Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Patent To Safeguard 911 Cellphone Calls

Posted by Soulskill on from the in-case-of-seizure-please-shake-your-iphone dept.

MojoKid writes "Engineers from Apple have applied for a patent on an 'emergency' mode for cell phones that would squeeze every last drop of energy out of the batteries. The phone would recognize emergency calls when the user dialed an emergency number, such as 911 in the United States. But another number could also be stored as an 'emergency number' on the phone (a spouse, child, or parent, for example) or the user could manually put the phone in emergency mode. The process would do a variety of things. It would disable 'non-essential hardware components' and applications on the phone, reduce power to the screen and potentially reduce the phone's processor speed. It also would make it harder to disconnect the call and enable 'emergency phrase buttons' on the phone."

14 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Not too bad.. by log0n · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually doesn't seem like that bad of an idea for a patent. Granted the system is full of abuse, but at least this one is well intentioned and could save a life.

    1. Re:Not too bad.. by GrpA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean only save the lives of iPhone users... Everyone who chooses a different phone will be punished to death for their arrogance...

      Sadly, this scenario seems more likely IMO given Apple.

      After all, if they intended to patent it "to stop others blocking it" they could just as easily have made it into prior art and it would have been cheaper to do.

      GrpA

      --
      Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
    2. Re:Not too bad.. by MLCT · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but at least this one is well intentioned and could save a life.

      Not if phone manufacturers are dissuaded from adding this feature because they would either have to pay Apple royalties or risk being sued by them. In that case the fact that it has been patented may actually cost lives.

      If Apple came out and guaranteed royalty free licensing for all then it would be a positive move for society.

    3. Re:Not too bad.. by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not if phone manufacturers are dissuaded from adding this feature because they would either have to pay Apple royalties or risk being sued by them. In that case the fact that it has been patented may actually cost lives.

      The obvious counter argument is that it wouldn't have been worked on in the first place because it would have given them no competitive advantage without the patent, so the 'life saving feature' would never have been developed, and those "lives would not have saved".

    4. Re:Not too bad.. by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The obvious argument is that we've had phones that do that, they've just gone out of favor as cell phone companies have largely stopped releasing basic phones.

      With the added bonus of not having to pay patent ransom or waste battery with bullshit functions you didn't really want in the first place.

    5. Re:Not too bad.. by YourExperiment · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Worked on"? While it's easy to say this with hindsight, all of the ideas that make up this "emergency mode" are pretty obvious. It did not require anyone to "work on" them. The patent covers the fact that the phone will do these things (the easy part), not the technical details of how it will do them (the hard part).

      I have no objection to Apple protecting the hardware and software that allows their phone to do these things. I object to them being able to stop others from implementing these obvious ideas without paying royalties, and thereby ensuring that less phones will have these features in the long run than would otherwise be the case.

    6. Re:Not too bad.. by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The obvious argument is that we've had phones that do that, they've just gone out of favor as cell phone companies have largely stopped releasing basic phones.

      Those aren't affected because they don't violate the patent. The patent covers shutting down extraneous features, not 'not having them to begin with'.

      With the added bonus of not having to pay patent ransom or waste battery with bullshit functions you didn't really want in the first place.

      So buy one of those phones then, if you want one. They are still out there.

    7. Re:Not too bad.. by TheSambassador · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just because Apple has a patent on it, it doesn't mean that other phones won't have it. They may have to pay royalties, but most things on cell phones are patented.

      They're not going to be "punished to death for their arrogance," if their phone didn't have it then they're in the same situation as everybody right now, and probably most of the people with phones. This is an extra feature... if people want it, they can buy phones with it.

      I don't think see most people using this as an "emergency" such as a life-threatening situation. I see people using this as an "emergency" as in they're wasted and their phone is dead and they need to call for somebody to pick them up, or the "emergency" of being bored with a dead phone.

    8. Re:Not too bad.. by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean only save the lives of iPhone users... Everyone who chooses a different phone will be punished to death for their arrogance...

      Ah, but we can't assume that such measures would exist without apple. If not having this does so much damage, perhaps we should be thankful that it exists at all, that we even have an option of using it.

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  2. Is a Good Idea = a patent? by Teun · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I have trouble accepting this type of Good Idea needs to be patentable.

    But then, when the same institution makes computer algorithms patentable maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

    This is very much comparable to the One Click fiasco, you get a couple of desirable but common applications linked to a single action and Bingo!

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  3. Re:Great. Just amazing. by maxume · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A big problem for you?

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  4. Prior Art? by cnaumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have turned off the AC in my car and reduced my speed in the hopes that I could get to a gas station before running out of gas. Isn't that about the same thing?

    How about a car with an emergency reserve gas tank that is activated by a lever inside the car?

    I suppose that running the batteries completely flat may harm them. Basically they are claiming a patent on overriding the shutdown feature designed to protect the batteries and using a low power mode. That does not seem original. Granted, coupling this with a 911 call is kind of clever.

  5. "Ideas" should not be patentable by volpe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Patents should cover an apparatus or method (the "how"), not the idea (the "what").

    Every patent application should first identify the "what", and then identify the "how". If the "how" is obvious after being told the "what", then the "invention" is obvious, no matter how novel or non-obvious the "what" is.

  6. Re:Great. Just amazing. by maxume · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It takes special talent to do it with a normal phone. I mean, shocker of all shockers, I carried a candy bar phone for a couple of years and never accidentally dialed, let alone accidentally dialed 911.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.