Take the 2-minute tour ×
Ask Patents is a question and answer site for people interested in improving and participating in the patent system. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've been looking for prior art for a Samsung patent application KR 10-2011-0029154, published as US 2012/0254255, priority date 2011-03-31.

Just 2 hits off the first 10 for a google search on "automatic diary" (I tried to post more but I'm new here):

Reading the text posted, all I see that is new is the language building process, which not only seems quite vague, but also easy to boil down to a simple algorithm (they half do in the patent itself). Can we get some others to comment on why this isn;t just another software patent that shoudl not be approved? I'm sure we can find a ton a prior art if we try to shoot this one down, automatic diaries are not even remotely new, and this, even internationally, was just filed on March 2011...

Here is the text of claim 1:

1. An apparatus configured to summarize daily life information of a user, the apparatus comprising:

  • an information collection unit configured to collect log information comprising the daily life information from at least one electronic device;
  • an analysis unit configured to analyze the log information collected from the information collection unit and decide at least one topic representing the daily life information;
  • a story generator configured to generate at least one sentence representing the daily life information using the at least one topic decided by the analysis unit;
  • and a display unit configured to display the at least one sentence generated by the story generator.
share|improve this question
    
Doesn't that sound just like a Facebook update? –  Ron J. Oct 4 '12 at 23:07
add comment

1 Answer

As expanded on in the specification, story creation is quite involved. Equations and all. If the invention takes boring daily details and turns into into an interesting narrative of your life, that might very well be new. Also a patent is supposed to tell you how to do it. If after reading the patent application you now know how to build it then the specification has done its job. To evaluate newness you need to not use the teaching of the patent itself.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.