3 ms·

I wrote on HN about patenting a "reusable RFID wristband" and attempting to work something out with Disney in ~2007.[1] The response on HN was fairly predictab

I wrote on HN about patenting a "reusable RFID wristband" and attempting to work something out with Disney in ~2007.[1] The response on HN was fairly predictable...I am a patent troll. Though I think this sheds light on the reality that it takes a lot of money to bring certain products to market and this is why, in certain instances, patents can be useful to the little guys who in some instances can not practically bring a product to market (I don't own my own theme park, ski resort, ect...). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8838362 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8838362 Edit: At the time of filing, the only existing patent was for a "single use RFID hospital bands" which was made to be disabled when removed and non-reusable (similar to existing non-RFID hospital bands).

digikata 12y ago
The band is just the ID device, the real value is how & when that ID process happens and gets wrapped organically into many different processes in the park - and that's not something that a small inventor would likely have the context to correctly wrap around just the hardware. Nor does it seem like something the original patent would be general enough to exclude. The article mentions a $1B investment. I would think the band and reader hardware are the smallest part of that investment with the bulk of it in the how to apply the information in developing new park-specific processes and retraining employees.
- will_brown 12y ago
  >the real value is how & when that ID process happens and gets wrapped organically into many different processes in the park I think I agree with your point, but to rephrase I say the real value (for theme parks and resorts) would be easing the ability for patrons to make payments, purchasing data, the ability to track/locate patrons (lost kids, people injured in ski resorts, ect...), and the general logistical improvements of operations (being able to see what seats/rides are open, the exact number of people in line, redirecting people to other areas of the park, ect...). This is all very basic data available in most existing RFID software packages.

digikata 12y ago

The band is just the ID device, the real value is how & when that ID process happens and gets wrapped organically into many different processes in the park - and that's not something that a small inventor would likely have the context to correctly wrap around just the hardware. Nor does it seem like something the original patent would be general enough to exclude. The article mentions a $1B investment. I would think the band and reader hardware are the smallest part of that investment with the bulk of it in the how to apply the information in developing new park-specific processes and retraining employees.

will_brown 12y ago
>the real value is how & when that ID process happens and gets wrapped organically into many different processes in the park I think I agree with your point, but to rephrase I say the real value (for theme parks and resorts) would be easing the ability for patrons to make payments, purchasing data, the ability to track/locate patrons (lost kids, people injured in ski resorts, ect...), and the general logistical improvements of operations (being able to see what seats/rides are open, the exact number of people in line, redirecting people to other areas of the park, ect...). This is all very basic data available in most existing RFID software packages.