Tell me if this sounds familiar: a man uses a smartphone to control a superautomatic coffee machine. Tags on the cups allow the machine to remember what settings he likes.
Thanks to Kickstarter user Dan_R for this amazing research. He analyzes the instances of plagiarism:
- It’s, the very same Jura espresso machine from the Arist disassembled photo.
- Controlled by a smartphone using a NetDuino interface
- Uses an RFID tag on the bottom of the coffee cup and an RFID reader in the drip tray so it can do everything that Arist does!
Summary: based on the above I can confidently say that the espresso machine with the cover removed in the Arist campaign video was a Jura espresso machine (likely with an arduino smartphone interface added to it’s top).
Based on the above YouTube video showing clear evidence of “prior art” and Arist’s own public disclosures of their machine on KS and at ICT how likely is it that Arist will get their patents approved? Any patent lawyers out there who can answer this? Usually any prior art or public disclosure would preclude patent approval. If the prospect for getting a patent approved is not good because other people have shown the identical idea years before and Arist prematurely showed their ideas publicly, then is it reasonable for Arist to continue to say that they can’t show a video of their machine working now because of “patent issues”? If the Jura machine in the Arist campaign video is the Arist version 1 as some have claimed then did Arist actually develop and espresso machine prior to KS as claimed or did they simply interfaced to a retail machine? Is the Jura machine with a controller on top what Arist demoed to baristas and is this the machine that Arist says they have sold 1000 units? If Arist has sold 1000 version 1 machines as claimed have any of them been delivered?