The First Phone Call Was 133 Years Ago 196
magacious writes "March 10 is the 133rd anniversary of the first telephone call. It occurred between Alexander Graham Bell and his assistant Thomas Watson back on this day in 1876. But there is some debate about whether Bell is actually the rightful owner of the crown for such invention. Having worked on the idea of transmitting speech using electricity for some time, Bell filed his patent on 14 February 1876, either just before or just after his main rival for the title of inventor of the telephone, Elisha Gray, filed his own. Bell won the patent and Gray died in obscurity."
Antonio Meucci (Score:5, Informative)
Research (Score:5, Informative)
Re:the message: (Score:4, Informative)
Watson, come here. I need you.
Re:Antonio Meucci (Score:5, Informative)
Meucci was the real owner of the idea of the phone. But he was almost forgotten, only recently it received some credits.
Re:Antonio Meucci (Score:5, Informative)
"In 2002 the U. S. House of Representatives passed a bill recognizing Meucci's accomplishment and stating that "if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell."
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meucci
Re:Antonio Meucci (Score:5, Informative)
H. Res. 269
In the House of Representatives, U.S.,
June 11, 2002.
Whereas Antonio Meucci, the great Italian inventor, had a career that was both extraordinary and tragic;
Whereas, upon immigrating to New York, Meucci continued to work with ceaseless vigor on a project he had begun in Havana, Cuba, an invention he later called the `teletrofono', involving electronic communications;
Whereas Meucci set up a rudimentary communications link in his Staten Island home that connected the basement with the first floor, and later, when his wife began to suffer from crippling arthritis, he created a permanent link between his lab and his wife's second floor bedroom;
Whereas, having exhausted most of his life's savings in pursuing his work, Meucci was unable to commercialize his invention, though he demonstrated his invention in 1860 and had a description of it published in New York's Italian language newspaper;
Whereas Meucci never learned English well enough to navigate the complex American business community;
Whereas Meucci was unable to raise sufficient funds to pay his way through the patent application process, and thus had to settle for a caveat, a one year renewable notice of an impending patent, which was first filed on December 28, 1871;
Whereas Meucci later learned that the Western Union affiliate laboratory reportedly lost his working models, and Meucci, who at this point was living on public assistance, was unable to renew the caveat after 1874;
Whereas in March 1876, Alexander Graham Bell, who conducted experiments in the same laboratory where Meucci's materials had been stored, was granted a patent and was thereafter credited with inventing the telephone;
Whereas on January 13, 1887, the Government of the United States moved to annul the patent issued to Bell on the grounds of fraud and misrepresentation, a case that the Supreme Court found viable and remanded for trial;
Whereas Meucci died in October 1889, the Bell patent expired in January 1893, and the case was discontinued as moot without ever reaching the underlying issue of the true inventor of the telephone entitled to the patent; and
Whereas if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the life and achievements of Antonio Meucci should be recognized, and his work in the invention of the telephone should be acknowledged.
Attest:
Clerk.
At the time patent duration was shorter (Score:5, Informative)
At the time patent duration was shorter, per the patent act of 1790, and was decided by a board, not to exceed 14 years. In addition, it wasrequested that you have a working prototype of your invention that you could demonstrate for the patent office for the purposes of the parent examination process. There were other hard requirements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_Act_of_1790 [wikipedia.org].
So it's a little disingenuous to claim this as an example of why patents are a bad thing.
-- Terry
Don't forget Philip Reis (Score:3, Informative)
...who also invented an early telephone [wikipedia.org]. In 1861!
Re:Antonio Meucci (Score:2, Informative)
Well... american technology history rewriting, according to the president of the USA america even invented the automobile. I am glad Daimler and Benz are dead already and have been for a long time :-)
I am not even sure if Edison really was the inventor of the lightbulb afair a russian was first but did not patent it!
Re:Gray died in obscurity (Score:5, Informative)
And not by Edison, who just got the patent...
Edison was one of the original patent/FUD trolls. A lot of people seem to think those tactics are new but in reality businesses have been engaging in them for a long time. Edison even went so far as to electrocute animals (including an elephant) during the "war of the currents" to try and scare people away from a competing product. He also tried to change the term from "electrocuted" to "Westinghoused".
Re:Antonio Meucci (Score:3, Informative)
It is universally acknowledged that Edison did not invent the light bulb. What he did was make it practical by devising a filament that lasted more than a few hours before burning out.
Re:Patent sucks (Score:3, Informative)
As I said, you still have to register your invention to be eligible for the prize.
See: http://www.uspto.gov/go/fees/ [uspto.gov]
Lotteries and bookies are familiar with the concept. They manage somehow, some even make money in the process.
And some companies might even sponsor an endowment or even the prizes every year.
Sure inventors or the companies they work for won't get billions of dollars in prize money. But should they need or get that in the first place?
The marketing budget for US drug companies tends to be bigger than their R&D budget. So I'm sure they and other companies will manage somehow. I also doubt Intel will stop investing in R&D if AMD et all can copy what they do (it's not so trivial to copy Intel even if you can read their inventions and patents - you can't reproduce their entire fab).
Whatever it is, we will need something else assuming an increasing rate of invention - the current patent system won't scale well. As the number of specialized fields increases it'll be harder and harder for an examiner to work out whether a patent should be granted or not.
Of course if we are assuming the rate of invention stagnates or even declines, then that's different. I hope that's not what we're planning for.