Patents Threaten To Silence A Little Girl, Literally

[garrybuck]

Build a better mousetrap and the lawyers will beat a path to your doorstep.

[Belle2Be]

The sPeak for yourself app has words too. And it's 300 bucks. It's basically exactly the same as the one thats 15k.

[Rob Lister]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

You said:

It sounded like you made up your mind already about who is right.

i'm not on the jury, so its okay.

[PaulPosition]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

So the patent holder claims to own the idea of clicking buttons to make sounds?

If *that* is their complain then (I hope) it will go the same way as the guy who patented "Sealed Crustless Sandwich" (ie, peanut-butter-jelly sam).

[taustin]

Originally Posted by jmaejr

Perhaps the article should be titled 'Lack of desire to pay threatens to silence a little girl'.

The equipment and software are both completely available, patents are not stopping that...they are only stopping the cheap/freebie knock off using the technology without paying for it...

The article I read, he said the hardware version from that company was too big and heavy for his kid for now. And language development needs to begin as young as possible, because by age five the brain loses a good deal of its flexibility to learn language. He's got a legitimate complaint.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Why doesn't Speak For Yourself work a deal and license the patents in question?

The theory is (and it makes sense) that people won't pay thousands of bucks for a iPad app, so they make a boatload less per sale that way.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by taustin

The article I read, he said the hardware version from that company was too big and heavy for his kid for now. And language development needs to begin as young as possible, because by age five the brain loses a good deal of its flexibility to learn language. He's got a legitimate complaint.

In which case, why aren't tax dollars being used to fund the research and providing these tools to those in need?

[taustin]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

In which case, why aren't tax dollars being used to fund the research and providing these tools to those in need?

So you feel it would be OK to violate their patent so long as tax dollars are used to do so? Because it would still be the same issue: the company that owns the patent owns the patent, and isn't interested in licensing it for software that costs an order or magnitude (or two) less than their devices.

[QuantumIguana]

Looks like a "See n' Say", only with clicking icons instead of pointing a dial and pulling a string.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by taustin

So you feel it would be OK to violate their patent so long as tax dollars are used to do so? Because it would still be the same issue: the company that owns the patent owns the patent, and isn't interested in licensing it for software that costs an order or magnitude (or two) less than their devices.

Not violate the patent, but fund the research from day one as a vital human service. Either that or subsidize the cost of these devices and programs for those in need.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

In which case, why aren't tax dollars being used to fund the research and providing these tools to those in need?

Speaking as a disabled person, I'd be in favor of that but we've spent the last however long making "raise taxes" a complete non-starter for politicians.

[Belle2Be]

If the patent is the issue, it wouldn't be difficult to come up with something different enough with the same goal.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

So the patent holder claims to own the idea of clicking buttons to make sounds?

No no no--clicking buttons *with pictures* to make a sound for that word! Such a unique idea! Takes many language specialists to come up with it, and extremely talented programmers to make it usable on a device!

Hey, if Apple can patent "rounded corners", why not?

[jmaejr]

Originally Posted by taustin

The article I read, he said the hardware version from that company was too big and heavy for his kid for now. And language development needs to begin as young as possible, because by age five the brain loses a good deal of its flexibility to learn language. He's got a legitimate complaint.

So what did the parents do before this app became available...?

There is no evidence supporting the fact that people lose ability to learn language after 5 years of age. While it's a commonly held belief that children learn language faster than adults there is no evidence to fully support it.

The Defense Language Institute and the Monterey Institute both specialize in teaching category three languages, the most difficult, to complete beginner adults, raising them to fluency in one year.

Children are not permitted in the courses.

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

So the patent holder claims to own the idea of clicking buttons to make sounds?

No different than Apple getting patents for its 'Slide to Unlock' feature. Patent numbers 7,657,849 and 8,046,721 prohibit any company other than Apple to sell touch-screen devices that unlock by touching that screen and moving your finger...

[5thWiggle]

The patent is for a little more than that.
http://www.google.com/patents/US5920303?dq=5,920,303

It looks like Speak for Yourself ran afoul of it here: "...and control means for comparing the temporarily stored symbol sequence, in response to each key selection, to a plurality of prestored symbol sequences, each including at least one symbol in a predetemined sequence, and for dynamically redefining symbols of less than all of the plurality of displayed keys of the integrated input and display device in response to the temporarily stored symbol sequence matching at least one of the plurality of prestored symbol sequences." (IANAL)

That said, I still think the situation sucks, and I hope that the parties can come to an agreement that benefits everyone.