Apple Wins Patent for NFC-Enabled 'iTravel' Transportation Ticketing App

jmcrutch said:

Nevertheless, that is the system that is in place. Thus, if Apple doesn't apply for this patent, someone else will.

Click to expand...

Not necessary. Just post onto a public forum the idea and then no-one can patent it unless you can prove you had the idea before it was made public.

I am surprised it was passed. Using NFC IMO is not novel any more. You could use it to track anything really. Are we going to get patents for tracking items in the fridge. Items on the conveyor belt at the airport i.e. everything you could do with a barcode, swap in a NFC.

Umm, I guess NFC comes to the iPhone 5S in 2013.

Now Apple will apply for another ban on nexus for having NFC chip based on inovation that they created (NFC). Maybe Apple should patent Traveling activity. Then it would be perfect.

When are we going to stop issuing useless patents

the8thark said:

Simple fact.
Without patents no one will invent anything. Because there'd be no way to prevent others ripping off their work. So in this spirit I'm glad Apple got their patent for this.

Click to expand...

Software patents are not necessary

FYI
Before jumping to conclusions here's a some of the patented independent claims.
Filing Date: 9/30/2008

Claim 1:
A method for transportation ticketing check-in, comprising:
prompting a traveler to place a handheld electronic device comprising a display and a plurality of wireless communication interfaces within range of a near field communication (NFC) reader, wherein the display is configured to display a graphical user interface, wherein each of the plurality of wireless communication supports a respective communication protocol, and wherein one of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces comprises an NFC interface; retrieving ticketing and traveler identification information from the NFC interface of the handheld electronic device via the NFC reader; and verifying the traveler's identity using the retrieved traveler identification, wherein verifying the traveler's identity comprises comparing a photograph retrieved from the handheld electronic device to the traveler.

Claim 9:
A handheld electronic device comprising tangible, machine-readable media, comprising code executable to perform the steps of:
booking a travel reservation for a mode of transportation using a travel management application on the handheld electronic device; scanning an email account on the handheld electronic device for an email containing the travel reservation; importing the travel reservation information from the email into the travel management application; storing the travel reservation on the handheld electronic device; accessing the travel reservation using the travel management application; transmitting the travel reservation from the handheld electronic device to a check-in kiosk; receiving check-in details from the check-in kiosk to the handheld electronic device; and transmitting the check-in details from the handheld electronic device to a gate kiosk to gain entrance to the mode of transportation.

Enough with the patents! Why are we still awarding software patents to Apple? They clearly abuse their power and bully everybody.

Thanks, Apple, for develop yet another really cool piece of technology and patenting it, then sitting on it and not using it in anything and preventing anyone ELSE from doing it either. ...at least not for five or ten more years when you need a new feature to sell your latest istuff.

Don't hate the playa, hate the game.

But seriously, Apple isn't the only company that applies for patents such as this, it's in every industry. The USPTO is what it is, if Apple (and others) don't try to protect it's ideas and methods, then someone else will.

It's basically the modified golden rule: Do unto others before they do unto you.

Jayse said:

For patenting, hardware and/or highly detailed software (like the above) should be allowed. Get rid of all this 'general' **** that clogs up the courts

Click to expand...

No, copyright should be sufficient for this and all other software

KanosWRX said:

WTF, how are patents given for this!!! The patent office screws up once again!! They will give a patent for just about anything. I want a Patent for typing the letter U after the letter F.

Click to expand...

So, you wouldn't mind it if you spent thousands of personal man-hours figuring out a secure and easy way to manage tickets, then someone took your information and knowledge and made millions off of it?

JHankwitz said:

So, you wouldn't mind it if you spent thousands of personal man-hours figuring out a secure and easy way to manage tickets, then someone took your information and knowledge and made millions off of it?

Click to expand...

This isn't a patent on the "how" but the "what". You don't need a verifiable and usable method to implement something in order to get a patent, just a concept, and a loose plan of how to do it. This is part of what's aggravating - a really basic idea, that nobody can now implement without being SUED. This kinda stuff entirely stifles innovation and competition in the market.

JHankwitz said:

So, you wouldn't mind it if you spent thousands of personal man-hours figuring out a secure and easy way to manage tickets, then someone took your information and knowledge and made millions off of it?

Click to expand...

Implementing software systems this complex would require the same thousands of man-hours on the part of the "someone". Copyright and trademarks protect your actual piece of software. The patent only protects the idea/methods which is not what is time and ressource intensive in making software.

JHankwitz said:

So, you wouldn't mind it if you spent thousands of personal man-hours figuring out a secure and easy way to manage tickets, then someone took your information and knowledge and made millions off of it?

Click to expand...

Please.

They've spent a thousand man-hours on figuring out how to word this obvious patent so that it gets through the patent office.

It has nothing to do with security.

It has nothing to do with efficiency and usability.

It's just another obvious patent that is protecting a business idea instead of a technical solution. This has to stop.

imagine that, people arguing like mad over everything on this site. i gotta stop clicking on the comment section

the8thark said:

Simple fact.
Without patents no one will invent anything. Because there'd be no way to prevent others ripping off their work. So in this spirit I'm glad Apple got their patent for this.

Click to expand...

Yeah, because before patent offices existed, nothing ever got invented! I guess we have to thank our lucky stars that a patent office was established back in the stone ages, or we'd still be stuck there.

this sounds really cool, looking forward to this!

Ummm. How can they patent this?

Delta (As well as others I'm sure, but I fly Delta mostly) already has an app for boarding, where your boarding pass can be emailed to you or loaded via their app, and presented in the way of a QR code at security checkpoint, where it is then scanned.

So that portion already exists.... am I to take that Apple is attempting to patent this? If so, there are other developers who can already claim this... which, I'm sure would simply end as yet another cash settlement on Apples part in the form of a 'win' ????

Weird.... I agree that patents are sort of getting out of hand.
Patents are vitally important to protecting intellectual property....
but you can't just patent EVERYTHING. This is like trying to copyright the alphabet.

Too funny

Simple Minds owns itravel!

i think simple minds should sue apple:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6MwzSaBBQY

Bezetos said:

I am not singling out Apple,

Click to expand...

I LOLed.

knewsom said:

Thanks, Apple, for develop yet another really cool piece of technology and patenting it, then sitting on it and not using it in anything and preventing anyone ELSE from doing it either. ...at least not for five or ten more years when you need a new feature to sell your latest istuff.

Click to expand...

Apple invented nothing. NFC technology is the core of this entire concept. The NFC technology is the actual invention, which has already been invented.

All that apple managed to Patent is a business concept that everyone who's in the NFC biz has already thought of as part of the entire NFC package.

This is a joke awarding of a patent. It won't hold up in court as it's too simple. "use your NFC device to check in at airports".

Patents should be awarded by demonstrating the ability for a process or technology to complete a specific task. these general "using your phone's NFC to check in at a _____" patents should be thrown out.

JAT said:

I LOLed.

Click to expand...

You mean "I trolled".

Mackan said:

Don't understand why patents like these are given. What a screwed up system.

Click to expand...

Life in the big city. It's a big, scary, complex world out there.

Isn't it?

Bezetos said:

You mean "I trolled".

Click to expand...

Interesting. By what definition?

LordVic said:

[...] Patents should be awarded by demonstrating the ability for a process or technology to complete a specific task. these general "using your phone's NFC to check in at a _____" patents should be thrown out.

Click to expand...

And just exactly how is checking in at an airport *not* a specific task?

Apple has streamlined the workflow of purchasing and using tickets. I used the United Airlines
app to check in to and board a recent flight, but the United app won't get me in to a concert or movie or WWDC.
And the United app won't get me onto a Southwest Airlines flight either.

Apple's process (whether it is used in iTravel or Passbook or some future concert ticketing app and/or
movie ticketing app) is both 1) a proprietary design that uses iTunes for purchasing and verification, and
2) flexible enough to be used for all manner of travel and event ticketing and admission.

If that's not worth patenting, then nothing is.

(Oh, and there's one more thing: NFC-based mobile contactless payment and ticketing systems have been
used in Japan for decades, but each and every organization has their own technology and process.
Apparently it's a huge pain for the user, and Apple has eliminated that pain.)

KanosWRX said:

I would hope so, the Type Writer was a piece of machinery that revolutionized how everyone wrote documents and letters or anything on paper. It was a mechanical device that did something no one had ever seen before. That's not what Apple is patenting here though or anything like it. If your trying to compare Apple to the inventor of the type writer you are crazy. It seriously would be more like someone invented the type writer then Apple came along and patented the semi colon button. It was a character that already existed, they just made another button for it... worthless patents by Apple it will never end.

Click to expand...

Yep. Patents also should have a deadline to be implemented. "If it won't came to the market as a product or service within 1 year, the patent will be revoked". So you could only submit a patent if you can implement it within 1 year. Otherwise, it's worthless.

Also, after the implementation, they should have a shorter time for exploring that patent, e.g. 2 years. 3 year (1 year of implementation plus 2 years of exploration) is an eternity in technology. Larger periods are a barrier to evolution.