EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)

[bills]

[quote
 Anyone in the US now the VAT rates charged on these campaigns?
[/quote]

The US has no VAT tax we would not stand for that kind of nonsense.

[TheAmmoniacal]

 Anyone in the US now the VAT rates charged on these campaigns?


The US has no VAT tax we would not stand for that kind of nonsense.

What about sales tax?

[bills]

 Anyone in the US now the VAT rates charged on these campaigns?


The US has no VAT tax we would not stand for that kind of nonsense.

What about sales tax?

Yes most states have sales tax 3-10% but let us not take this thread off topic.
If you would like to discuss this start another thread or take it to a pm.

[edy]

Back to Batteriser's campaign timeline.... We have this on their page:



We are into the "Summer - Launch IndieGogo, Production Starts" and "Fall - Ship to Backers". I would say that if there was any credible shred of evidence that this device lived up to the misleading and conflicting statements of "8x more, 80% more" and "the snail that escaped after 25+1 days" claims, we would have seen Batteriser showing us final production-ready units by now and final schematics. If they are patented, what do they have to lose? If they are the only ones who know how to miniaturize it, or have a production secret for making them, they don't even have to share that. A simple schematic using large-scale components breadboard prototyping would do.

Now I've been looking into the PWM boost circuits (thanks for the wonderful links to the "Post Apocalyptic Inventor" videos - very good!) and there is always a capacitor across the circuit (usually after the diode). I don't see any evidence of that in the Batteriser schematic.

I can see how they could get a PWM generator, a tiny inductor and diode in there. Perhaps the PWM generator is regulated by the remaining voltage of the battery so that the duty cycle creates greater boost as the voltage drops more and more on the battery, so it tried to keep the voltage regulated to 1.5V constant. Otherwise, keeping a steady PWM duty cycle would result in greater boosting when the voltage is 1.5V than when it has dropped down to 0.5V, no? I don't remember, did Batteriser claim to keep working on the battery until it gets down to 0.5V?

Anyways, does this circuit not require a capacitor to work?




Oh and I found this interesting page covering a boost chip from MicroChip and the sizing of the various component values:

http://www.electronicproducts.com/Analog_Mixed_Signal_ICs/SoCs_ASICs_ASSPs_MEMS/Simplifying_efficient_solid-state_backlight_driver_design.aspx

[LabSpokane]

One doesn't push out getting $300k  for another 30 days because things are going well - particularly when the holiday season is nearly lost.

[edy]

I finally found the patent PDF complete with the schematics and it does indeed show a capacitor. Here is the full patent PDF:

http://images3.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20150056476A1.pdf

I would attach it here but it is bigger than the size limit.

Here is the page you can see it as well:

http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20150226ptan20150056476.php

[jippie]

Back to Batteriser's campaign timeline.... We have this on their page:

Claiming 500 patents, means 1 patent per month for over 40 years in a row on average. Say his first patent at age 20, then he'd be 60yrs old now, sounds reasonable. This also means that during idea-design-patents-phase Mr. Roohparvar about 50 new patents. I'm jealous of his brilliant brain, if I only had half of his brain to start with.

[tree]

Let's assume he really holds 500 patents, all of which have a contribution from Roohparvar. In academia, there are plenty of professors who will publish articles upon articles just based on one project. They just take bits and pieces and publish them as opposed to other professors who publish an entire project at once. What's stopping Roohparvar from doing the same with patents, i.e., patenting bits and pieces of a larger system?

[Fungus]

Let's assume he really holds 500 patents, all of which have a contribution from Roohparvar. In academia, there are plenty of professors who will publish articles upon articles just based on one project. They just take bits and pieces and publish them as opposed to other professors who publish an entire project at once. What's stopping Roohparvar from doing the same with patents, i.e., patenting bits and pieces of a larger system?

Not all patents are for brilliant, world-changing ideas. Patents can be for really stupid, obvious things. Really. Some of them are beyond belief.

The only real obstacles to holding lots of patents are willpower and money. Keep submitting junk to the patent office, some of it will stick.

I'm sure a google search for "frankie roohparvar patents" will be enlightening.

(And I wonder how many of those patents will have several names on them, not just his...)

[LabSpokane]

Have you actually read some of these patents? I read a few. Most of them are not single author, and frankly, consist of "chuck it at the wall and see if it will stick" claims of possible things one could do. Micron was trying to patent every possible way to use its products. That is not really indicative of unique inventions brought to fruition.

[tree]

Let's assume he really holds 500 patents, all of which have a contribution from Roohparvar. In academia, there are plenty of professors who will publish articles upon articles just based on one project. They just take bits and pieces and publish them as opposed to other professors who publish an entire project at once. What's stopping Roohparvar from doing the same with patents, i.e., patenting bits and pieces of a larger system?

Not all patents are for brilliant, world-changing ideas. Patents can be for really stupid, obvious things. Really. Some of them are beyond belief.

The only real obstacles to holding lots of patents are willpower and money. Keep submitting junk to the patent office, some of it will stick.

I'm sure a google search for "frankie roohparvar patents" will be enlightening.

(And I wonder how many of those patents will have several names on them, not just his...)

First patents that popped up were for memory related systems and of course others' names were on them. Based on that technical video batteriser released and the technical language in these patents, I seriously doubt he actually "invented" anything.

[edy]

Have you actually read some of these patents? I read a few. Most of them are not single author, and frankly, consist of "chuck it at the wall and see if it will stick" claims of possible things one could do. Micron was trying to patent every possible way to use its products. That is not really indicative of unique inventions brought to fruition.

You can see most of them here:

http://patents.justia.com/inventor/frankie-f-roohparvar

If only there was a way to simply grab only the "title" of the patents and make a brief list. A lot of it has to do with memory access, writing and reading. Most of bits and pieces, which I assume is easier to defend in court than a whole large patent. With the right system in place, you can become a "patent-making machine" once you know the process. He was part of a team for most patents. Also, if you are the CEO or COO of a company, I assume your name goes on all the patents as a matter of business because your company owns part of the patent for funding it.

[tree]

Most of bits and pieces, which I assume is easier to defend in court than a whole large patent.

My original point!

[Howardlong]

There are over 600 patents with his name, starting from 1995, so that means one patent every two weeks.

A human patent machine is not the same as producing an end product: everyone has ideas, but not many people see any of those ideas through to real, worthwhile marketable products.

[edy]

There are over 600 patents with his name, starting from 1995, so that means one patent every two weeks.

A human patent machine is not the same as producing an end product: everyone has ideas, but not many people see any of those ideas through to real, worthwhile marketable products.

Let's see... 2015 - 1995 = 20 years = 52 weeks/year x 20 years = 1040 weeks.
1040 weeks / 600 patents = 1.7333 weeks/patent.
7 days/week * 1.7333 weeks/patent = 12.1333 days per patent.

That's incredible!

[Fungus]

Have you actually read some of these patents? I read a few. Most of them are not single author, and frankly, consist of "chuck it at the wall and see if it will stick" claims of possible things one could do. Micron was trying to patent every possible way to use its products. That is not really indicative of unique inventions brought to fruition.

Here's a list: http://patents.justia.com/inventor/frankie-roohparvar

Looks like he used to work at Micron. Most (all?) of them are variations on ways to access memory devices.

Here's a random example: "If a memory block in a flash memory device is found to have a defect, a memory block quality indication is generated in response to the type of memory defect. This indication is stored in the memory device. In one embodiment, the quality indication is stored in a predetermined location of the defective memory block."

Around here that level of problem solving is just "what I did today". Nothing special.

If you work at Micron it gets patented (...and most other big companies as well, I'm not judging Micron)

[Rasz]

Let's see... 2015 - 1995 = 20 years = 52 weeks/year x 20 years = 1040 weeks.
1040 weeks / 600 patents = 1.7333 weeks/patent.
7 days/week * 1.7333 weeks/patent = 12.1333 days per patent.

That's incredible!

thats corporate, IBM spams over 20 patents per day

Around here that level of problem solving is just "what I did today". Nothing special.

this!

[edy]

I think he's trying to compete with Dr. Nakamatsu:

http://www.tofugu.com/2011/04/20/inventor-nakamats/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshiro_Nakamatsu

[jippie]

7 days/week * 1.7333 weeks/patent = 12.1333 days per patent.

It takes longer than that between announcing the announcement of the great news and the actual publishing of the great news 

[edy]

Somebody better notify Wikipedia.... Frankie Roohparvar is NOT on the list of the world's most prolific inventors:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prolific_inventors


Should he not be up there? Or do they list only individual patent holders and not include any that contain more than one name or a company as holding the patent?

[lpickup]

Let's assume he really holds 500 patents, all of which have a contribution from Roohparvar. In academia, there are plenty of professors who will publish articles upon articles just based on one project. They just take bits and pieces and publish them as opposed to other professors who publish an entire project at once. What's stopping Roohparvar from doing the same with patents, i.e., patenting bits and pieces of a larger system?

Nothing except money.  Since it costs quite a lot of money to push a patent through the system, generally you will want to do just the opposite:  made your patent as BROAD as possible, and therefore more valuable.  There is really no prize for largest number of patents (despite the fact that the company I used to work for, IBM, repeatedly touted their leadership in annual number of patents issued.  But at IBM, I can tell you that the IP lawyers were not trying to intentionally break up inventions into dozens of different patents.  On the contrary, the lawyers would get you to expand your claims as much as possible to cover every foreseeable application space the single patent would cover.

The other issue with Frankie's patents, as others have theorized, is that he simply attached his name to patents where the inventions were actually his underlings.  While it's certainly possible he did this, it is also very illegal.  Every inventor listed on a patent must have contributed some novel intellectual property to the invention.  IBM was/is very serious about this as well.  During the review process, each inventor is required to describe their specific contribution.

I am SURE that not all companies operate like this.  And it would be extremely difficult to prove after the fact, but I believe finding inventors listed on patents that did not actually contribute to the invention would be a valid reason to nullify the patent.  So it's a very risky way to do business.  CEO's that add their name to the patent without actually contributing to it are asking for trouble.

Now I do have several friends that do indeed have 100's of patents legitimately amassed over the years, with the strict requirements I listed above.  They do have a process they use.  In the most successful case, the guy held a weekly breakfast meeting where we all sat around and brainstormed ideas.  Usually there were 10-15 of us.  Sometimes we would hit upon an idea that seemed patentable and 2-3 guys would develop the idea and meet separately.  The leader would make sure he attended all these separate meetings and he would generally contribute one small nugget towards the invention so he could get his name on it.  In this way he kept his patent pipeline full with 2-3 patents applications a month (and after so many patents, he was an expert in determining whether something was patentable or not and how to write it up).  He did have to work hard...he did most of the writeups on his own time in the evenings and he spends a fair amount of time developing these ideas.  Because IBM valued their number of patents issued, they do allow (even expect) inventors such as him to spend 10-25% of their time developing patentable ideas.

[FrankBuss]

Around here that level of problem solving is just "what I did today". Nothing special.

Another example:
https://www.google.com/patents/US5526364

A circuit for generating test-mode signals for memory which uses both hardware and software protection schemes. The circuit enters a test code by receiving a high voltage at two terminals. The high voltage must remain on at least one of the terminals during the test code process. Otherwise, the circuit is reset.

I don't get it how the German patent got granted. Law requires a minimal level of invention, not just some common practice problem solving.
 

[edy]

I don't think the Patent System today works anything like it did in the past.

Patents are SO complex and technical now, and there are so many that get pushed through the pipeline, that reviewers likely skim through them and grant many that shouldn't be. The patent system obviously wants to keep the revenue stream flowing, and so it works more like a "library system" where ideas get time-stamped. When and if there is ever a violation found, a lawsuit occurs or whatever, the lawyers pour through and that's when the actual patent infringement and nitty-gritty technicalities get brought out and discussed. I highly doubt that a patent clerk will have the time or energy or knowledge to carry out the amount of very technically detailed work needed to decide if a patent should even be patented. They are probably just making sure it follows a certain "format" and that the money is paid for filing, and there are no obvious major holes.

http://www.wired.com/2015/01/fixing-broken-patent-system/

[Fungus]

Somebody better notify Wikipedia.... Frankie Roohparvar is NOT on the list of the world's most prolific inventors:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prolific_inventors

There's people on there with less than 1000 patents? Jeez.

I'm sure I could be on that list if I'd had a team of patent lawyers following me around for the last 30 years. I'm sure I have half a dozen patentable ideas a week. If just one in three of them get past the examiners then 30*52*2=3120

[Godzil]

Also, if you are the CEO or COO of a company, I assume your name goes on all the patents as a matter of business because your company owns part of the patent for funding it.

That's exactly the point, and it was exactly what I though the first time I saw the video where he try to explain how smart he is by claming "My name is on 500+ patents"

You were CEO on the company that claimed those patents, it's nearly impossible in such big company (like micron) that the CEO have time to do any research.

Edit: is that me or their own patent show that the batteriser will nearly halves the battery life

It's "FIG 7: shows actual measurements that illustrate the advantages of the various embodiments."
For me it does not display what the title says, but I'm always wrong so.. Go figure..