here's the earliest wireless camera I found: 6,535,243 filed in '98 by HP

1. A method of managing image information utilizing a hand-held camera comprising the steps of: capturing raw image data representative of a subject of interest utilizing an imaging device of said hand-held camera; transmitting said raw image data to a host computer during a continuous session via a wireless link between said hand-held camera and said host computer; receiving, as an automated response by said host computer to said transmitting step, related image data at said hand-held camera during said continuous session via said wireless link; forming an image from said related image data on a display device of said hand-held camera, wherein enabling a display of said subject of interest on said display device is dependent upon operations at said host computer; and browsing stored image data that is stored in said host computer, where said browsing is controlled by operations at said hand-held camera.

but as you can see, it's very limiting - round trip of camera sending image to computer and computer processing it before sending it back for display on the camera. So an obvious workaround would be to just do half it (camera -> PC) and patent infringement avoided. This patent might have seemed useful back in '98 when processing power on a small device (like a handheld camera) was not thought of the way to go. So HP seemed to miss this important fact and could/should have realized that processors would get smaller, faster, less-power hungry. I have found this subtle but important miscalculation happens all the time. Call it a design flaw in the patent.

here's one filed by Nikon in 2001 but not issued until March 4, 2008 that is a removable unit: 7,340,275

Here's the only Independent claim:

1. A wireless communication unit, comprising: an interface portion signally connectable to a main device, the interface portion including a connector portion having a shape that mimics a shape of a removable memory-medium-device, the connector portion being receivable by and connectable to a memory-medium-device-receiving-portion of the main device; a recording portion performing non-volatile recording; a wireless communication portion performing wireless communication; and a control portion transmitting information through the wireless communication portion to an external destination and generating a backup of the information in the recording portion, the information being inputted from the main device to the control portion through the interface portion, wherein the control portion automatically deletes the backup from the recording portion after transmission of the information in the wireless communication portion is normally terminated, when the control portion generates the backup of the information in the recording portion, wherein the wireless communication unit is a stand-alone unit.

I believe Nikon came out with wifi camera's before Cannon.

innovated by realizing the useful potential for combining wireless with cameras first, then second finding the way to make it work. In hindsight this appears obvious, but then you need to ask yourself why didn't everybody start working on this 5-8 years ago. Certainly all the technology was in place. Just like the problems we face today exist because they aren't obvious but in 5-10 years when these are resolved the proper combination will be obvious (after we see it). Partly why demo's help sell a product - before seeing the demo the user doesn't understand how/why it would work but after seeing the demo functioning (even roughly with hardcoded pieces) it quickly becomes "obvious".

there isn't much stopping anyone from implementing this on Linux except the payoff is a fraction. Do you go to work for 1/20th of your hourly wage?

Yes very convenient (especially for Professional shops where assistant can be doing photoshop or touchup work immediately and ship them off to the magazines/newspapers). Nikon innovated and got the patents for these a few years back.

he's got limited #minutes so instead of scouting out the articles you want to read & pasting URL into email app, instead scan Inbox for the few dozen stories cultivated that day and read the best ones first until time runs out.

Useless outside of U.S. And in the U.S. limited (e.g. connecting to home wifi).

With such short Internet allotment the guys running the ship are asking for trouble. It will be a war out there - somebody someday will be running Denial of Service (Dos) attacks to knock others off. Do this for a couple of weeks and nobody will want to waste their time signing up for Internet time.

Here be Pirates.

Limited time would be painful. You will need to maximize efficiency. Leverage your best friends and get them to keep you in touch with only the real important news. Then bring laptop and/or USB keys to pull down your news to take back to your cabin.

For upload, write your emails/replies before hand (in your cabin) and have them ready to send.

kind of painful/slow and with limited time you want to spend it more efficiently. Write an application that pulls in your favourite RSS feeds and emails you (triggered by CRON). You read the stories you have time for each docking. Actually, there's probably already apps that do this.

I wouldn't be so sure. How do you know that letters weren't sent ahead of time and these larger corporations ignored them? I tend to believe that small company/inventor wants to avoid an infringement suit since they easily cost over $1million.

Yes we all pay due to higher costs, but in many cases this all could have been avoided. I'm assuming the patent is valid and innovative.

1) Large corporations get patents as a protection racket to throw mud back at. Most of those patents aren't innovative. Show me some that are (...and Google patents don't really count - they innovated and just happen to have grown so fast (actually due to innovating)).

2) Explain to me why the small inventors or businesses dont' see the use in them again?

ahh but herein lies one of the problems - without patent protection a medium-large corporation will almost always tell the inventor to buzz off, and then depending on the usefulness of the innovation - copy&paste the idea. You'd be surprised. Remember, these are soulless corporations who's sole purpose is to maximize profits for investors - and that means reduce expenses (e.g. technology license fee's).

I believe the problem lies in that the system too heavily favors the bigger guy. To start an infringement suit you need many things - one is due diligence - big time proof that they are infringing. This is intense and can take years to collect the evidence. Remember our law - defendent is innocent. So the larger corporation will make a business decision whether its more cost-effective to negotiate and buy a license or let him drag you through court. An infringement suit is easily over $1million. Now of course, the little guy should recognize this and not be too greedy - but in this case we're talking about innovating AV software here - no trivial innovation and so probably felt it worthwhile to pursue for higher amounts.

Interesting, but how so? Corporatism is one of the factors behind Western civilization that isnt going to be easy to get rid of, how is it to blame for small business lack of leverage? Corporations can be small - even one man (owner+employee) and provides certain advantages.

I disagree. I suspect that what happened in this case was:

1. guy recognizes a problem in the early 90's (viruses)
2. guy see's there is no existing solution (contrary to other posters, chmod, VMS, etc... are not prior art)
3. guy comes up with innovative way to solve problem
4. guy asks himself - if I go to big company to license this then what's stopping them from stealing my idea? and weighs that against building software himself. The guy figures he's no software developer, doesn't have money to hire software developer, has other things to do (maybe more innovations - this guy has 100+ patents)
5. guy patents innovation
6. guy waits until patent issued (back then not so long, nowadays this is often 5-7 years)
7. guy finally has patent, approaches companies on friendly terms - naively (he's an engineer not cut-throat businessman) thinking "I've got a way to solve this that nobody is doing yet, surely they will be somewhat fair"
8. company(s) either play him, laugh at his "innovation"
9. company(s) goes ahead and builds product
10. guy notices product, examines it, and tries to reason with the company
11. company ignores
12. company(s) get cease and desist letter, company ignores
13. guy decides he doesn't have the time or $money to pursue these huge guys (look at that list)
14. guy finds another company willing to buy his "asset" for pennies on the dollar
15. new company starts this suit

On Slashdot we never see proper analysis of the patent claims. Others claimed things like chmod and VMS were prior art - I'm sorry but those aren't antivirus products that stop virus.

Untrue unless you drink Slashdot koolaid.

Small inventors/businesses come up with a disproportionately large number of innovations. Now assume a world without software patents - large corporations could work most efficiently if they leverage their resources, brand, experience in just scanning their competitors and re-implementing whatever looks most profitable. In other words, why would a large company innovate and not just monitor competitors + copy-paste their code. You see large corporations do not need to innovate - they just leverage their strengths (brand, position, existing customer base, ...). In fact, in software its even worse than that, once a client is hooked on a platform it is very costly to migrate even if better technology exists (look at operating systems, look at office suites, etc...).

When someone comes up with a way to protect small inventors from larger companies that copy-paste the results of their hard work and innovation THEN AND ONLY THEN we can abandon the current patent system. Sorry copyright doesnt cut it - large companies just re-implement.

You are confusing bringing something to market vs recognizing the actual innovation or improvement. The market can be more efficient for smaller companies to do the actual innovation and selling their innovations to the larger corporations. Software folks miss this point (so far). Really the problem is the small inventor or business does not have enough leverage - companies like the 20 in this suit just dismiss them and expect the small guy to disappear or to run them over in court with their lawyers.

hate to burst your bubble but without those "intellectual property laws" you think are worthless/hindering we will be in for drastic changes to our lifestyle. Suddenly China and India will be able to copy-paste our designs and ship them into our country without the minimal opposition that patents provide. Who would pay $200 for an iPod when an _EXACT_ duplicate could be purchased for $50.

We have pushed out most of our manufacturing jobs, services are soon to depart, all we have left is design. Our children will be the 1st generation in a long time to be worse off then their parents.