Should IF be Shamed to award a pirating work?

Why my former post was removed? The discussion is not interesting ?
It is about this article for more details:
[article deleted]

Probably deleted because you need to say what you want to say here and not direct us outside for the information. What you say on your link could be discussed here, it is not a lot of information. It looks like your are trying to drive hits and traffic to your website.

aha. Maybe. But the Admin may misunderstood me if that is true.You thought me as what you are. I can drive hits in Linkedin more easier than here and there seems not too many peoples here. It is meaningless to drive that poor hits. Any kind of links can be post in other kind of SNS , such as Linkedin and facebook, right?
Ok, I can post the article here( There is a link of IF in original article. Do you think me try to drive hits of IF ? ) :

I was surprised when I was told that a pirating work was awarded IF, which is a famous international design competition. However the original work was not awarded several years ago.

The original work “No key keyboard” was published in yankodesign first in 2008. It is easy to search in Google. It has been transferred by many websites and medias. I attended IF design competition considering the innovation of the work at that time but was not awarded. I continued to seeking investment in the next time and wanted to produce it by ourselves. Unfortunately no investor dare to invest to date.

However, a pirating work, TransluSense, was awarded IF 2012.


There is not difference of technology and innovation between the two works, though the ouglook is different. Could IF say that TransluSense was awarded just because of its outlook? (Read my another blog to know the technology:

Another different thing between us is that the author of TransluSense seems already get fund. And the amount of fund is similar with my requirment: $150000! I was even wondering whether the author was kidding me.Whatever, I don’t care and I already started another promising project.

However, I still congratulate the author on being awarded and succeeding in fund raising. I don’t think the author can succeed in business because he has no Intellectual Property and the keyboard is too high to type. I do not want to blame IF here,too. I just want that they are more professional and others need not distrust their judgment.

I expose this just want to show the fact to someone that western also pirates others and pirating exists all over the world. China is also innovative enough.

I have no way of knowing if one work was inspired by the first work, or if both works were inspired by the thousands of people around the world doing work on FTIR reflected infrared light. There was a lot of inspiration at that time on this subject.

Billions of people in the world are looking at the same things and having the same moments of inspiration. History is full of such examples of simultaneous invention. And history is just as full of people using one piece of work as a jumping off point for the next evolution.

Awards are different than patents, an object can be awarded because it has been entered into a competition and judged to be notable. Amount of funding is not related to the quality of the idea, it is the quality of the sales job.

You can probably take comfort in knowing that the world is not looking for transparent glass keyboards with no tactile response.

On to the next idea!

Sorry you didn’t get my message. I sent it to your email and it bounced back. I’ve resent via private message.

Thank you for expanding on your topic here. We encourage discussion, but please don’t only link to your own blog.

As for your topic, this is far from piracy. Transparent keyboards actually aren’t difficult to make. I saw a calculator with transparent keys in the late 1980’s. We don’t see them often because of the lack of tactile feedback. They look better than they are easy to use.

Also, these designs are very difference beyond the transparent keyboard principle. Detailing and assembly are completely different concepts.


I can drive hits in Linkedin more easier than here and there seems not too many peoples here.

Core77 can only hope that some of your many blog readers will start to participate here. Thanks!

aha, so interesting to read your two replies.
To nxakt:
Of course I know many peoples were doing work on FTIR. Touch-screen is already popular all over the world now. But they are totally different technology. We can not think Apple pirated IBM because they all produce computers,right? Apple use its own technology. Almost all the designs were inspired by other what ? you mean that these designs were pirating ? Newton was inspired by an apple. The problem is that he was the first one that was inspired.
“Awards are different than patents” .it is true. but your opinion is still strange. And my question is why and how "it has been entered into a competition " since it is a pirating work? And why the original work was not entered into the same competition ? That is what I want to know.
About your last comment, it is interesting ,too. How do u know the world is not looking for transparent glass keyboards? just because you did not see?
About fundraising, I did not care. I know it depends on luck and different environments and also different inventors sometimes.

To Mr-914:
Your opinion is basically similar with nxakt. Can you tell me what tech the transparent keys used in 1980’s? I guess it should be an imagaination and was not supported by patent. Digtal camera was not even on the market at that time.It is meaningless to disscuss same product with different technologies. If you only focus on “Transparent” , there are already many “Transparent” products in the world,such as iMAC,and even “Transparent” keyboard----it is very easy to make a tranditional keyboard with Transparent plastic.-----Anything meaningful ? Is it innovative?
You can easily search a cell phone of LG with transparent keyboard in Google. I am not sure it is already produced or not. But it is obviously different technology.Therefore nobody thinks me pirating LG or LG pirating me.
“We don’t see them often because of the lack of tactile feedback” —Do you have any tactile feedback when you use IPHONE and Touch-screen ?

Is this just an axe grinding thread?

Did you build a working prototype?
Did you find a tiny little camera that has enough resolution and a nearly 180 degree field of vision in order to reach the edges of the keyboard such as the ESC key?
How did you over come the extremely narrow angle to the glass at the bottom front edge of the keyboard, where the light entering the camera would almost certainly be 100% reflected and the internal reflection rendered invisible?
Or is it just a rendering?

It seems like the two camera solution proposed by the award winner is necessary to make the concept function.

Since you are defending what apparently your concept, please share with us the development that you did. I am curious now. We are very curious here on the forum and nothing helps to win us over like a good story of development.

How do I know the world does not need transparent, no tactile feedback keyboards? My opinion and my experience. I could be wrong, there is nothing to prevent you from bringing your product to market and proving me wrong. There are plenty of awards to win in the world. No award beats having strong sales.

In answer to your main question, should IF be ashamed to award a pirated work? Not really, it is a little piece of nice design.

Final update:3 Million dollars invested in itby a Swiss VC companies first foray into Kickstarter funding. Guess we will see if there is a market after all. One year later, still not shipping. (I wonder if 143K of the 3 Million went to refund the Kickstarter funders or if everyone is that patient.)

U.S. Patent for Transparent calculator:

U.S Patent for Digital Image capture:

Now that we got that out of the way, let’s talk about tactile response in text input devices. A keyboard is a peripheral, those that have taken formal typing classes are trained to look at what they are typing on screen/paper, not at the keyboard/device. The camera may know the position of your fingers, but your fingers don’t the correct positions because they have no reference to the “home row” and key depressions that provide feedback that a key has been depressed. the “IPHONE” doesn’t need to provide feedback because the display of the text is very close in visual proxy to the keys themselves making it more intuitive. Auto-correct also assists with speed and the lack of tactile response though people with large fingers do have issues using small touch screens.

And then, it seems, you are really using this personal experience to point out some kind of injustice in regards to a double standard when it comes to West-China / China-West piracy. Nxakt is correct that there are many example of simultaneous invention throughout history. Maybe that is the case with your transparent keyboard, maybe not. But even if you were completely ripped off you sound like you are whining. My advice would be to learn from this experience and next time you have what you feel is an innovative design (and I hope you do) you should take the proper measures to protect your intellectual property before you share it, and after you’ve taken those measures develop a plan to promote it, sell it, and secure funding.

This is the one I was talking about:

Available on Alibaba.

I imagine it uses a resistive switch technology.

BTW, invention of the 1970’s.

To nxakt,
aha…Don’t you know what kind of camera can catpture nearly 180 degree field of vision? or even 360 degree ? just Google it and it is too easy!( Guess your coming question, I would like to prompt you in advance to think carefully about whether it matters with the twist image) And you seem also lack of patent knowledge. You would not mention the difference between one camera and two cameras if you do. There is not different in patent description files. What you said is that one camera is not innovative but two cameras is innovative, right? aha…very funny. I want to ask you a question: Have you ever applied any patent? not shape patent.
However some other kinds of comments are far from the topic.There is not essence difference between the two designs.The problem of tactile feedback occurs also on TransluSense. Do you have any tactile feedback if you use TransluSense? Is it the reason IF refused my design but awarded TransluSense?
Can you tell me more details on how to judge original and pirating ? I mean the standard? I don’t care what kind of opinion you have according to these words…If I ask you whether you are shamed without knowing camera with 180 degree, you may answer directly: not really! …
I am also willing to see whether TransluSense will succeed on the market. I can easily persuade some stupid investors to produce my design if he succeed. Maybe we all will see which design is better at that time.

To Greenman ,
You’d better compare the patents and the two designs carefully since you seem have some patent acknowledge.
Your opinions on feedback maybe right. But you still not tell me what is the difference between the two designs. You mean TransluSense has feedback ?
“there are many example of simultaneous invention throughout history” I think you should distinguish “invention” and “imagination”. And “inventions” are also different. My transparent keyboard is different with the one of LG.Do not tell me that we can not “invent” a new transparent keyboard since there is already a transparent keyboard. You can invent a new product with new technology, which is a basic knowledge.
It is out of range for intellectual property protecting.Further more, it should not be the excuse of pirating if the work is not patented.

Anyway, discussions can make us clearer and clearer.So, welcome more professional comments.

Great! Mr-914, you have done a good job. So you need study some patent knowledge next.Or require a lawer to distinguish the difference if you don’t want to study.
haha…it is funny.

I know why you don’t feel shame now, and also IF!.

Perhaps you lack deductive logic.

You are correct, both of them suck ergonomically.

Agreed, but perhaps the developers of the TransluSense were better able to articulate their design process, technology, and product benefits while at the same time not coming off as whiny douchebags with a China superiority complex.

Clearly, you don’t care about our opinions, in terms of details on pirating, I think you guys have that market cornered, so, you tell us eh?

It won’t, read my comment about referring to ergonomics that suck

If your powers of persuasion are exemplified by your comments here and on your blog then I sincerely doubt it. But hey, we here will bear in mind that you think investors are stupid and if we see any of your work in the future we’ll advise potential investors of that fact.

I did the search and used deductive reasoning, you do the homework, it’s your project.

I assure you that they are.

Ergonomically they both suck, so that can’t be the difference. Since your deductive reason aptitude appears lacking I will connect the dots for you. The developers of Translusence did a better job articulating their design with process while avoiding being douchebags. You whipped up some slick renderings, did a top level Google search within your government’s limited internet access laws, and slapped it over to Yanko. So if there is a difference, then that would be it.

Thank you for that gripping assessment of the differences, all this time I thought my imaginary friends were people that I invented. Did you patent your design before going public with it? No? Then bad on you.

Agreed, patents very often built upon combining existing technologies in innovative ways. The point is that if you offer a very similar product then you have to distinguish its benefits in the marketplace. How is yours better? Why? Because you thought of it first?

How’d I do?

This is a true “forum frenzy”, when will it be “shut’er down time”? Greenman 1 - China nil

No lock coming from me. I haven’t seen a classic Fisking job in EONS…

Where’s my popcorn?

It seems to have 2 issues. Stealing in terms of patent law and stealing in the case of the contest.

For the patent it boils down to your independent claims. For example, if you only claim a single camera and don’t claim more than one camera, the other company effectively broke your patent. And it’s completely legal. But that’s why we have lawyers to write them in the first place. And that’s why we have lawyers to interpret the independent claims. Also, since the other company has yet to commercialize their keyboard, it would be pointless to file a claim as there is no revenue to recover to pay your expensive lawyers. Sure, you could sue them on principle, but I hope you have deep pockets.

As for the contest, it is unreasonable to expect the judges to know of every obscure design that may have preceded what they are judging. They cannot possibly know every design, published or unpublished. Have you written them, hopefully in a non-accusatory manner, about the possible copying? With evidence of copying instead of “I sez so”. If not, what’s the point of complaining to an anonymous interawebz board?

@jamesking -
You’re still pushing this virtual keyboard thing even after 5 years?

Speaking of inspiration - You know what would be a cool design…

A faucet - but instead of a drip it’s a lightbulb!

OMG…this just keeps getting better!