Hi, everyone. Now let's talk about how to read patents again.
Today, there is a whole series of headlines claiming that Facebook has a patent to secretly light up the microphone of its phone when it hears a signal coming from a TV set. The story seems to have resumed in Metro UK which headlined "Facebook wants to hide inaudible secret messages in television commercials that can force your phone to record audio."
Here Gizmodo in the classical style Giz : "The Facebook patent imagines the triggering of the microphone of your phone when a hidden signal is broadcast on television."
Here Engadget that personally breaks my heart.I had used to do all the patent histories out there: "The Facebook patent activates the phone pickups to record reactions to commercials."
Here Esquire for whatever reason: "Facebook's new patent In any case, all these titles are false. Facebook has not applied for a patent to turn on your phone's microphone when a hidden signal is being broadcast on a television. I know it because I simply read patent claims, which do not have the word "phone" or "microphone" at all. And claims are the only part that really matters.
A patent is composed of several parts. There is the title which is usually gibberish, the summary which largely describes what is in the patent, the specification which explains how to build or use the invention. being patented, and then there are the claims which is the very purpose of the patent. If you are not a patent attorney in a patent litigation and you read something other than the claims, you are mistaken.
This is so fundamental to the reading of patents that law students are taught "the name of the game is the claim" for it to be remembered.
