Watch Out! New Apple Patent for Camera Watch Has Internet on High Alert!

On Tuesday, February 14th, Fox News reported that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has awarded a batch of over 40 patents to tech titan Apple in the past month, including one for a new watch with a video camera. But is this really a surprising development, and do these patents have as big an impact as Fox seems to believe? I suggest the answers to both questions are the same:?

NO.

But to explain why, we need to dig into some detail about how patents work, what they do, and why the newest-gen Apple watches teased by the patent aren't, or shouldn't be, a surprise twist at all. In fact, let's start with the latter point and go from there.

An Apple (Patent) a Day...

Apple has consistently been at the forefront of wearable tech inspired by everything from Star Trek to the James Bond franchise that offers broad functionality and interactivity between its various products, even though the initial sales suggested Apple should have just stuck to computers, pads, and MP3 players.

Despite the outsized price point and disappointing early unit-to-user shipment figures, the first-gen iterations of the Apple Watch put Apple firmly at the forefront of the digital arms (wrist?) race, pitting the legendary company against Samsung's Gear and Google's Fitbit lines.

As the tech evolved and ever-greater functionality was incorporated, Apple Watch became more of a status symbol which justified the higher unit cost, much like a low-end Rolex typically commands a higher retail price point than a high-end Timex.

Of course, Apple Watch is only as successful as it is innovative. The idea of adding a camera to the Apple Watch may have been on the drawing board for years before miniaturization of the necessary components and a suitably robust battery unit made it practical. However, it was a logical and even inevitable next step in wearable tech evolution, so Fox's breathless reporting that Apple Watch is likely to integrate a camera into the design in the near future doesn't make much sense. While there may be privacy concerns arising from an Apple Watch with an onboard camera, these concerns have largely been filibustered, argued, litigated, and done to death with every other device that can track a user's location and passively or actively monitor the ambient environment. There's nothing new here in itself, just an obvious next move in the gambit to gain more market share.?

Or perhaps not.?

...Keeps Competitors at Bay

The more eyebrow-raising point in the story as reported by Fox was, in my opinion, also more interesting and relevant. By expending paragraphs of ink on the possibilities of a camera integrated into the Apple Watch, Fox buried the lede, which is that Apple won approval for over 40 patents in a month from USPTO. That's a breakneck pace for any government entity, and absolutely supersonic by USPTO standards.?

But again, the numbers make this sound bigger and more important than it actually is.?

Apple could just as easily use the patent for the camera integration to prevent competitors from incorporating cameras into their own devices without cutting Apple in for a piece of the action. This is actually a very common tactic in the business world, as I discussed when talking about the 116 patents awarded to Humira recently.?

You see, the owner of a patent has a limited-time monopoly to do what they wish with the IP in question. As long as the patent remains in force, they can mass-produce it and sell it for whatever the open market will bear. They can license it to others. They can give it away. They can lock it in a vault and never let it see daylight until either the patent's protection term expires or a competitor attempts to market something sufficiently similar to trigger a legal action.?

Filing a lot of patents is simply good business, especially for pharma and tech companies. By taking a scattershot approach to patenting both existing and envisioned uses of their innovations, they maximize the time protection of the patents, their potential profitability, and of course their ongoing control over their innovations. It may look unfair from the outside or a layperson's perspective, but as I've said before, this is a standard play that I would encourage any client of mine to pursue if the circumstances warranted it.?

Bottom Line

It's not clear if Apple truly intends to release a camera-equipped Apple Watch anytime soon, or if or how they intend to utilize their other newly awarded patents. We may very well find that Apple has no intention at all of implementing most, some, or any of these breakthroughs on the open market, but rather plans to keep them in abeyance as a sort of legal club they can wield to fend off their competition. The privacy and digital safety watchdogs will almost certainly have a lot to say about this, but from a patent law standpoint in modern America, this whole "news" article wasn't really news at all.?

ABOUT JOHN RIZVI, ESQ.

John Rizvi is a Registered and Board Certified Patent Attorney, Adjunct Professor of Intellectual Property Law, best-selling author, and featured speaker on topics of interest to inventors and entrepreneurs (including TEDx).

His books include "Escaping the Gray" and "Think and Grow Rich for Inventors" and have won critical acclaim including an endorsement from Kevin Harrington, one of the original sharks on the hit TV show - Shark Tank, responsible for the successful launch of over 500 products resulting in more than $5 billion in sales worldwide. You can learn more about Professor Rizvi and his patent law practice at www.ThePatentProfessor.com

Follow John Rizvi on Social Media

YouTube:?https://www.youtube.com/c/thepatentprofessor Facebook:?https://business.facebook.com/patentprofessor/ Twitter:?https://twitter.com/ThePatentProf Instagram:?https://www.instagram.com/thepatentprofessor/???