On my phone so I can't edit the post but I wanted to clarify that you are oversimplifying the patent in order to make it seem ridiculous.
On my phone so I can't edit the post but I wanted to clarify that you are oversimplifying the patent in order to make it seem ridiculous.
Apple filed a patent in 2010, not recently files. Apple didn't get it working right so that's why we don't see it in iOS.
This is nothing but a troll thread. If Apple has the patent, take it up with the patent office.
This is nothing but a troll thread. If Apple has the patent, take it up with the patent office.
Blueychan
Senior member
- Feb 1, 2008
- 602
- 0
- 76
Leave it our resident Apple-fan.
At least the "resident Apple-fan" brings facts while you tried to manipulate it.
So if I have a great idea but no money, I should wait until I have or rise enough money to obtain a patent for it?
No. Facial recognition stops at the individual's face being identified. That's the simple of it.
It's like saying a key (object) is the same thing as using the key to unlock the key hole (action). Well, it's not. Plain and simple.
Facial recognition (the technology) is not the same as Face Unlock (the action).
QueBert
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2002
- 22,546
- 832
- 126
You shouldn't patent an idea unless it's 100% originally yours, according to OP if anyone has done anything even remotely similar, even if they just wrote a theory paper on an idea they had. You have zero right to attempt to patent it, but knowing OP's mentality I'm thinking this only applies to Apple and Google gets a pass here, as would any other company.
canon, nikon and others sell DSLR cameras. how can that be if they all have patents?
you can't patent an idea, only the implementation
They will enter into a licensing agreement with you. For every person you recognize and speak to you owe them $5. If you recognize someone and don't talk to them, it's only $4.
dainthomas
Lifer
- Dec 7, 2004
- 14,632
- 3,504
- 136
Facial recognition devices are always connected to computers. I mean, they have to be right? So a face is recognized and the computer does something. Whether that action is to save a picture of the face, unlock a computer, or make a pizza is hardly relevant. This has been going on for decades.
"Oooh look how innovative Apple is. They are taking facial recognition in a completely unique and unexpected direction" is total BS. They want to use facial recognition to do the EXACT kind of things it's always done. Probably more stylishly though.
US patent law has become a sad joke that companies like RAMBUS and Apple are trying to exploit.
Patranus
Diamond Member
- Apr 15, 2007
- 9,280
- 0
- 0
People here are missing 2 things.
1) This was filed for in 2010.
2) It is a specific feature done in a very specific way.
Apple did not patent facial recognition rather a specific way of using it via a very specific method to accomplish whatever goal.
Oh no! Google (Stanford) patented internet search because they have their "Page Rank" patent. Oh the humanity!
1) This was filed for in 2010.
2) It is a specific feature done in a very specific way.
Apple did not patent facial recognition rather a specific way of using it via a very specific method to accomplish whatever goal.
Oh no! Google (Stanford) patented internet search because they have their "Page Rank" patent. Oh the humanity!
Phynaz
Lifer
- Mar 13, 2006
- 10,140
- 819
- 126
This x 100.
This is a method.
Different people can come up with multiple ways of accomplishing the same thing and both are patentable. OP seems to be focused on the outcome and not the action.
Last edited:
No one is saying Apple is doing something innovative, nor are they reinventing the wheel, nor are they saving children. I'm not sure where that notion came from.
The thing is that... facial recognition and face unlock are two different things.
The wheel has always existed. But you can't say the wheel is the same as a car... nor can you say that the car is the very same as a truck.
Let's just say Apple is not doing anything new. They are simply patenting something that no one has patented before. In this case, it's the "apply for a patent" action that they did first, not the "invent" action.
I hope that's clear now?
Oyeve
Lifer
- Oct 18, 1999
- 21,980
- 847
- 126
purbeast0
No Lifer
- Sep 13, 2001
- 52,992
- 5,888
- 126
asus has had face unlock on their laptops for years now... but i think its pretty easily circumvented by just holding a photograph up to the camera
akugami
Diamond Member
- Feb 14, 2005
- 5,936
- 2,254
- 136
Clearly a lot of people did not RTFA. Even if you didn't understand the patent, it was very clear from the article that Apple was implementing a very specific method of facial recognition used to solve a couple of issues/limitations of using facial recognition in a mobile computing device.
sygyzy
Lifer
- Oct 21, 2000
- 14,001
- 4
- 76
Apple isn't solving any issues or limitations. Just like voice recognition, the difficulty is in the actual recognition. According to the responses in this thread, Apple is doing with Facial Recognition, the same thing they did with Siri - they are making it do interesting things after the the face gets recognized.
senseamp
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,197
- 126
Leave it our resident Apple-fan.
They filed for the patent, without a product, without plans for a product, while all the while their competitors were actually using it.
And the pot calling the kettle black.
Its our own resident Apple basher.
akugami
Diamond Member
- Feb 14, 2005
- 5,936
- 2,254
- 136
Well, there's also the part about them attempting to implement decent facial recognition and design it to fit into the computing and power constraints of mobile devices as well as the vastly different lighting situations that may impact decent facial recognition.
Current mobile facial recognition is pretty crappy. I was testing it and took a photo of my friend, using my iPhone 4, and was able to get his Android phone to recognize the photo as legit and unlocked the phone using his photo which was displayed on my phone.
Apple's proposed methods do seem more advanced and may be much more "hack proof" than current implementations. But again, the proof is in the pudding as they say so we won't know until it's actually implemented and tested by regular users.
The problem with these patents is that they are all very obvious. Using a photo to unlock a phone with face recognition is obvious(or any unique body part). If screens ever become advanced enough to read finger prints then that will become an obvious use for them- could also be used to verify user for NFC transactions. Once the tech is there it's very easy to come up with 'innovative' idea's but the real innovation is the tech itself. If we had a way to control computers with our mind then unlocking a device by thinking of a unique image would probably be patented right away even though it's completely obvious.
Zaap
Diamond Member
- Jun 12, 2008
- 7,162
- 424
- 126
Meanwhile, lost in the shuffle of all this is the fact that facial recognition sounds über-stupid and mostly useless.
Another thing that will drain the battery on whatever device is supposed to be scanning for faces all the time. (That's one of the dumber ideas I've heard of lately, like devs are running out of actual uses for all these portable devices.)
Another dumb 'parlor trick' idea that will be relevant and cool for about 2 seconds, then ANNOYING as all hell every time anyone has to suffer through someone showing it forever after that. (Like dorks that still don't know that demoing Siri in any social gathering of non-dweebs is as retarded by now as putting a lampshade on your head.)
Another thing that will drain the battery on whatever device is supposed to be scanning for faces all the time. (That's one of the dumber ideas I've heard of lately, like devs are running out of actual uses for all these portable devices.)
Another dumb 'parlor trick' idea that will be relevant and cool for about 2 seconds, then ANNOYING as all hell every time anyone has to suffer through someone showing it forever after that. (Like dorks that still don't know that demoing Siri in any social gathering of non-dweebs is as retarded by now as putting a lampshade on your head.)
cronos
Diamond Member
- Nov 7, 2001
- 9,380
- 26
- 101
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter