Re: What am I missing?
As for why it was patentable at all, obviously I don't know enough about the details to say anything for sure. But it does seem as though a system to group multiple normal phones as a single number, while also allowing them to behave as individual numbers when required, could require a very different solution from doing it for VOIP phones, so there may well be something deserving of a patent in there
It's confused me has this. It sounds like they have a case, AT&T has failed to do due dilligance, got stung signing an over priced contrac (oh, the irony) and is now trying to screw the little guy.
However, the patent, unless I'm missing something, seems to be 'Lets have 2 groups of phone numbers that can talk to each other based on these rules and some as yet unspecified software and hardware'.
How you actually go about any of this, ie, the implementation details, seem to be sorely lacking, which, surely is the actual point of an invention? (If not I have an idea for an invisible car....)
"The activity handling rule configuration module 316 may determine sets of one or more rules that implement telephone service activity handling policies including grouped telephone number call policies such as grouped telephone number incoming call policies and grouped telephone number outgoing call policies and similar policies for other types of telephone service activity such as SMS messaging. "
According to diagram, 316 is a black rectangular outline with the words 'Activity Handling Rules Configuration' written centrally within. Or, with my work hat on... one of those diagrams where someone has gone 'Here's the magical thing', and you're sat there thinking 'Oh... great.. I've got to make that actually work now'.