Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Patents Whacking Your Phone To Silence It

another random user writes with news of a patent application from Microsoft that details a method for silencing your phone by giving it a whack. "There are a variety of circumstances under which it may be desirable to quickly control a device without having to interact with a traditional user interface. For example, often mobile device users forget to set their mobile devices in a silent or vibrate mode and the device rings or makes sounds at an inopportune moment." And yes, 'whack' is the technical term used in the patent (20120231838): "receiving information indicative of acceleration of the mobile communications device; determining correlation between the information indicative of acceleration of the mobile communications device and exemplar whack event data; and based at least on the correlation, controlling an audio signal of the mobile communications device." This method is not recommended for controlling the audio output of animals or children.

42 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. That this is patenteable AT ALL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    goes only to show how broken the Patent system is.

    1. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by osu-neko · · Score: 2

      I dunno... I'm normally skeptical of patents, but if they've come up with a good method of distinguishing a genuine, intentional "whack" from a bit of jostling or other causes of sudden acceleration, which doesn't seem at all obvious how to do, then that strikes me as something that might genuinely be patentable.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    2. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by coastwalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In other news a Tech company patents wiping your arse. Seriously these people need to find work as the devil has them realy busy right now. Vermin.

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    3. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by bmo · · Score: 5, Informative

      intentional "whack" from a bit of jostling or other causes of sudden acceleration, which doesn't seem at all obvious how to do,

      It's only a magnitude. Random jostling is not the same as a good solid whack, which easily can exceed 5Gs. People do not typically experience 5G engvironments unless they are in a jet fighter or an automobile accident. Measure with a phone's built-in accelerometer any 5G thwack = intentional whack.

      Bam. Done.

      It's an obvious application. It's so obvious that you can buy tags to attach to shipped items that measure whacks, and if it exceeds the whack standard of the tag, then the shipper is at fault for damage.

      http://www.drypak.com/shippingHandlingIndicators.html

      This is just using already-built-in accelerometers and doing the exact same thing. Don't forget the standard is supposed to be "nonobvious to someone skilled in the art" and not "nonobvious to a moron."

      --
      BMO

    4. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by isorox · · Score: 2

      goes only to show how broken the Patent system is.

      I find giving things a whack often fixes them

    5. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by Plunky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it seems to me (with no time at all spent thinking about it, and I am scarcely skilled in the art) that it is when a device is being alarming that a whack is most significant.. just like a naughty child who knows they are doing wrong, when the 'whack' is applied then they will shut up. If you 'whacked' a child who was just playing peacefully they would justifiably object.. and please, substitute your choice of censure, if 'whacking' a child is distasteful to you.

      So, the whack detection becomes more accurate when the current state of the device is accounted for.

    6. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      I'm normally pretty anti-MS and anti-patent, but this isn't actually a bad idea if they've developed a method to do this safely. While there is obviously the analogy to silencing alarm clocks by hitting them or throwing them, it's generally not advisable and will usually void your warranty. There is a clock which was designed specifically to be silenced by throwing it against a wall, and it would not surprise me to see that patented.

      Now, if it's the entire concept of "hitting the phone to silence it," I would see that as being overly broad. If it's about a particular method of doing so safely, then I'm all for it being patentable.

    7. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just because an idea wasn't implemented before doesn't mean it should be patentable.

      Tabs in browsers weren't implemented for a long time. Imagine the slowdown in the industry if it was.

      I fail to see the benefit to society for patenting input methods. They'll come regardless of patents. Just with patents, the competition won't be able to incorporate the successes that society agrees upon is a good idea.

    8. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by justforgetme · · Score: 2

      It's laughable. Not to mention that there is prior art. Humanity has been whack silencing things since we had opposable thumbs!

      --
      -- no sig today
    9. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Alarm clocks that you silenced by hitting them were around in the '80s, probably before. Using an existing UI on a new device is not novel.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by pmathew · · Score: 2

      And Old ipod and some others had "shake to shuffle" .. Aint it prior art ??

    11. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by Ira+Sponsible · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're describing devices that were not specifically designed to perform (or stop performing, rather) in this manner, therefore these cannot be counted as actual implementations. However, the soft-bodied alarm clock I had about ten years ago was specifically designed to be turned off by throwing it across the room. (Whacking it also worked, of course). The unfortunate design flaw of this particular alarm clock was that not everything else in the room was designed to be struck by an alarm clock hurled at it.

      --
      1.Netcraft confirms:In Soviet Russia all your base welcomes a beowolf cluster of CowboyNeal overlords. 2.? 3.Profit!!1!
    12. Re:That this is patenteable AT ALL by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      In other news a Tech company patents wiping your arse. Seriously these people need to find work as the devil has them really busy right now. Vermin.

      Well... If they write it up as "wiping your arse with a computer/phone," then they might just get that patent.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  2. Geeze.. by ibsteve2u · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Talk about an obvious use for a g-force sensor...what's next? Somebody patenting using a screwdriver for a chisel or to open paint cans?

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
    1. Re:Geeze.. by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.

      I actually like this idea. If my phone is in my pants and i'm in a movie theater and I forgot to silence it.. just whack my pocket and it stops ringing, rather than fumbling in my pocket to get it out, and find the buttons.

    2. Re:Geeze.. by cps42 · · Score: 2

      If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.

      My Samsung G2 supports muting the ring by turning the phone over. Using the accelerometer isn't unique. Whacking it is pretty clever, though.

    3. Re:Geeze.. by Mr0bvious · · Score: 4, Funny

      Much better title - Microsoft patents whacking off..

      I dunno, but I think it deserves the name Whack Off...

      --
      Never happened. True story.
    4. Re:Geeze.. by stephanruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.

      Actually, my Nexus S (which is already a two year old model I think) has been doing this ever since I can remember.

      In fact, that's probably why Microsoft used the word "whack", and not "shake" or "move". If they had used any of those other words, a simple bing search (yes, even a bing search I tell you) would have uncovered multiple instances of prior art on both Android and on the iPhone.

      No doubt, they'll try to use this little play on words in their commercials to say how unique the feature is, and how they're the only one who have it because they patented the idea.

    5. Re:Geeze.. by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Informative

      Quite obvious NOW isn't it. After the event it's obvious with the use of 20/20 hindsight

      it's pretty fucking obvious.

      it's so obvious it's been used already - in a more sophisticated form too, Nokia has had "turn over on table" silence for ages - turning it into a whack isn't really that much of a thing.

      what's more, the feature appeared on phones just about when the hw started featuring accel sensors. it's the second most obvious use after automatic screen rotation.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Geeze.. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That brings me to this new idea: Silence a phone by breaking it.
      Maybe I should patent that? :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    7. Re:Geeze.. by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 2

      I consider accelerometer events (drop, whack, hit, turn, rotate, flip, shake, bounce, etc) analogous to keyboard shortcuts. Now excuse me while I patent using Alt+B to launch my browser, I mean I haven't seen any computers yet that do it, so it CAN'T be obvious, thus it must be a valid patent!

    8. Re:Geeze.. by kenorland · · Score: 2

      If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.

      Smartphones have been around for more than 15 years.

      And, yes, there have been plenty of phones that have done this for years, including Nokias and Android phones.

    9. Re:Geeze.. by BadDreamer · · Score: 2

      My HTC Android works this way. it has a "shake off" function when it rings or the alarm goes off, and just whacking it activates that.

    10. Re:Geeze.. by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2

      Clever? Really?
      When I was a kid, I had an alarm clock in the shape of a baseball. To turn the alarm off, you'd chuck the ball against a wall. The impact silenced the alarm.
        Keep in mind, this was about 30 years ago.

      How is this clever again?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  3. Groan! by Ian.Waring · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Prior art city: hitting an alarm clock. If Americans are so intelligent, why have such an outrageously dumb patent system? It's meandering stories for profit rather than any reward for innovation these days...

    1. Re:Groan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One doesn't "hit an alrm clock". One presses a button that is wide and shallow enough that a blow from one's hand will activate it. This patent suggests that the phone's internal accelerometer will detect short, sharp motions and communicate them to the ringer. While I don't think patenting such small details is healthy, this invention isn't so comparable to an alarm clock.

    2. Re:Groan! by snikulin · · Score: 3, Funny

      People for the Ethical Treatment of Smartphone

    3. Re:Groan! by guttentag · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One doesn't "hit an alrm clock". One presses a button that is wide and shallow enough that a blow from one's hand will activate it.

      In theory one presses a wide button. In practice millions of people hit their alarm clocks. This creates the pretense that the device may be silenced in a non-destructive manner, while ensuring continued regular demand for new alarm clocks. It's really quite brilliant on Microsoft's part. By encouraging this model of behavior they can inflate their sales figures and retention percentages ("9 out of 10 Windows Phone owners buy another Windows Phone each year").

    4. Re:Groan! by vux984 · · Score: 2

      You are describing -your- alarm clock.

      There are any number of alarm clocks that do in fact just let you "whack" them anywhere.

      Hell, there's even ones designed to be thrown...

      http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20080429/throw-alarm-clock/

  4. Already done with Nokia phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    My Nokia 6600 fold already had this feature for years. You just tap it twice and it silences alarms and calls. And shows the current time on the front panel. Where's the actually new stuff in this patent because everything else seems like an obvious extension to that?

  5. Prior art: Mafia by Calydor · · Score: 3, Funny

    The mafia has been whacking people for decades to silence them.

    --
    -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
  6. Possible titles for the patent application by Cryacin · · Score: 4, Funny

    1. The three stooges "Shut up you numbskull" patent
    2. The whack dat nois - e boid patent
    3. The void-your-manufacturer-warranty inoportune phonecall patent

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  7. Phew by JohnboyHolmes · · Score: 2

    As long as they don't Patent dropping annoying phones in a glass of water, I think there might be some prior art on that one.

    --
    I stopped thinking I was unique when I found out everyone else was to. So does that make me the average user???
    1. Re:Phew by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not me, I actually like the Microsoft patent.

      It just gives me one more excuse to whack some people on the side of their head while they're on their phone.

  8. USPTO is a joke by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > goes only to show how broken the Patent system is.


    Patents are supposed to be novel, useful and not obvious. This patent seems obvious. According to a law lecturer, the mere fact the USPTO has granted a patent doesn't mean you have a valid patent: It also has to be tested in the courts. Only if it is upheld does this mean you have a valid patent.

    The problem is this system is easily exploited. A USPTO examiner is supposed to eliminate patents which fail the above tests, but you can overwhelm a USPTO examiner just by giving them a lot of documentation. I have seen this done. It's easier for the examiner just to grant it and let the courts figure it out. The problem is as we saw in the Apple v Samsung case the jury assumes just because the USPTO has granted the patents they *are* valid. It's also expensive: It costs about $2M to attack or defend a patent and takes a lot of employee time when they could be working instead. In the US even if you successfully defend a patent attack you usually don't get your legal fees reimbursed, so that $2M is gone forever. This will send a smaller businesses broke. Is that really good for innovation?

    Microsoft's patent here seems obvious and should have never been granted. The same goes for the intuitive tablet / smart phone operations which Apple patented: Give one of these devices to anyone who hasn't used one before and they quickly figure out which gestures work. The "intutive" nature of this means it is by definition obvious.

    The US patent system... now forced down the world's throat thanks to aggressive lobbying of foreign governments by US diplomats bringing shiny beads and mirrors ... means it has been inflicted upon the world, and is hampering innovation everywhere. Even Google has spoken against it, but big companies are forced into a position where they must spent millions on stupid patents (which shouldn't hold up in court) just to get into a better bargaining positions against the patent trolls and Apples of the world.

    But make no mistake: The USPTO is the patent troll's friend. Not just due to their lazy examinations, but because they have also increased fee to discourage people from asking for bogus patents to be re-examined. That was the reason they gave when they did this: they are trying to make less work for themselves caused by their own sloppiness in the first place!

    The only solution: Tell your congressman and senator to stop this madness now and that there will be consequences at the ballot box if they don't. A tall ask, but they are the only people with the power to change it.

  9. Re:nice by cffrost · · Score: 3, Funny

    So your zune squirts and your WP8 device whacks off.

    Microsoft. What will they think of next?

    Rubbing a phone's little pink silicone nub to turn it on?

    --
    Thank you, Edward Snowden.

    "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  10. I've used both ME and Windows Vista by Grayhand · · Score: 2

    Beating an electronic device to death makes perfect sense to users of ME and Vista. This falls under a common sense patent. This must be a defensive patent before the new OS comes out given their history of every other release sucking. I'm still waiting for them to announce the "AX Back Up System". The hard drive backs up before you take an ax to it!

  11. Ignorance of the Patent System on Slashdot by drphil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... is amazing.
    "Microsoft's patent here seems obvious..."
    Really? well, I don't know about the inner workings of all cell phones, but I've yet seen a model that I can silence with a single instant button touch or one that uses an accelerometer to transmit a single clear command to the phone. -- Others may come up with examples which is great. Third parties can now (or soon) file with the USPTO to put prior art not considered by the examiner into the official record. This is a very recent change and I don't recall the details. It may be active just for business patents right now, but eventually all patent apps will be included and this one likely won't be examined before that rule is opened to all patents. So prep your arguments now! In any case the mere existence of accelerometers probably would not constitute obviousness which seems to be the main point being made by most.

    "...and should have never been granted"
    Well, it hasn't. This is only an application published 18 months after filing. With the current backlog in the USPTO, it won't be examined for another 2 years.

  12. I thought my dad had the patent on this by aenigmainc · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure my father can claim prior use. when i was a kid that was his default method of shutting us kids up.

  13. In other news -- by Guppy · · Score: 2

    Microsoft Patents Whacking Your Phone To Silence It

    In other news, CNET reports that Apple patents "Giving your Phone a Reach-around to Check Voicemail", while RIM is rumored to be close to announcing a "Tongue the Screen Discreetly to Read E-Mail" feature. No word yet on Microsoft's rumored "Candles and Hot Wax Interface", designed to appeal to the S&M contingent of the Windows Phone userbase (which is most of them), or HP/Palm's "Necrophilia" WebOS initiative.

  14. Here's prior art for you by cronot · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh, so you want prior art?

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=br.com.eversource.shake2silence&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImJyLmNvbS5ldmVyc291cmNlLnNoYWtlMnNpbGVuY2UiXQ..

    Last update was on December 2010 - so it's a fair to assume the first version was submitted even earlier. And that's just one example I could find quickly, of course. It wouldn't surprise me it there are many more other apps (for Android or iOS alike) that does the same thing and was made before.

    And yeah, as rolfwind said, just because the idea was implemented only after 10 years after Microsoft entered the smartphone market, doesn't mean it's patentable. The technology needed for this idea wasn't ubiquotous on smartphones until some 4 or 5 years ago anyway, so you should rather start making the math at that point in time.

  15. PS Vita; RIM jobs by tepples · · Score: 2

    CNET reports that Apple patents "Giving your Phone a Reach-around to Check Voicemail"

    No, that'd be more of a Sony thing given the rear touch sensor on the PS Vita.

    while RIM is rumored to be close to announcing a "Tongue the Screen Discreetly to Read E-Mail" feature.

    That would fit in with RIM jobs.