0

US9882740B2 appears to patent the transfer of images over wireless networks.

The present disclosure relates generally to transferring digital images, and more particularly, to the wireless transmission of digital images.

Am I missing something about the claims that makes this patentable, or is this trivially invalid (bridged wireless networks have been transmitting images for decades)?

It seems like the system was invented to display a downrange target on the shooter's smartphone (which doesn't sound like something you could patent either). But the patent language seems to cover every case of transmitting images.

Edit: I can't comment, so I'll address things here. My question was not sparked by simply reading the introduction. Claim 1, which was pasted below, seems to patent bridged wireless networks (most of the other claims are simple variations on that). I suppose my question should be posed to a network expert to see what makes these claims special.

  • Did you bother to read the claims? – Eric Shain Jun 2 '18 at 2:28
  • That's the introduction that you're citing. – DonQuiKong Jun 2 '18 at 7:23
  • I edited my answer a bit. I agree it sounds sort of broad, but I'm not a network engineer so I'm really not competent to assess this. Sorry if my first comment came off as snarky but the phrase you quoted had nothing to do with the claims. – Eric Shain Jun 3 '18 at 23:01
1

Your quoted sentence is from the "Technical Field" section of the patent. This only describes the general application area of the invention. In no way does it suggest or imply that the patent covers all aspects of transferring digital images via wireless transmission.

A patent's specific coverage is defined by its claims. In specific, here is the first claim of the patent.

  1. A system comprising: a first remote device that measures first information at a first location;

    a first transceiver unit coupled to the first remote device, wherein the first transceiver unit controls a first local network, wherein the first remote device is located within range of the first local network;

    a smart device comprising an application that processes the first information, wherein the smart device is located at a second location;

    a second transceiver unit wirelessly coupled to the smart device, wherein the second transceiver unit controls a second local network, wherein, the second transceiver unit is within range of the second local network, wherein the second local network avoids overlap with the first local network; and

    a bridge network formed by the first transceiver unit and the second transceiver unit, wherein the bridge network wirelessly joins the first local network and the second local network.

In order to infringe on a claim, you need to implement each and every aspect of the claim. I'm not an expert on this field, so I can't comment on the strength or validity of this patent. It does seem suspiciously broad to me, but it may depend on how some phrases like "smart device" are defined in the specification. Please note it is a continuation of US9485476.

What I will say is it is a constant theme on this site that people find a patent (or even more likely an application) related to a common field and construe that it is trying to patent everything related to that field. Much more likely is the patent/application is trying to cover a refinement or improvement.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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