80 likes | 236 Views
This overview examines the patent liability implications of the Defender Turret-Based Defense System developed by Kirk Iler, Brian Bentz, Stephen Wolf, and Fuhe Xu. The system employs autonomous weapon features, including image recognition and a targeting mechanism similar to existing patents like Paintball Sentry. We differentiate our implementation by using a semi-autonomous state for user control, which influences liability risks. We analyze safety mechanisms that enable weapon activation via a code, assessing potential infringement and the commercial viability of similar products.
E N D
Defender Turret Based Defense System Kirk Iler Brian Bentz Stephen Wolf FuheXu
Patent Liability Analysis Overview: Patents: • Autonomous weapon system implementation • Weapons identification and firing safeties mechanism Product: • Paintball Sentry
Patent on Autonomous Weapon System Similarities: • Autonomous • Acquires images and performs target recognition • Aims the weapon at the target Potential Liability: Moderate • Our implementation is different in that it will require users to set the gun into a semi-autonomous state temporarily. • The weapon, when enabled, will only fire one time without further user control.
Patent on Weapon Firing Safeties Similarities: • Exchanges an identification code (PIN in our case) • Enables a weapon Potential Liability: Minimal • Our implementation is different in that the identification code is more of a password than an identification of the weapon type. • So long as we do not choose to associate different codes to unlock different weapons, the potential for infringement is low.
Paintball Sentry Product • Commercial product (non-military) • Performs many functions similar to our product. • Image recognition and targeting • Rotation of firing barrel • Computer interface • Manufacturer was contacted, but not particularly concerned with patent liability.