Motorola Patent Uses Neck Tattoo As Microphone 51
nk497 writes "A Motorola Mobility patent application proposes using an 'electronic skin tattoo' as a smartphone microphone and wireless transceiver. The temporary tattoo would also include a 'power supply configured to receive energizing signals from a personal area network,'
according to the filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office. It would be applied to 'a throat region of a body' — otherwise known as the neck. Motorola thinks the technology would be ideal for noisy environments, such as large stadiums and busy streets, or in emergency situations."
OCTattoos (Score:4, Informative)
Peter F. Hamilton's OCTattos from his Commonwealth Saga become reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Peter F. Hamilton's OCTattos from his Commonwealth Saga become reality.
At one time I would have preferred neural nanonics. But I'm not so sure any more. The way things are going we'd end up with thought police.
Re: (Score:2)
Here is a picture of the tatoo (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
It might as well be, this creates the possibility of sending your personal privacy square to hell.
What idiot wants to use this? Turn your body into a broadcasting station that anyone with some gumption could tap at will.
Way to go Motorola, do you still have the taste of ass on your lips? Did the NSA buy you dinner first? Go Die.
Re: (Score:3)
You might be on to something. If a loud female causes males to..."yield" more, then a tattooed spank amplifier may well add to that and leave her utterly drenched.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering where they are usually located, I'm NOT interested in listening to THAT music!
Re: (Score:2)
One on each cheek and your headphones become an asshat. You know you wanna...
Re: (Score:2)
Gives new depth and possibility to the joke about telling the fellatrix to " speak into this microphone".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah jeez who'd a thought of embedding a micro piezo element in ink, I'm so overwhelmed, aren't they the company that invented fire as well?
Perhaps I should patent the middle finger as a communications device and give them a call...
Obviously incompatible with . . . (Score:3)
. . . neckbeards . . .
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking, for the Slashdot crowd, it could be a tattoo of a neckbeard...
personal area network? (Score:1)
Time to learn to type with my dick.
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy, Cheech and Chong beat Motorola to that patent. http://www.last.fm/music/Cheech+&+Chong/_/Acupuncture [www.last.fm]
Wonderful demonstration of playing a xylophone by only stimulating a few nerves.
I'm pretty sure it's an open patent, so get out your pincushion and go to town....
But do they have a working model? (Score:5, Insightful)
Without a working model, all they have is words and diagrams on paper that might not work in practice. But that piece of paper gives them the right to sue somebody else who implements the concept and makes it work.
They need to bring back the working model requirement. If there is no working model, grant the patent provisionally. Don't let the patent holder sue before they have a working model, and if they don't build a working model by a specific deadline (say 5 years) the patent goes up for auction, with proceeds going to the patent owner. Or they can sell the patent before the 5 years are up. The new owner must have a working model before they can sue.
That way inventors can still get paid for a useful invention even if they don't have the resources to build the working model themselves.
Re: (Score:1)
> If there is no working model, grant the patent provisionally.
No. Of they can't demonstrate their idea, it shouldn't be patentable. You should have to have a working prototype or no patent. And I want to say a $10k fine.
Re: (Score:3)
Or a fine based on your company's annual revenue.
Re: (Score:2)
Under the rule I proposed, the patent holder can't sue before the working model is demonstrated. While the patent is provisional, its 20-year expiration clock is ticking, the information is public, and others can't be sued for infringing it. So there would be advantages to the public and disadvantages to the patent holder for acquiring a patent before the working model is ready.
Re: (Score:2)
what actually happens is nowadays is that first someone patents the idea.
then someone patents how the idea is probably practical.
then someone actually makes the scifi idea of the first thing ACTUALLY work and ends up paying the prior two patent holders who had no fucking idea whatsoever about how to make it work.
the patent system is _supposed_ on paper be set up so that based on this patent Nokia, Sony or whoever COULD ACTUALLY BUILD THE THING - not just the inventors themselves, but anyone sufficiently com
Re: (Score:2)
No. If there is prior art, don't grant the patent, with or without a working model.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. Are the patent trolls now going to scour Sci-Fi books and start patenting the ideas in the fiction?
You know... You may be on to something... (Score:2)
How about going through Sci-Fi books and patenting EVERYTHING left and right - androids to zappers?
And just letting them run out.
Most of those things won't be nowhere near a working model for centuries - and should they one day be invented they'd automagically be in public domain due to their patents having already run out.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if Scientology has patented "technology" from L Ron's books?
An actual patent or a pipedream one? (Score:3)
I.e. one where they have at least kinda-sorta-maybe some prototype, or is it one of those that are currently so en vogue, i.e. one of the kind that some markedroid had too much coke one day and came to the revelation that this would be just too cool and we should patent it before someone else does?
"...or in emergency situations." (Score:3)
Patent.. (Score:1)
Mmmm, new tech (Score:2)
How would this affect your Essence rating?
I mean, as a magic user I'm conflicted. The spirits like tattoos but not so much cyberware, and this sounds like both.
Interesting how the article doesn't have Google (Score:2)
On it except for one very brief mention in the 2nd to last paragraph unlike The Register article [theregister.co.uk] calling it a Google patent... which since they own Motorola, it is. Slippery slopes indeed. From the article I'm linking, the patent filing [uspto.gov].
mandatory (Score:2)
Key Word: Application (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
How on earth did this get +2 "Interesting"? The ravings of a madman (Really! No mixed-fibre clothing! No shellfish! No shaving of any part of the head! And Heathens are perfectly fine to buy as slaves. And let's not forget "An eye for an eye") whose ideas of morality and correctness were way out of line when the "Good Book" was written (4-legged insects are unclean! As is pretty much everything else, ever!) has precisely what bearing on our lives?
If you want to live by the rules Leviticus (and most of the r
Apple's new product: (Score:1)
iSkin