"In the end the project led nowhere, apparently there was a patent that it violated (of all things, one that had to do with the codes on laundry for hotels and hospitals held by Philips) but that by itself had nothing to do with the technology or whether it was possible to build this."
Hurray for the patent system supporting innovation.
I'm interested to know why they decided not to move forward anyway. Every entrepreneur I know personally (admittedly, mostly software people) is steadfastly avoiding looking at patents, figuring you don't have to worry about the patent problem until you are big enough that you might have some ammo to fight back, and they don't want the triple penalty for knowingly infringing. Maybe physical devices are thought of differently.
Guess how well this article encouraged the readers to go out there and do something.
When you think about the huge number of patents the big companies sit on, it's pretty much Russian roulette to try and to something new. At good chance to shoot yourself in the foot and waste a couple of years even if the idea works.
Hurray for the patent system supporting innovation.