Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/08/17/6368268.html
…
1 Like
The other incentive for the USPTO to grant patents is that if they DON’T they might get sued (and have been). But if they grant a patent for something that turns out to be well covered in “previous art” the court case is a civil one between the patent holder and the person that wants to make something.
For a long time, the Patent office refused to grant patents for anything involving software on the basis that “Programs are mathematical equations and math can’t be patented.” Which meant that people would actually patent a hardware circuit that would do the work of a software program. So when the gave up on the “no patents involving software”, they did not have a record of previous patents to establish whether something was “novel” or prior art.
4 Likes
the bullshit tech patent that simply adds “with a computer” to some absolutely obvious and existing technology or technique.
Really? We coined a new word just to describe this: teledildonics. And while that’s in part a joke, it also points to something so potentially revolutionary, we needed a new word to describe it. I’m not so sure the idea is a boring nothing.
5 Likes
8 Likes
The idea may have been new - at some time. The Motherboard article puts the phrase as having been coined in 1975…
It wasn’t new by the time these schmucks patented it.
In addition the issue with patents is that it is not enough that you’ve had a new idea. It has to be a new idea that is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed.
Given that this patent basically consisted of saying:
- There are sexual stimulation devices available.
- There are sexual stimulation devices available where the operator can adjust the degree of stimulus.
- There are sexual stimulation devices available where another person can adjust the degree of stimulus by remote control but the operator has to be nearby.
- There are medical devices that can be controlled remotely over a computer network but those won’t get you off.
- If we put the sex aids together with the kind of system that allows medical devices to be controlled remotely, $$$
They kinda showed the obviousness right there in the application 
Summary
These stimulation aids, however, require that the operator directly engage the stimulation aid. Only several stimulation aids are known that allow the stimulation aid to be operated by a remote controller-type device, such as shown in U.S. Pat. No. 4,834,115 to Stewart entitled “Penile Constrictor Ring,” U.S. Pat. No. 4,412,535 to Teren entitled “Remotely Controlled Massaging Apparatus,” U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,978,851 and 3,874,373, each to Sobel and entitled “Massaging Apparatus,” and U.S. Pat. No. 5,454,840 to Krakovsky et al. entitled “Potency Package.”
Nonetheless, these prior art devices all have the disadvantage that the operator must be in close proximity to the recipient. Medical communication systems are known that enable medical personnel located at a central station to monitor devices located at a patient via computer control over an existing telephone network. Medical communications systems are shown, for instance, by U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,462,051, 5,544,649 and 5,467,773 to Oka et al., David et al., and Bergelson et al., respectively. However, these medical communication systems are not readily suitable for use for sexual stimulation aids. Thus, no system enables an operator to control a stimulation aid from a location remote from the recipient.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Accordingly, it is a primary object of the invention to provide a system that permits an operator to have interactive control of a sexual aid used to stimulate a recipient that is remotely located from the operator. It is a further object of the invention to provide a system in which an operator may stimulate a recipient over currently existing computer networks, such as the Internet. It is yet another object of the invention to provide a multi-media event, such as a prerecorded video feed, that automatically operates a stimulation aid located at a user interface.
5 Likes
Good advice when it comes to sex.
4 Likes
I wonder if it’s too late to comb through these patents and change “with a computer” to “with a robot” and then resubmit? Asking for a friend.
Drats. Oh well. Back to work, I guess.
3 Likes
“That groinal attachment’s supposed to have a lifetime’s guarantee. You’ve worn it out in nearly three weeks.”
9 Likes
3 Likes
I know of a dumber Patent, on a perpetual Motion Machine, which is impossible under the Laws of Physics.
1 Like
Accordingly, it is a primary object of the invention to provide a system that permits an operator to have interactive control of a sexual aid used to stimulate a recipient that is remotely located from the operator. It is a further object of the invention to provide a system in which an operator may stimulate a recipient over currently existing computer networks, such as the Internet. It is yet another object of the invention to provide a multi-media event, such as a prerecorded video feed, that automatically operates a stimulation aid located at a user interface.
All of these are pre-dated in Robert Russel’s 1967 article The Next Medium: Intersex, published even before ARPANET existed. Intersex here stands for multi-media, multi-device teledildonics. Cybersex meant augmented reality sex via a computer that can interpret pre-recorded user data.
Quote: 'With each new development we should ask ourselves the question, “Does this system increase the freedom, understanding and enjoyment of the individual, or does it merely serve the administrator’s desire to maintain order?” ’
Russel intended his article to be obvious parody.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
