6 ms·

Apple patents system for iOS devices to prevent image and video capturing

37 points by ary 15y ago

ary 15y ago
Now just imagine it being used at political events or to suppress collection of evidence of abuse at demonstrations. Edit: Probably worth noting that were this to take off it would probably also be embedded in every TV out there.
- GHFigs 15y ago
  Now just imagine if people went around trying to scare each other with wild speculation based on scarce evidence and no rational arguments. What would that be like?
- kelnos 15y ago
  Probably worth noting that were this to take off it would probably also be embedded in every TV out there. If it's infrared, you can always find and cover the emitter.
  - ary 15y ago
    Good point. In your home yes, but not everywhere.
    - kelnos 15y ago
      In which case you could cover the receiver on the phone instead.
    - anko 15y ago
      stick an IR filter on the back of your phone, no?
  - sixtofour 15y ago
    It would be more difficult if the emitter were inside the bezel.
  - mahyarm 15y ago
    Or add IR blocking film.
- dclowd9901 15y ago
  That latter part is the first place my mind went. Imagine not being able to capture all the police abuses that have been captured in the last 5 or so years because of cell cam videos.
kjell 15y ago
This is really scary. I'm a total apple fanboi. But no way I'd buy a phone with this baked in. I don't like to think apple would bow this deeply to the recording industry. Maybe the government. Either way it turns my stomach. "At block 950, a record function can be disabled. For example, if the encoded data includes a disable command, the device can temporarily disable its record function for a period of time after receiving the command (e.g., 30 seconds or 30 minutes). After the device's record function is disabled, the device may not be able to store images detected by the device. In some embodiments, after the device's record function is disabled, the device may not be able to even display images detected by the device (see, e.g., system 500 shown in FIG. 5). In some embodiments, a device may even delete one or more of the most recently stored images (e.g., the first image detected at block 910) when disabling the device's record function."
- kjell 15y ago
  In this image there's a toggle for the IR capabilities. [1] http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c014e88d77752970d-pi http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c014e88d777...
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > But no way I'd buy a phone with this baked in. Don't worry. It'll come bundled in a firmware update.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
orangecat 15y ago
Yet another reason why replacing general purpose computers with locked down appliances would be extremely bad for freedom and innovation.
- awnroca 15y ago
  Bad for freedom, great for innovation. If you lock me down I will find a way around to root/jailbreak/whatever you.
lotusleaf1987 15y ago
This is a purely defensive act to keep some company from producing a device that blocks Apple devices, but they can still make one for WebOS/Blackberry/Android/WP7.They're doing it to prevent someone else from producing/selling a similar device.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  If that's the case, they should donate the patent to either the EFF or the ACLU.
  - lotusleaf1987 15y ago
    Why that's a total non-sequitur? If the patent is only specifically related to Apply products, then they should keep it to themselves. There's no incentive for Apple to produce/sell this device.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      Then why have the patent in the first place?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - edw 15y ago
    No, I think they should license it to HTC and all the other Android handset manufacturers, giving them one more bullet point in their long list of features that the iPhone lacks. There's a patent. That much is (apparently) fact. Everything else is speculation. Is it really worth getting worked up over things that haven't happened and may never happen? Finally, if this were to come to pass, there's a very easy solution: a filter. You will see cases that cover the lens with an IR filter. Problem solved. Yawn.
    - lotusleaf1987 15y ago
      | edw: No, I think they should license it to HTC and all the other Android handset manufacturers, given them one more feature bullet point in their long list of features that the iPhone lacks. What are you talking about? To follow your absurd scenario, you think if Apple gave this bizarre patent away, but none of their others, that the EFF should then turn around and backstab the inventors and license it to their rivals? Yeah that's real classy and makes a whole lot of sense.. Why do so many people see the world in these binaries? Good/evil, black/white, red/blue.
SeoxyS 15y ago
Oh god, I don't like the sound of that. I wonder how Apple's going to spin this to make this sound in any way acceptable, when and if this does get released. Note, though, that a patent does not mean the feature is coming. Most companies patent everything their R&D departments come up with, and only 10% of those ever make their ways into products.
- roc 15y ago
  If they actually did this, they would obviously focus everything on the the value-add cases: the shopping assistant, tour-guide apps, etc. And there's really no indication they would include the 'copy protection' feature even if they implemented other parts of it. Personally, I can't see anyone bothering with it. You'd set up some proprietary transmitter that would only work on a subset of devices, that is based on a technology that the wider market wouldn't be interested in adopting (why would Nokia or Nikon care to adopt such a standard?) and ultimately it could be defeated by a cheap piece of IR filtering glass or plastic. What would be the point?
gamache 15y ago
This gives me a giggle. Around ten years ago, a few friends of mine put together a system for Palms to receive IR annotations next to physical objects, and one of the use cases was for museum guide information. Never ended up commercializing it. They were calling it the iPod...
gte910h 15y ago
I can see police officers affixing this to their gear....
- sedev 15y ago
  That was my very first thought, too - "wow, this is going to be a boon to criminals in uniform!" Think of it the way Bruce Schneier would: what could a malicious person accomplish with this technology? There's no effective way to keep it out of their hands, so you need to know what happens when someone tries to use this technique for malicious ends. The security implications of this are just nasty, nasty, nasty.
  - pyre 15y ago
    Hear, hear! I wonder how Apple will spin it when I can't photograph a police officer abusing someone with my iPhone? Is that a feature? Or is Apple trying to tell me that 'photographing abuses of power' is not one of the intended uses of the iPhone and if I want to use it for such a purpose, I shouldn't buy one?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
rufo 15y ago
Infrared filter, anyone?
- joezydeco 15y ago
  Most CCD-based cameras alread have an IR filter film behind the lens. There are lots of people that hack them out to turn their webcams etc into night vision cameras.
  - juiceandjuice 15y ago
    True night vision is a bit different than just adding near-infrared, unless you plan on using an IR illuminator. It's more like cranking the ISO to ridiculous levels, and if it's thermal the wavelengths are much much longer than any digital camera (or optics) can pick up. In any case, the first poster is right, an additional IR filter would remove this.
    - joezydeco 15y ago
      My point was that consumer CCD cameras filter out short-wavelength IR to enhance the image, so how does the Apple patent expect to get around that without removing the filter and making the visible light camera worse?
      - rufo 15y ago
        I don't think Apple has an IR filter; IR blasters show up as bluish-white - handy for testing remote controls.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- Kylekramer 15y ago
  http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c015432b717a5970c-800wi http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c015432b717... Apple was the first one to suggest this use case, not the blog.
  - rauljara 15y ago
    Thank you. Completely stupid just missed it on my part.
cheald 15y ago
I want this to go into the iPhone 5. If it does, I can think of about a million ways to troll the general public with it. Imagine, little solar-powered IR LEDs that you could ninja-drop in places (like...an Apple store) that would broadcast "Hello, you are photographing a copy of The Hurt Locker". This would make the best hidden-camera show ever (though you'd have to record it with a non-iPhone).
- xorglorb 15y ago
  It mentioned that you could disable recording for a period of time. What if you set the LEDs to disable recording for several days or even weeks.
- mnutt 15y ago
  Combining the IR LEDs with throwies ( http://graffitiresearchlab.com/projects/led-throwies/ http://graffitiresearchlab.com/projects/led-throwies/ ) would be ideal.
- jamesbkel 15y ago
  Agreed, my first thoughts too. This is ripe for abuse. I honestly would be less concerned about "legit" or "publicly known" use (concerts, sports, political event etc.) since it would lead to public dissent towards of the offending performer/venue. Not saying it wouldn't be used, but there would be a significant PR liability if they imposed sanctions on photography. If I were a criminal, first thing I would do is get a few of those IR transmitters to wear on my ski mask.
Tycho 15y ago
Different take: this would allow people to carry iPhones into company buildings (eg. service centres belonging to banks, government offices) and areas where camera-phones are banned for security reasons. The bank I used to work for banned camera phones from their offices, I imagine many other companies do the same. I would think twice about buying a phone I can't take to work. Or, corporations might rule out iPhones when choosing a model for the company phone. This would let Apple back into that (fairly large) market. Possibly.
- jamesbkel 15y ago
  Interesting take, hadn't thought of that at all. Something along those lines would definitely be boon to AAPL or others penetrating that sort of market. However, we all know the software on smartphones are if not trivially, at least often manipulated. This may be able to skim a little of the market, but if I had a business where I couldn't trust camera phone now, I wouldn't trust this technique against even a slightly educated and motivated individual.
  - Tycho 15y ago
    True enough. A more likely solution would be to just sell a 'corporate' iPhone with no camera (and support for some other stuff to sweeten the deal).
sudonim 15y ago
The patent was filed December 2, 2009 when the 3gs was the latest and greatest iPhone. I'd be surprised if you see this on an iPhone near you anytime soon. And if the powers that be try to use it to repress Apple users, there are tons of other devices out there. No need to get alarmed.
- sjs 15y ago
  Unfortunately there aren't any other smart phones that I could recommend for my mom in good conscience. I haven't tried WP7 yet which actually looks like it's made for humans. Unlike my Nexus One which is no good for mom yet for a number of reasons.
  - jamestr 15y ago
    Vote with your wallet!
monochromatic 15y ago
Software patents are bad, right? EVERYONE should be able to build this capability into their phones!
brudgers 15y ago
The technology described kind of reminds me of the "Ugly T-Shirt" in Gibson's Zero History.
jamestr 15y ago
Vote with your wallet!
- edw 15y ago
  So by voting with your wallet and not purchasing an Apple product, you are sending the message that you won't purchase products that don't incorporate technology from patents that you don't like?

37 points by ary 15y ago

ary 15y ago

Now just imagine it being used at political events or to suppress collection of evidence of abuse at demonstrations. Edit: Probably worth noting that were this to take off it would probably also be embedded in every TV out there.

GHFigs 15y ago
Now just imagine if people went around trying to scare each other with wild speculation based on scarce evidence and no rational arguments. What would that be like?
kelnos 15y ago
Probably worth noting that were this to take off it would probably also be embedded in every TV out there. If it's infrared, you can always find and cover the emitter.
- ary 15y ago
  Good point. In your home yes, but not everywhere.
  - kelnos 15y ago
    In which case you could cover the receiver on the phone instead.
  - anko 15y ago
    stick an IR filter on the back of your phone, no?
- sixtofour 15y ago
  It would be more difficult if the emitter were inside the bezel.
- mahyarm 15y ago
  Or add IR blocking film.
dclowd9901 15y ago
That latter part is the first place my mind went. Imagine not being able to capture all the police abuses that have been captured in the last 5 or so years because of cell cam videos.

kjell 15y ago

This is really scary. I'm a total apple fanboi. But no way I'd buy a phone with this baked in. I don't like to think apple would bow this deeply to the recording industry. Maybe the government. Either way it turns my stomach. "At block 950, a record function can be disabled. For example, if the encoded data includes a disable command, the device can temporarily disable its record function for a period of time after receiving the command (e.g., 30 seconds or 30 minutes). After the device's record function is disabled, the device may not be able to store images detected by the device. In some embodiments, after the device's record function is disabled, the device may not be able to even display images detected by the device (see, e.g., system 500 shown in FIG. 5). In some embodiments, a device may even delete one or more of the most recently stored images (e.g., the first image detected at block 910) when disabling the device's record function."

kjell 15y ago
In this image there's a toggle for the IR capabilities. [1] http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c014e88d77752970d-pi http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c014e88d777...
rbanffy 15y ago
> But no way I'd buy a phone with this baked in. Don't worry. It'll come bundled in a firmware update.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

orangecat 15y ago

Yet another reason why replacing general purpose computers with locked down appliances would be extremely bad for freedom and innovation.

awnroca 15y ago
Bad for freedom, great for innovation. If you lock me down I will find a way around to root/jailbreak/whatever you.

lotusleaf1987 15y ago

This is a purely defensive act to keep some company from producing a device that blocks Apple devices, but they can still make one for WebOS/Blackberry/Android/WP7.They're doing it to prevent someone else from producing/selling a similar device.

rbanffy 15y ago
If that's the case, they should donate the patent to either the EFF or the ACLU.
- lotusleaf1987 15y ago
  Why that's a total non-sequitur? If the patent is only specifically related to Apply products, then they should keep it to themselves. There's no incentive for Apple to produce/sell this device.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    Then why have the patent in the first place?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- edw 15y ago
  No, I think they should license it to HTC and all the other Android handset manufacturers, giving them one more bullet point in their long list of features that the iPhone lacks. There's a patent. That much is (apparently) fact. Everything else is speculation. Is it really worth getting worked up over things that haven't happened and may never happen? Finally, if this were to come to pass, there's a very easy solution: a filter. You will see cases that cover the lens with an IR filter. Problem solved. Yawn.
  - lotusleaf1987 15y ago
    | edw: No, I think they should license it to HTC and all the other Android handset manufacturers, given them one more feature bullet point in their long list of features that the iPhone lacks. What are you talking about? To follow your absurd scenario, you think if Apple gave this bizarre patent away, but none of their others, that the EFF should then turn around and backstab the inventors and license it to their rivals? Yeah that's real classy and makes a whole lot of sense.. Why do so many people see the world in these binaries? Good/evil, black/white, red/blue.

SeoxyS 15y ago

Oh god, I don't like the sound of that. I wonder how Apple's going to spin this to make this sound in any way acceptable, when and if this does get released. Note, though, that a patent does not mean the feature is coming. Most companies patent everything their R&D departments come up with, and only 10% of those ever make their ways into products.

roc 15y ago
If they actually did this, they would obviously focus everything on the the value-add cases: the shopping assistant, tour-guide apps, etc. And there's really no indication they would include the 'copy protection' feature even if they implemented other parts of it. Personally, I can't see anyone bothering with it. You'd set up some proprietary transmitter that would only work on a subset of devices, that is based on a technology that the wider market wouldn't be interested in adopting (why would Nokia or Nikon care to adopt such a standard?) and ultimately it could be defeated by a cheap piece of IR filtering glass or plastic. What would be the point?

gamache 15y ago

This gives me a giggle. Around ten years ago, a few friends of mine put together a system for Palms to receive IR annotations next to physical objects, and one of the use cases was for museum guide information. Never ended up commercializing it. They were calling it the iPod...

gte910h 15y ago

I can see police officers affixing this to their gear....

sedev 15y ago
That was my very first thought, too - "wow, this is going to be a boon to criminals in uniform!" Think of it the way Bruce Schneier would: what could a malicious person accomplish with this technology? There's no effective way to keep it out of their hands, so you need to know what happens when someone tries to use this technique for malicious ends. The security implications of this are just nasty, nasty, nasty.
- pyre 15y ago
  Hear, hear! I wonder how Apple will spin it when I can't photograph a police officer abusing someone with my iPhone? Is that a feature? Or is Apple trying to tell me that 'photographing abuses of power' is not one of the intended uses of the iPhone and if I want to use it for such a purpose, I shouldn't buy one?

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

rufo 15y ago

Infrared filter, anyone?

joezydeco 15y ago
Most CCD-based cameras alread have an IR filter film behind the lens. There are lots of people that hack them out to turn their webcams etc into night vision cameras.
- juiceandjuice 15y ago
  True night vision is a bit different than just adding near-infrared, unless you plan on using an IR illuminator. It's more like cranking the ISO to ridiculous levels, and if it's thermal the wavelengths are much much longer than any digital camera (or optics) can pick up. In any case, the first poster is right, an additional IR filter would remove this.
  - joezydeco 15y ago
    My point was that consumer CCD cameras filter out short-wavelength IR to enhance the image, so how does the Apple patent expect to get around that without removing the filter and making the visible light camera worse?
    - rufo 15y ago
      I don't think Apple has an IR filter; IR blasters show up as bluish-white - handy for testing remote controls.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

Kylekramer 15y ago
http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c015432b717a5970c-800wi http://www.patentlyapple.com/.a/6a0120a5580826970c015432b717... Apple was the first one to suggest this use case, not the blog.
- rauljara 15y ago
  Thank you. Completely stupid just missed it on my part.

cheald 15y ago

I want this to go into the iPhone 5. If it does, I can think of about a million ways to troll the general public with it. Imagine, little solar-powered IR LEDs that you could ninja-drop in places (like...an Apple store) that would broadcast "Hello, you are photographing a copy of The Hurt Locker". This would make the best hidden-camera show ever (though you'd have to record it with a non-iPhone).

xorglorb 15y ago
It mentioned that you could disable recording for a period of time. What if you set the LEDs to disable recording for several days or even weeks.
mnutt 15y ago
Combining the IR LEDs with throwies ( http://graffitiresearchlab.com/projects/led-throwies/ http://graffitiresearchlab.com/projects/led-throwies/ ) would be ideal.
jamesbkel 15y ago
Agreed, my first thoughts too. This is ripe for abuse. I honestly would be less concerned about "legit" or "publicly known" use (concerts, sports, political event etc.) since it would lead to public dissent towards of the offending performer/venue. Not saying it wouldn't be used, but there would be a significant PR liability if they imposed sanctions on photography. If I were a criminal, first thing I would do is get a few of those IR transmitters to wear on my ski mask.

Tycho 15y ago

Different take: this would allow people to carry iPhones into company buildings (eg. service centres belonging to banks, government offices) and areas where camera-phones are banned for security reasons. The bank I used to work for banned camera phones from their offices, I imagine many other companies do the same. I would think twice about buying a phone I can't take to work. Or, corporations might rule out iPhones when choosing a model for the company phone. This would let Apple back into that (fairly large) market. Possibly.

jamesbkel 15y ago
Interesting take, hadn't thought of that at all. Something along those lines would definitely be boon to AAPL or others penetrating that sort of market. However, we all know the software on smartphones are if not trivially, at least often manipulated. This may be able to skim a little of the market, but if I had a business where I couldn't trust camera phone now, I wouldn't trust this technique against even a slightly educated and motivated individual.
- Tycho 15y ago
  True enough. A more likely solution would be to just sell a 'corporate' iPhone with no camera (and support for some other stuff to sweeten the deal).

sudonim 15y ago

The patent was filed December 2, 2009 when the 3gs was the latest and greatest iPhone. I'd be surprised if you see this on an iPhone near you anytime soon. And if the powers that be try to use it to repress Apple users, there are tons of other devices out there. No need to get alarmed.

sjs 15y ago
Unfortunately there aren't any other smart phones that I could recommend for my mom in good conscience. I haven't tried WP7 yet which actually looks like it's made for humans. Unlike my Nexus One which is no good for mom yet for a number of reasons.
- jamestr 15y ago
  Vote with your wallet!

monochromatic 15y ago

Software patents are bad, right? EVERYONE should be able to build this capability into their phones!

brudgers 15y ago

The technology described kind of reminds me of the "Ugly T-Shirt" in Gibson's Zero History.

jamestr 15y ago

Vote with your wallet!

edw 15y ago
So by voting with your wallet and not purchasing an Apple product, you are sending the message that you won't purchase products that don't incorporate technology from patents that you don't like?