Now you can tell someone to literally go f--k themselves over the internet: Remote-control mock-cock patent dies

Talk about getting off on a technicality...

It is a great day for those who dream of Internet-of-Flings sex toys. A key patent describing web-connected remote-controllable techno-dildos has expired.

Friday marks the 20-year anniversary, and, ahem, climax of, US Patent 6,368,268, a controversial piece of intellectual property that has long been blamed for holding back the development of 'net-connected pleasure gizmos.

Bestowed with the decidedly non-stimulating title "Method and device for interactive virtual control of sexual aids using digital computer networks," the '268 patent described a system in which a personal joy-stick is connected to a computer that, in turn, links up to the internet.

The idea is you, er, place the erotic aid somewhere sensitive, and have a friend, lover, or stranger on the other side of the internet connect to it and control it remotely, with webcam and microphone live streaming for some real-time feedback. It's love-making, Yahoo! chat style. Less ICQ, more I-screw-you. Less MSN messenger, more BDSM messenger. Less WhatsApp, more wet [OK, that's enough – ed.]

"An interactive virtual sexual stimulation system has one or more user interfaces. Each user interface generally comprises a computer having an input device, video camera, and transmitter," the patent's abstract read.

"The transmitter is used to interface the computer with one or more sexual stimulation devices, which are also located at the user interface. In accordance with the preferred embodiment, a person at a first user interface controls the stimulation device(s) located at a second user interface."

Hot stuff.

Basically, patent-holding firms had been using the '268 patent to shut down or extract a licensing deal from anyone who wanted to make IoF sex toys that could be cum-trolled over the internet. This kept a number of startups and hobbyists from getting into the game with their own network-connected loin ticklers.

The patent was issued on August 17, 1998 to Warren Sandvick, Jim Hughes, and David Atkinson, but most recently was owned by Tzu Tehcnologies, a patent-litigation firm that had used the patent as a legal sword (a bulbous, vibrating, ribbed-for-her-pleasure sword, presumably) to extract licensing payments from companies looking to develop their own connected package-pleasers.

"This patent has embroiled many SexTech companies in patent infringement lawsuits, stopping them in their tracks as they attempted to create high tech pleasure devices," explained industry site SexTechLaw.

sex work

Bluetooth 'Panty Buster' 'smart' sex toy fails penetration test


"For those who couldn’t pay licensing fees, there would be no pleasure – The suits were the end of the road, pushing them out of business."

While the end of the '268 patent clears one major hurdle for smaller sex-toy companies to link up their creations with the cloud, it won't be the end of all legal problems in the industry.

Metafetish, a blog that tracks the world of tech-friendly sex toys, pointed out that a number of other frivolous patents await those who want to get into the internet of buttplugs.

"If you think the end of the 268 patent is the beginning of a sex tech revolution, you're gonna have a Real Bad Time once you find out about all of the provisional patents filed throughout the last few years," the site noted.

"Modern sex tech companies have set up an environment of mutually assured legal destruction while making damn sure no new players will rise just because as of 2018/08/17 you can UDP some vibrations to someone somewhere else and not have to pay a license for it in the US."

Sadly, it seems the mock-cock minefield is still fraught with danger. So, don't suffer any premature celebrations. ®

Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022