Except if you are going to seek investment from others. In my experience, most startups don't look at patents as a means of excluding others. Instead, they see patents as a means to show potential investors validation of their work and a concrete asset that can be used to secure capital.

In case you are interested in tracking COVID19 cases, the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth has set up a website tracking cases across the U.S. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huntonak.com%2Fen%2Fco...

Not necessarily. If the inclusion of x is both novel and not obvious, then the second patent would be valid. However, the holder of the second patent would not be able to practice the second approach (with X and Y) without the consent (i.e., license) from the original patent holder (owner of Y).

The summary is further wrong in that the "article" they are associating with the message specifically is referring to a physical article (e.g., a sweater). When you read the decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that essentially allowed this patent, it is clear that the "article" is "descriptive of an article to be procured, and [that] the article is associated with an event." A better summary of the claims would be to state that it is a reminder system that allows a person to scan in information from a product after an event has already been created, associate the article information (e.g., product description) with the event, and then send a reminder that includes event data and the article information. This may have been known in the art, but lets at least avoid the handwaving that is overly broad and not accurate that leads to the quick condemnation of the patent system.

To infringe, an infringer would have to produce a product that had every element of the claim listed below. Leave one thing off and you are clear of infringement. 1. A head-mounted device that is worn on a user's head and configured to integrate with a removable portable electronic device, comprising: a frame comprising a cavity that is configured to physically receive and carry the removable portable electronic device, wherein the frame places a display screen of the portable electronic device in front of the user's eyes, and wherein the display screen of the portable electronic device acts as the primary display screen of the head-mounted device such that the display screen of the portable electronic device is primarily used to view image based content when the head-mounted display device is worn on the user's head; a detection mechanism configured to alter the portable electronic device based on whether the removable portable electronic device is mounted on the frame; and an optical subassembly operative to: receive at least one image frame from the display screen of the portable electronic device, wherein the at least one image frame comprises the image based content; and adjust the image based content based at least in part on relative sizes of the display and the display screen of the portable electronic device.

Thank you for your insightful comment. Nothing is permanently being given away, instead a single purchaser will have the right to utilize and control the utilization and implementation the technology patented. The right of ownership will still be retained by NASA (and hence the U.S. Public).