
Ask HN: Is this patent valid even though there is prior art around the world? - washer24
This year, a patent was granted for a laundromat service using a mobile app (number US10168678B2 [0]). Prior to this patent&#x27;s filing, there were similar apps in other parts that allowed users to do the same using a mobile app by scanning a QR code. Why was this patent granted in the US? Is it valid even though prior art exists?<p>One example of prior art is LaundroSmart&#x27;s YouTube video dated Sep 30, 2013 [1].<p>[0] https:&#x2F;&#x2F;patents.google.com&#x2F;patent&#x2F;US10168678B2&#x2F;en?oq=patent+No.+10%2c168%2c678<p>[1] https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=i-L2J-H6fY0
======
ineedasername
You ask if the patent is valid; Concisely, if it has been granted, then yes,
it is valid.

The question of whether it should have been granted in the first place is much
more complex and, now granted, irrelevant unless/until it is challenged in
some way.

It should be noted that even seemingly obvious prior art may not actually
invalidate a patent, even with judicial review, because the aspects of a
patent that make it "novel" can be subtle. For example, pharmaceutical
companies frequently gain extra patent extra for a drug by patenting an
"extended release" version. It would seem therefore that an "extended release"
drug is now an obvious innovation, and not patent-able. However, the specific
mechanisms by which a given chemical compound can be made to extent its
release often vary significantly.

That said, patents that follow the pattern of "doing mundane task X, but with
a computer" have often been held as obvious and therefore not eligible to
receive a patent. This particular patent may follow that pattern. Though
again, there may be subtle aspects of novelty here that aren't apparent from a
cursory review.

~~~
neodypsis
If I understand correctly, they're claiming using a Bluetooth beacon workflow
as their novelty, but they also mention the QR code scanning workflow as an
alternative implementation. This last workflow is exactly the one shown in the
linked video (dated 2013).

------
2_listerine_pls
[https://patentpandas.org/resources/prior-
art](https://patentpandas.org/resources/prior-art)

I believe they have to pay the expenses if they sue and you prove there is
prior art.

------
plumeria
_In some implementations, the code may be a scannable code such as a one-
dimensional barcode, two-dimensional (e.g., matrix) barcode, scannable
alphanumeric code, and so forth. The code may be arranged according to any
suitable format, such as a version of the Universal Product Code (UPC), the
Quick Response (QR) code, and so forth. In such instances, the user may use
their user device to capture an image of the code or otherwise scan the code,
e.g., using a camera or other image capture component. The scannable code may
be decoded to retrieve information that uniquely identifies the laundry
machine._

Interesting. Many vending machines/services in Asia (through WeChat payments)
and other on-demand rentals (such as Bird and Lime) use QR codes to initialize
a pay-per-use transaction. The so-called implementation described in this
patent is just a particular use case of this technology.

