any product has an up-front development cost. Why has this become impossible to recover, apparently regardless of size, without monopoly protection?
    21. Re:I don't get it... by ushdfgakjj · · Score: 1

      This is not "your" invention. This is IBM, a giant multinational corporation that held the computer industry hostage for years. They have more than enough profits.

    22. Re:I don't get it... by aim2future · · Score: 1

      I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.

      Mine! Due to patents we are about 30 years behind. I anticipate that with patents this slow down will accelerate, until we merely reach a status quo

      Moreover, this is hardly a "daydream" which seems to imply fanciful idea.

      Actually, we are implementing this (generally speaking) "daydream" as a business model Wish-IT, Wish Innovation Technologies (R) (not yet released)

      * Like a good slashdotter, I have not actually looked at the patent or RTFA.

      Same here, as slashdotters we don't need to. It is funny though, as this last reply was first written to be funny, it is often like a good slashdot article is something you have waited for, and the actual article just confirms that it's here. (OK, this does not apply to this patent though, which just adds to the pile of stupid patents I'm aware of).

    23. Re:I don't get it... by makomk · · Score: 1

      Is an invention still an invention if it is never produced? Good question. The thing is, a lot of the stuff being patented (and in particular, a lot of the things patented by IBM) will never be produced. It's just speculative patenting; they have no real intention of actually producing it at any point in the future, and this patent means no-one else will either.

      If anything, the current state of the patent system acts as a disincentive to do something innovative; if you're successful, a bunch of companies will just sue you for patent infringement. (See for example Vonage.)
    24. Re:I don't get it... by mea37 · · Score: 1

      Nice misdirection.

      If you want to debate the effectiveness of patent law, or whether it should apply to one class of invention vs. another, that's a different discussion (and one I'm not getting pulled into at this time).

      Your original contention was that patents existed either to be abused (in which case the patent in this story would make sense) or to cause trade secrets to be revealed (in which case it would not).

      My point was that neither of those is the purpose of patent law. Whether you agree with the law or not, its purpose is ensuring the inventor gets the chance to benefit from his work. Given the law as written and it's purpose, the patent does make sense.

    25. Re:I don't get it... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      My original contents was (intended to be) that the only way for patents to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (what the US constitution says patents (and copyright) are for, which I was assuming everyone knows) is by causing things to not be kept as trade secrets (meaning, they don't cause things to be invented that otherwise wouldn't be, at least to any significant degree), as opposed to harming progress just because the inventor is somehow "entitled" to exclusively receive any benefits. Just, worded more as a bit of a troll/flamebait.

  2. just another take... by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol?

    Not that I can say I've had a problem performing this task WITHOUT their little patent, but interesting IBM would want it, seeing as how they've sold their laptop-making division already anyway.

    1. Re:just another take... by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      You don't need to create a product to license a patent. If anyone decides to make laptops with brushed chrome (or whatever the hell the iPhone is made of), I'd welcome anything that helps me keep a grip on the things. I swear, a cold iPhone is like trying to hold onto jello...

      YRO might be because of the handprint which may, or may not, include fingerprints (to the previous poster).

    2. Re:just another take... by getto+man+d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FTA:
      "A hand impression is disposed on a bottom surface of the chassis base unit.

      Though this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion. I myself cannot see it entirely useful (e.g. typing) or comfortable.

    3. Re:just another take... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      feh. It brings up a question which is begging for an answer. It does not beg the question.

    4. Re:just another take... by CaptainPatent · · Score: 1

      How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol? This is directly from the claimed language in the independent claims of the application:

      "and a sensor disposed in the hand impression, responsive to contact by a user, for enabling or disabling a processing unit in the data processing system" I'd say that's very different than ergonomic gripping as it's able to enable and disable the processor itself. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be patentable, I'm just saying you're way off with your assertion there.
      --
      Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
    5. Re:just another take... by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      So, that's saying that if I put my hand on the bottom of the laptop that its going to turn the computer on?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartgun -- kinda like that.

      So, I'm not really "way off," just differently right that this is not really a ground-breaking idea.

    6. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What if I really, really want a question? Pretty please with sugar on top?

    7. Re:just another take... by getto+man+d · · Score: 1

      And that would be why in the world did they go to the trouble of patenting this? The foreseeable answer is that they needn't have taken the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

    8. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      feh. It brings up a question which is begging for an answer. It does not beg the question.

      Neither does the mistranslated latin phrase (petito principii: seeking the principle, which is what the logical fallacy described is about, which never matched any meaning of "beg" ever used in English. Nor was any "question" ever involved) that you are currently referring to.

      Let it die already.

    9. Re:just another take... by Slacksoft · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. I wonder if I could make the case that my seven year old Toshiba laptop shows precedence in that I've used it so much my hand print is literally worn into the plastic shell. Do you think I could claim IP rights?

    10. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SHUT UP! For the love of FSM, don't EVER say that again. You sound like a complete utter fucking TOOL when you try to make people think that "begging the question" has ANYTHING to do with an old latin logical fallacy. That was NOT the context the phrase was used in, and that was NOT the intended meaning of the words. For that matter, "to beg the question" NEVER made sense as a translation of the original latin phrase. People trying to make others think that it means that really need to just STFU, as they make themselves look stupider every time they open their mouths.

    11. Re:just another take... by Dancindan84 · · Score: 1

      I tend to agree. Leg grooves to make it easier to balance on my lap would be more beneficial for my off-desk use. Mind you I also have an old, heavy, widescreen laptop. Using it while balanced on one hand would be more a feat of strength than dexterity in my case. Even still I can't imagine using a light laptop in that way.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    12. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. That would be begging the questioner

      When you see the follwing line:

      "How are you today?"

      Ask it for five dollars profusely. THAT would be begging the question.

    13. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like you say, there's no value in trying to preserve the original meaning of words and phrases. Why? I'll tell you why. Cream cheese fart superman gublook.

    14. Re:just another take... by gnick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      feh. It brings up a question which is begging for an answer. It does not beg the question. This seems like a petty peve. It seems obvious enough that by:

      this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion. the esteemed "getto man d" meant:

      This begets the question, "How many people actually use a laptop in this fashion?" Double feh.
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    15. Re:just another take... by reebmmm · · Score: 1

      It's easy. Try being on a site someplace with a laptop that you're trying to show a virtual representation of the end result. For that matter, any time you're in a place where you cannot sit and there is no table.

      Also, I can think of a number of very small computers, iphones, blackberries or things of slightly larger size which is necessarily held in one hand.

    16. Re:just another take... by samkass · · Score: 1

      Though this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion. I myself cannot see it entirely useful (e.g. typing) or comfortable.

      I'm not even going to ask what body part YOU would have suggested making an impression of...

      --
      E pluribus unum
    17. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      question in this context means "the logical proposition to be proved", not an interrogative.

      the proximity of beg and petition are too obvious to need explanation.

    18. Re:just another take... by webrunner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They try to downplay actual lap-top use (in case of another burn lawsuit) to the point that they almost say "do not use this on your legs"

      Notice how companies never actually call them "laptops"? They'll call them either "notebook computer" or "labtop" (as in: put on the counter of a research lab).

      Releasing one with leg grooves would be rather strange, given that.

      --
      ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
    19. Re:just another take... by raehl · · Score: 1

      No, that would be begging for a question. The begee only becomes the questioner if they actually ask you a question.

      --
      paintball
    20. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little correction: IBM did sell their PC laptop/desktop division and the deal was very specific about PC & PC laptops.
      If IBM want to make a PowerPC/Cell (or anything else except I386) based laptop/desktop they are free to do it.

    21. Re:just another take... by aim2future · · Score: 1

      Though this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion. I myself cannot see it entirely useful (e.g. typing) or comfortable.

      I did that at a party recently, when I proved that with one hand, my laptop, google and wikipedia I could easily compete with a "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" competitor.

    22. Re:just another take... by maglor_83 · · Score: 1

      I'll often hold my laptop on one hand and type with the other. Though unless the impression was a fairly snug fit for my hand, then I can't see it being any more comfortable.

    23. Re:just another take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.begthequestion.info/

    24. Re:just another take... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Laptop use on legs is perfectly safe if you push it sufficiently away from you (i.e. nearer to your knees, rather than to your belly).

      So, no problem with leg grooves, as long as their is no dick grove between those.

  3. Cool: No fingerprints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean IBM will sue the idiot who left fingerprints on my shiny new MacBook?

    1. Re:Cool: No fingerprints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow i know this is slashdot.... but come on now, the summary is only a few lines long.

    2. Re:Cool: No fingerprints by Uncle+Focker · · Score: 1

      There's a summary? I thought we were just supposed to read the title and make up all our assumptions from that?

    3. Re:Cool: No fingerprints by gnick · · Score: 1

      You read the whole title? I got as far as "IBM Patents..." and came in here to start complaining.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  4. Too bad Lenovo you missed out... by ArIck · · Score: 1

    If only they had bought the laptop division from IBM right now they cudve enjoyed this uber cool patent guaranteed to you impress your friends when you are juggling your laptop with a finger!

  5. More like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...you best not do the same on a laptop, [and then produce it for sale to other people] lest you infringe on IBM's new patent for the Portable Computer with a Hand Impression, ...

    Patents don't stop you from doing things, they stop you from making money for doing said things.

    1. Re:More like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAPL Technically, it legally does stop you from doing things even for free (as in beer).

    2. Re:More like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly. Anyone is allowed to look up a patent and build their own for themselves.

  6. It's another biometrics toy. by Sierran · · Score: 4, Informative

    The handprint is there, claims the patent, in order to facilitate the 'proper carrying' of the 'computing device.' However, I don't think I've ever carried my laptop balanced like a waiter's tray, or held it to my side while closed without wrapping the carrying hand around the edge underneath it for support. What they do say, buried in the patent, is that the patent also covers the use of 'biometric devices' inside the handprint, presumably for identity verification. If so, I"m not sure how this any better than a fingerprint port, unless they plan to have biometrics cover the entire print or even all five fingers - which will be more expensive for dubious additional security.

    --
    A hero is someone who knows when to run away. I am a hero. -Trent the Uncatchable
    1. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not really "buried in the patent". It's mentioned right up front in claim 1, and the headline for this article seems oblivious to that point.

    2. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by Paul+Slocum · · Score: 1

      If you have to do any work like click through to the article or search for patent summary, it's buried as far as we're concerned.

    3. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      "which will be more expensive for dubious additional security."

      No kidding. Does IBM think it is significantly harder to cut off a persons hand than it is to takeoff their finger?

    4. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by msgtomatt · · Score: 1

      without wrapping the carrying hand around the edge underneath it for support The patent also covers "grips" on the edges.
    5. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by skiflyer · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't mind one on my X60 tablet... in fact I currently use the extended life battery just for the sake of getting a better grip. I'd appreciate being able to use my smaller battery and still keep a handle on the thing.

    6. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 1

      I know loads of people who carry the laptop like this. Much to the annoyance of the IT department. However with the new tablet PCs and the hard drive air bag it is much easier to carry a laptop around. Also I find I use the keyboard less and less, for example this slashdot entry was written using the speech recognition system in Vista.

    7. Re:It's another biometrics toy. by JimDaGeek · · Score: 1

      After reading the patent claim, I noticed they mentioned _five_ fingers many times.

      What if I had a finger or two cut off? Can I put in a new patent claim for this same "idea" for three fingers?

      How about just one finger? Guess which one I am holding up? ;-)

      --
      General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
  7. This is a great idea by Lostlander · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think I'm going to patent a process by which a footprint is left in a SiO2 water suspension and used for tracing the location of an individual.

    1. Re:This is a great idea by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      It would be a pretty useless patent, as sand prints usually don't last long. However, you could patent filling the footprints with plaster for the purposes of identifying an individual, animal, plant, of fossil if the method hadn't already been used forever.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  8. Looks at his Laptop... by hyperz69 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sees handprints all over it's exterior.

    Oh crap, I hope IBM will lease the technology to me cheaply ;\

    1. Re:Looks at his Laptop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yesterday I was painting the brightwork in the bathroom - I sat down at my laptop and left a large palm print of gloss paint on the case - can anyone advise me how to contact IBM to get it removed?

      D

  9. Re:Really, that's interesting because by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    Not in this case because you asked for it and enjoyed it.

  10. Not their only patent! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM secretly also received a patent for "IBM Executive with a Head-in-Ass Impression", an 'invention' that makes sticking one's head up one's own ass easier.

    And they're "fighting" for patent reform.

    Yah, sure!

  11. what next? by slydmin · · Score: 1

    ergonomic digit imprints on one's dick? less tiring for the girl, improves quality of life!

    1. Re:what next? by xpuppykickerx · · Score: 3, Funny

      but what if you want to go lefty and pretent it's someone else?

    2. Re:what next? by db32 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think if you are putting digit imprints you probably don't have a girl to worry about as that particular body part is already shaped correctly for it's corresponding girl part. The digit imprints would clearly be for those who lack access to the corresponding girl part.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    3. Re:what next? by xpuppykickerx · · Score: 1

      girl parts? what are these girl parts you speak of?

    4. Re:what next? by JimDaGeek · · Score: 1

      She's not called "lucky lefty" for nothin...

      --
      General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
  12. Isn't that one of the KDM login animations? :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember finding this in the set that came with the distro I was using at the time, I think it was OpenSuSE. It impressed the heck out of someone on a train journey, because he really thought the screen edge camera did the job.

    Oh, well, I do what I can to make people happy .

  13. I call right hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Their picture shows an impression of a left hand, I want to claim rights to an impression of a right hand.

  14. Exactly by JonTurner · · Score: 2, Funny

    Makes me want to patent an impression of my boot in the rear end of the reviewer who approved this patent.

    1. Re:Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry I claim prior art. Plastic seats in subways and buses have had ass-molds in them for years.

  15. better idea by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1

    I thought this was a security thing. Like nobody would steal a laptop with your unique fingerprints and entire handprint. Why hasn't anyone done that before?

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    1. Re:better idea by randyest · · Score: 1

      Because it's a stupid idea that would stop no one from stealing a laptop and would give the thief a way to make a replica of your hand-print to use to frame you for any number of crimes?

      --
      everything in moderation
  16. Didn't IBM say they were going to do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I seem to recall an article on slashdot about IBM saying they were going to try and get as many ridiculous patents as they could and offering them for free?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/11/technology/11ibm.html

    1. Re:Didn't IBM say they were going to do this? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      There are too many 1's in your URL

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  17. Not obvious? by Bombula · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless I'm mistaken, only non-obvious inventions can be protected by patents. Even if something is novel, useful, or a new combination of existing ideas, it must still be non-obvious to be patentable.

    --
    A-Bomb
    1. Re:Not obvious? by Uncle+Focker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the USPTO we are talking about right? Since when has the obviousness of an invention stopped them from granting a patent?

    2. Re:Not obvious? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      If it is so obvious, why has no-one else done it in the last 20 or so years that laptops have been available? Either it was not obvious, or it is not a good idea. If it is not a good idea, what does it matter if it is patented?

    3. Re:Not obvious? by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      Or nobody thought to even look at the problem.

  18. The next big invention... by imyy4u3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...a biometric laptop that is "ergonomically designed" for being "carried" on your "lap" while looking at porn. It is called the Magnum Laptop for the big boys, and the Tiny Laptop in China.

  19. wrong link by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Gun -- that's more like it.

  20. How about a lap impression? by Liz99 · · Score: 1

    I have the impression that this will be a generic hand impression, not unique to the computer owner so how useful will this be? And if I balance a laptop, it's on my lap, not on my hand...I mean, if you balanced a laptop on your hand, how could you use the touchpad and keyboard?!

    1. Re:How about a lap impression? by realisticradical · · Score: 3, Funny

      Daddy, why is there a hole in your laptop?

    2. Re:How about a lap impression? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly on the hand sizing.
      Will I have to order this laptop in "chassis sizes?"
      will they make a petite version for my tiny little White Collar hands?
      holding a laptop like that is a disaster after you've had a Valium or three

    3. Re:How about a lap impression? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Daddy, why is there a hole in your laptop? Because I ran out of gift boxes son.
      [NSFW] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhwbxEfy7fg
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:How about a lap impression? by Liz99 · · Score: 1

      Daddy, why is there a hole in your laptop? Ugh, no thanks.
  21. FMI by KGIII · · Score: 1

    More information.

    Seems both obvious and obviously silly to me.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  22. If so... I'm going to patent by zukinux · · Score: 1

    Handprint, on cars...
    It would be just the same idea but on different product...

    --
    Read and Comment at my BLOG
    !!!
  23. What if by MrNougat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    What if I make mine in the shape of my penis?

    --
    Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
    1. Re:What if by Smallpond · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then IBM would have to redesign with smaller sensors.

    2. Re:What if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is your laptop levitating or are you just happy to see me?

    3. Re:What if by PPH · · Score: 1

      Brilliant! If you stood up suddenly, your laptop wouldn't go crashing onto the floor.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  24. easy balance by alxkit · · Score: 0

    someone should tell ibm to make the laptop cases out of velcro

  25. Obligatory Response by kenp2002 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Old Man: IT'S A CULT AND I DON'T CARE WHAT OR WHO THEY THINK THEY ARE!
    Kid: WHO?
    Old Man: I CAN'T SAY OR THEY'LL SUE ME FOR DEFAMATION!
    Kid: AREN'T YOU ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINION?
    Old Man: ONLY WHEN PEOPLE WITH MONEY AGREE WITH IT!
    Kid: WHAT ABOUT FREE SPEECH?
    Old Man: FREEDOM ISN'T FREE. THOSE WITH MONEY HAVE MORE FREEDOM THEN THOSE WITHOUT IT
    Kid: WHAT ABOUT INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY?
    Old Man: ONLY IN CRIMINAL CASES KID. IN CIVIL CASES YOUR ARE POOCHED UNTIL YOU ARE BROKE THEN YOU LOSE.
    Kid: SO WHAT IS FREE?
    Old Man: A PRISON SENTENCE, DON'T COST THE DEFENDANT A DIME
    Kid: HOW DO I GET ONE?
    Old Man:

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
  26. Who does that, anyway? by Minwee · · Score: 1

    Really, unless you were a hand model posing for a notebook computer advertisement, why would you hold a computer like that? It may look pretty, but the slightest sideways impact is going to send the whole thing tumbling to the ground no matter how neatly your fingertips line up with the spots on the case.

    1. Re:Who does that, anyway? by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I see it occasionally, especially when people are in conference rooms or going to and from same.

      And, I did it last night. I was in my car in a parking lot of Kinkos' and started to download something. Decided to go in when it said it would be 10 min.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  27. Derivative patents? by hanshotfirst · · Score: 1

    1) do I have to order my laptop as right-or-left-handed now?

    2) Is it to late to get a design patent of the position of certain fingers in the hand impression? "...In one manifestation of the invention, all but the central digit are retracted..."

    --
    Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
  28. Usability by thewiz · · Score: 1

    I'm wondering how well a laptop with a palm print on its bottom will handle when you put it on a table and try to type/mouse/etc. Seems to me like a very bad idea as the laptop would wobble as you try to type unless they're planning on putting legs on it.

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
    1. Re:Usability by randyest · · Score: 1

      Why would it wobble? The print is indented into the laptop. It creates a hand shaped void, around which is a perfectly level surface in every direction. It's not a protruding handprint.

      --
      everything in moderation
    2. Re:Usability by droopycom · · Score: 1

      Clearly, your comment demonstrate that the idea is not that obvious, hence the patent is valid....

      IBM thanks you....

  29. Previous Art? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't that how Schwarzenegger started the Martian reactor in Total Recall?

  30. Defensive use? by Nexus7 · · Score: 1

    The patent appears be specific (as it should be) and the same idea implemented with a different configuration (place palm in a different location) might be construed not to infringe. Perhaps then they filed it for defensive purposes; they're famous for that.

  31. Re:I don't get it... Hand-wringing bullshit by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Hands down, this has got to be the most hands-wringing bullshit to come out of the USPTO if this is/were only about putting hands on a laptop. If it is, i'm going to get hot wax, palm my lappy, and make lasting impressions upon it.

    No patent will lay hands on ME or my lappy!

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  32. Insensitive bastards! by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't have a hand. I have a flipper!

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  33. Its prior art by thorkyl · · Score: 1

    I did it already.

    Every time I touch my laptop I put a hand print on it...

    --
    -- I am the NRA, enough said...
  34. Just put the handprint on upside-down by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

    You could call it Rot180 and get your own patent, and they'd be legally prevented from decrypting it to see if it infringed upon their patent.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  35. they grant patents for anything these days... by spidercoz · · Score: 1

    I'm going to patent the portable lap

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
  36. If I can only get a liscense by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

    I can resell it back to any restaurant establishment and prosper. Waiters and waitresses the world over will sing my praises.

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    1. Re:If I can only get a liscense by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't need a license, since the application is in a different sector for a differnt technology (unless IBM wants to argue that laptops should now also be used as serving trays).

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    2. Re:If I can only get a liscense by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      Instead of the outdated image of a waiter bringing a telephone on a platter for a patron who has received an important call while dining, I picture the waiter carrying an open laptop tray-style to deliver an urgent text message. Maybe the menu will be delivered in this fashion! And the patron is sitting at a big-ass table.

  37. quota by nguy · · Score: 1

    Obviously, someone at IBM needed to fill their patent quota for the year again.

  38. The plan... by flydude18 · · Score: 1

    1) Balance laptop on hands with assistance of IBM's new technology.
    2) Drop laptop.
    3) ???
    4) Profit!

    Wait. Wait, that's it! I've just figured out what the "???" step is. It's "sue"! Of course! It's so obvious now. How could we have been so blind!? The gnomes are to blame for today's flood of frivolous lawsuits. THE GNOMES RUN THE RIAA!

  39. Re:just another take... A work around... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    An injection molding company can catalog the popular laptop form factors, or it can custom-make rubber bases with a Play-dough-like hand area. Insert hand, hang on to laptop.

    If this doesn't exist, and it is copied, i still reserve the right to at a later date implement my idea, whether or not a patent is out there. Don't like it, TOUGH!

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  40. Re:Really, that's interesting because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, it will never stand up in court.

  41. It's my laptop... by Unanimous+Cow · · Score: 1

    It's my laptop, I'll do whatever the hell I want with it. IBm has enough money so this patent better only affect other large corporate industries.

  42. Was it sized? by hurfy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do i have to order my next laptop as Left or Right, how about Small, Medium, or Large?

    Didn't get far enough to see if it is just a generic hand print or custom ($$$) But my hand print won't work if they use my dad for an impression and vice-versa.

    Despite that the impression seems reasonable if only marginally useful. Putting sensors in it seems dumb tho. I don't want to HAVE to hold it that way. Not to mention, aren't most of these small computers really cheap? Adding a bevy of sensors seems counter-productive to that. ...and now i know why noone wants to RTFA...ugh

  43. Total Recall by StCredZero · · Score: 1

    Turn it upside down and use it as a prop in your fan tribute YouTube video inspired by Total Recall!

  44. I've got a better idea... by ElboRuum · · Score: 1

    Why don't they make a laptop with an impression of a LAP... you know, so it fits on a LAP.

  45. Oven mitts? by HobophobE · · Score: 1

    This idea is only good if they make it an oven mitt shaped indentation. Otherwise you'll be seeing suits for burnt hands.

    One step to better mobile computing that doesn't involve hand prints:

    Divorce the components.

    Text input device
    Pointing device
    Screen/display
    Storage
    Computer

    Basically this means if I'm sitting in a train seat and I want to use the built in screen in the back of my neighbor's seat, I just synchronize to use it and keep my own screen packed away.

    It means only one of the people in a party needs to bring their optical drive because the rest can just load-to-ram or rip the data to their HD in the computer component.

    It means I'm not buying a laptop. I'm buying separate components that I can evaluate separately for their perks and faults.

    There are downsides. Multiple batteries, for example.

    But as far as I can tell, this is the way forward. You can even keep your laptop: someone can make a "shell" that you can fit your display, text input, storage, computer, and pointing device into a single package.

    Huzzah.

    --

    -HobophobE
    Nothing laughs forever.
  46. Re:just another take... The Sin Sore... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    The sensor, when gripped in the a form inched in man her, causes flexation and convulsion in the Real Doll, the laptop the One-Laptop-Per-Loin, or other impecunious hard-core geek-inspired devvisses, providing tactile and tactical feed back to the holder or operator.

    A plurality of conduction and convection transmit signals respond to the plurality of user-fed digital impulses into the squish-pad...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  47. They're ignoring the obvious prior art!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My daughter has been getting hand prints all over my computers for years!

  48. Only valid by EkriirkE · · Score: 1

    ..for 5 fingered hands...

    Someone else should patent the 1,2,3,4,6 fingered versions. You know, think of the handicapped/mutants/Matt Groening characters.

    --
    from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
  49. IBM makes laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM still makes laptops? Really? I thought their laptops/notebooks were all broken and they gave up making crappy portable computers. When did this happen? Did they decid to make laptops again or just total pieces of crap. Wow, IBM still makes laptops... crappy, glitchy laptops with the nub in the center of the keyboard... Damn.

  50. Balance on hand? Who cares? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    First one to the patent office with the laptop with two kneecap impressions on the bottom wins the big bucks!

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Balance on hand? Who cares? by joocemann · · Score: 1

      I agree. I almost never hold my laptop with one hand. This idea and patent are a waste of time, as the future will show us. You should get a Score: 5 "Realistic"

  51. no returns by crenshawsgc · · Score: 1

    I cant believe everyone missed the point of why this sucks - any laptop you get this with will now be unreturnable for anything but manufactures defect.

  52. Patents hinder progress. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    As a software engineer working in a small company, I can clearly state that patents have hindered progress in our field.

    What's more, we are too small to build a large enough defensive patent portfolio, so in addition to hindering innovation, patents open us for attack from larger companies without any chance of recourse, because we do violate many obvious patents (there's no way not to).

  53. Reading the patent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else notice the typo in par 1 of the claim?

    "... calm impression."

    lol

  54. They actually invented this a while ago by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

    ...with the G4 powerbook that melted its casing to fit your hand _while you used it_!