“Avatars displayed to a user, in response to user gestures in the real world, e.g. in response to manipulation of a game controller or other such expedient [PlayStation Eye or wand-based motion control?—Ed], may toss tomatoes that stick to the actor’s face or bounce off the actor’s face and roll along a table that appears in the movie or television show.”

The virtual avatars would be overlaid just like Joel Robinson’s silhouette in Mystery Science Theatre 3000. In fact, the patent application actually mentions the cult US comedy series.

“The avatar of the audience member 39a is now out of its seat, has rushed up to the actor in the scene, and has kicked the actor in the behind while the target is still displayed. The first participant to accomplish this may be awarded points…The kicked individual may be displaced or the portion of the body that is kicked may respond. Key to this aspect of the invention is modelling the physics and the interaction of the impacting object, e.g. the duck and the underlying object, e.g. the water, in a way that is realistic. Known game technology techniques can be used to accomplish this modelling.”

Sony’s patent also mentions the possibility of overlaying advertising like Nike and Coca-Cola logos. Come to think of it, being able to throw tomatoes at ads might actually get me to stop skipping them. At least until the novelty wears off. Either way, crazy stuff, no? [USPTO via Silicon Era via Kotaku]

The Gerbil Shirt wraps your torso in plastic tube passageways, making your bod a super highway of fun for Binky and Bart. The interior surfaces are textured for traction and have air vents for easy breathing.

Also, you can a faucet through the tubes for “easy cleaning”. (It helps if the gerbils are still inside.)

As bad as the idea may be, the Gerbil Shirt is still slightly more ethical than the inevitable follow-up, Gerbil Pants. [Patently Absurd via tywkiwdbi via Neatorama via OhGizmo!]

The story was the subject of much hyperventilation last week which revolved mostly around a few impassioned quotes:

Here it is, patent number7617530. Thanks, USPTO, for giving Microsoft, which is already a monopoly, a monopoly on something that’s been in use since 1980 and wasn’t invented by Microsoft. Here’s Wikipedia’s description of sudo, which you can meaningfully compare to Microsoft’s description of its “invention”.

This from Groklaw, a site that specialises in free and open source software legal affairs, i.e. exactly this kind of thing. But for whatever reason — zeal? clicks? — their reading of the patent, which we picked up, turned out to overblown. Says Sudo maintainer Todd Miller, via Ars:

I’ve already received a number of questions about US patent 7,617,530 that some people seem to believe might cover sudo. I don’t think that is the case,” he wrote. “Sudo simply doesn’t work this way. When a command is run via sudo the user is actively running the command as a different user. What is described in the patent is a mechanism whereby an application or the operating system detects that an action needs to be run with increased privileges and automatically prompts the user with a list of potential users that have the appropriate privilege level to perform the task.

So, if not this, then what does the Microsoft patent cover? Back to Ars:

Specifically, it describes a user interface which displays accounts that have the necessary rights to perform an action when the user is blocked from performing an action that requires higher access privileges.

These are similar, but not patent similar.

Turns out though, that there is a Linux tool called PolicyKit just like what Microsoft patented, which prompts users to switch to a higher-level user account when they hit against a permissions barrier. It was created after the patent was filed. So, Microsoft, on all counts: not guilty. [ArsTechnica]

“A system comprising: a pen-based input tablet configured to collect and organise received ink information into ink strokes.”

Tablets are mentioned all over the application… one step closer to Jesus’ wet dream? [USPTO via Unwired View]

Groklaw has an explanation of the history of sudo and details about the patent, but it all boils down to this: Someone at the US Patent Office must’ve been snoozing when they approved this patent application. Either that or the command worked on a person. [USPTO via Groklaw]

I don’t even know why this iPod thingie—which includes microphone, headphone, memory, display and media player—is also a wireless headset. Would this be paired to an iPhone? It doesn’t make sense, since the iPhone is already a media player. Why would I want to have a second one on the headset itself? Maybe to connect to another non-media-playing mobile phone? Do those exist anymore? Does Steve know about this, per chance? [Baltimore Sun via 9to5]

Now, touchscreens are nothing new, obviously. The iPhone’s an obvious example, as are the multitude of touchscreen handsets that have done their fair share of pinch zooming, screen swiping and touch typing in its wake.

Add in pressure sensitive gestures, however, and a new level of control descends on the venerable touchscreen. Again, Apple’s been here before—at least with a 2007 patent—but nevertheless it’s interesting to see a giant like Nokia weighing in with some ideas too (let’s just hope they get their homework handed in before doomsday though, right?).

Like I said, the Apple one is going on two years old, and we haven’t seen anything yet. Our expectations with these things must remain in the realm of the real and the grounded. Still, as we explained earlier, touchscreens are our future, and the added functionality provided by a pressure-sensitive screen seems an inevitability. Question is, who’s going to be first to successfully drive this tech to where it really counts: Into the mainstream consumer market? [Unwired View via Engadget]

From Nokia:

The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models shipped since the iPhone was introduced in 2007.

Apparently, the wireless technologies in question mean that the iPod touch is off the hook.

Apple is no stranger to patent squabbles, even on the iPhone with their blanket claims on multitouch. [Nokia]

UPDATE: Gene Munster estimates that the patents add up to $US6-$US12 per phone, meaning that Apple would owe Nokia roughly $US200-$US400 million based upon the estimated 34 million iPhones sold to date. [BusinessWeek]

Among other disclosures, an operating system presents one or more advertisements to a user and disables one or more functions while the advertisement is being presented. At the end of the advertisement, the operating system again enables the function(s). The advertisement can be visual or audible. The presentation of the advertisement(s) can be made as part of an approach where the user obtains a good or service, such as the operating system, for free or at reduced cost.

The advertisement could appear as:
- a pane on top of any other pane in a user interface of the device
- in a designated area of a background of the user interface
- in a window for an application program
- inserted in content from an application program
- through an audio output of the device; and combinations thereof.

Microsoft Office Starter 2010 aside, ad-supported software has pretty much gone out of fashion. However, it does show that Apple, too, has at least contemplated the idea. [USPTO via MacRumors]

Apple Insider says this multitouch interface is designed to recognise specific user hands touching the device (personalised profiles!), and could differentiate between actions such as typing, or hands just resting on the surface. There’s also talk of scrollwheel elements for basic OS X control and tactile feedback that wouldn’t disrupt movement across the device surface.

Obviously, this seems like a fit for a tablet-based keyboard interface. But maybe it could work as a standalone as well. Many of the functions described revolve mostly around keyboard/tablet like functions, and substitution gestures for direct object manipulation. And in the patent flowchart, the display seems to be listed as an entirely different component. Then again, it could just be a Red Herring. [Apple Insider via Electronista]

[imghttp://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/images/4/2009/10/gallery_patent-091001-4.jpg|left]