Reading through these comments reveals that many people have no idea how patents work. Sad, really. They clearly have Internet access, yet haven't bothered to expand on their knowledge but rather just respond to an article with emotion.
Yes, there are instances of patents being granted for something where prior art exists, but one cannot assume that this is the case all the time. Many patents are filed based on a different implementation method - no claim is being made that the patent holder "invented" the entire process, JUST the method that they created. Tyre manufacturers regularly file patents on tyres. Are they claiming to have invented the tyre? No, they have just found an improved manufacturing process, or a better design. Does it stifle innovation? Doubtful.
I'm wondering how many people choked on their coffee when they read that Apple had been awarded the trademark on the word "Retina", without bothering to read further that this only applied to a small class of goods - including computers, computer display screens and mobile devices.
In theory, I could charge your handset from the base station but it would require massive power. (Remember the inverse-square law).
