RFID Smart Shelf

RFID Smart Shelf Dispenser ..

TagSys develops new item-level RFID reader-based devices that target improvement of inventory management for the pharmaceutical, retail, library and industry laundry sectors through an RFID-enabled Smart Shelf and Smart Dispenser products. ...

... "The Smart Shelf simulates the 3D tunnel reader approach on a static standard shelf. The Shelf is designed to read any tag that is placed on the surface of the shelf. Previous designs of RFID shelves have required tags to be perpendicular to the antenna. The new Smart Shelf is designed to provide accurate readings regardless of the orientation of the tag. The Smart Shelf is highly sought after by libraries to help manage high volumes of books and other media, the pharmaceutical industry, where RFID tagged bottles can be tracked and monitored, high-end jewelry stores, and retail, where inventory of items like DVDs and CDs can be monitored to ensure availability during peak seasons of demand. The Smart Dispenser provides a volume based approach to reading the items in the dispenser. A typical dispenser could be a drawer or cabinet used to dispense items to authorized individuals. The items can be placed in any order or orientation in the dispenser. The new design reads the items in the dispenser when the drawer is opened and again when it is closed. The items that are removed are identified through the difference between reads. One user example of the Smart Dispenser is the management of hospital garments (scrubs) used by medical staff. To help hospitals manage hygiene and sterilization requirements, the Smart Dispenser can dispense the appropriate attire to the staff, (e.g. size, number of previous washes, etc.), and also monitor inventory and how that inventory is being managed. " ...

RFID Smart Shelf Dispenser: Via TAGSys: TAGSYS Develops Item-Level RFID Smart Shelf And Smart Dispenser For Pharma, Libraries And Retail ...

RFID Chemical Monitoring: Smart Cabinet ...

ORNL > Newsroom > Story Tips

... "The smart cabinet will track the placement of laboratory chemicals used in a typical research environment inside a small enclosed storage area. The cabinet uses special shelves that have radio frequency reader capability for constant monitoring of placement and removal of chemicals. Changes are recorded in a computer database, and discrepancies are reported to designated personnel through electronic mail or pager. This eliminates the need for physical inventories. [Contact: Fred Strohl; 865.574.4165; strohlhf@ornl.gov] " ...

Wireless Communication and Smart Card-enabled Route Accounting Drives Efficiency ...

Smart Card-enabled Route Accounting: Zebra Technologies Changes Rules of the Road for Route Accounting ...

From PR Newswire (press release) ... It includes wireless communications options such as Bluetooth and 802.11b, and a smart card and magnetic stripe reader module that is EMV certified for use in ...

... When it comes to record keeping and reconciliation at the end of a shift, route drivers who deliver and stock retailers' shelves with beverages, bakery goods, and snack foods, readily admit it's a time-consuming and frustrating chore. While some drivers use automated mobile and in-vehicle systems to record sales orders and issue receipts, those systems are bulky, prone to failure, and inflexible -- severely limiting on-the-spot transaction processing that can save time, increase accuracy and boost cash flow. But now, the rules of the road for route accounting and direct store delivery (DSD) applications are about to change. ...

Zebra Technologies Corp. (Nasdaq: ZBRA) delivers innovative and reliable on-demand printing solutions for business improvement and security applications in 90 countries around the world. More than 90 percent of Fortune 500 companies use Zebra-brand printers. A broad range of applications benefit from Zebra-brand thermal bar code, "smart" label, receipt, and card printers, resulting in enhanced security, increased productivity, improved quality, lower costs, and better customer service. The company has sold four million printers, including wireless/mobile solutions and RFID printer/encoders, and also offers software, connectivity solutions, and printing supplies.

Additional resources on smart card-enabled route accounting ...

Telemetry & Applications: also offers other upwardly mobile features, such as smart card, IrDA, and ... in many scenarios including: field sales, field service, route accounting and ticket ...

Mobile printers, portable printers, Zebra: such as: shelf labeling, bin labeling, product identification and route accounting. ... optional bidirectional MCRs (magnetic card readers) and smart card readers. ...

Route Accounting Solutions from Symbol Technologies: If your organization relies on a mobile workforce for direct store delivery (DSD), route accounting or field service, Symbol Technologies offers powerful ...

Route Accounting, Mobile Computers & Delivery: Route Accounting >. Route accounting is the term used to describe those applications in which goods and services are bought and sold in a mobile environment. ...

RFID for Chemical Monitoring - Keeping labs safer

... Laboratory chemicals with dated shelf lives can become dangerous if not carefully monitored. Paul Ewing and other researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory have developed a special storage cabinet system to enhance inventory and tracking of such chemicals and other similar high-risk assets through an antenna-based passive radio-frequency identification tag technology. The "smart cabinet" will track the placement of laboratory chemicals used in a typical research environment inside a small enclosed storage area.

The cabinet uses special shelves that have radio frequency reader capability for constant monitoring of placement and removal of chemicals. Changes are recorded in a computer database, and discrepancies are reported to designated personnel through electronic mail or pager. This eliminates the need for physical inventories. [Contact: Fred Strohl; (865) 574-4165; strohlhf@ornl.gov]

From RFID to Smart Dust: The Expanding Market for Wireless Sensor Technologies

Wireless sensor technologies will be explored at a U.S. Department of Commerce Forum on April 1, 2004 that addresses the current and potential uses of sensor technologies by both industry and government as well as the public policy implications of widespread deployment. The forum is open to the public on a first come basis. Registration is onsite, no pre-registration required. A link to the forum webcast will be posted here on the day of the event.
DATE & TIME: The Wireless Sensor Technology Forum will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. on Thursday, April 1, 2004. Registration and demos open at 8:00 a.m.

LOCATION: The forum on wireless sensor technologies will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Auditorium, Washington, D.C. (Enter through the Department of Commerce Main Lobby on 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania avenues. Photo identification required.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy Lader, Office of Policy Analysis and Development, NTIA, at (202) 482-1880, or electronic mail: wlader@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct media inquiries to the Office of Public Affairs, NTIA, at (202) 482-7002.

Commerce To Host Wireless Sensor Technologies Forum April 1st, Panel Discussions Will Examine Marketplace Expansion “From RFID to Smart Dust”

Wireless sensor technologies, the next highly anticipated billion-dollar market for the information technology sector, will be explored at a U.S. Department of Commerce Forum on April 1, 2004 that addresses the current and potential uses of sensor technologies by both industry and government as well as the public policy implications of widespread deployment.

Panel discussions will be moderated by Federal Communications Commissioner Kevin J. Martin and senior Commerce Department officials including Jon W. Dudas, Acting Under Secretary for Intellectual Property and Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; Michael D. Gallagher, Acting Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information; Elizabeth Prostic, Chief Privacy Officer; and Benjamin H. Wu, Deputy Under Secretary for Technology.

"Designing an appropriate regulatory framework for wireless sensor technologies requires an understanding of different policy objectives. We look forward to a lively discussion," said Acting Under Secretary Dudas.

“Widespread use of wireless sensor technologies is moving from factory floors to store shelves to family living rooms,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Gallagher. “We want to make sure government is a smart consumer. We also need to explore the implications for spectrum management and privacy, and we must adopt policies that maintain our economic competitive advantage,” Gallagher said.

The Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and Technology Administration will host the half-day forum. The first panel will address the present and future market for sensor technologies. Panelists will include developers, manufacturers, market analysts, and industry and government users. The second panel will address public policy issues facing sensor technologies such as spectrum use, privacy and security, and intellectual property. Panelists will include representatives from industry and government, as well as public policy analysts.

The Wireless Sensor Technologies Forum will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Auditorium, Washington, D.C. More information is available on the NTIA Web site at www.ntia.doc.gov .

Program:

8:00 AM Registration and Demo Area Opens

9:00-9:15 Opening Remarks by Mario W. Cardullo, Counselor for Technology and Entrepreneurism,

Office of the Under Secretary, International Trade Administration



9:15-11:00 Panel 1: The Market and Uses for Sensor Technologies



Moderators:

Michael D. Gallagher, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and

Information

Kevin J. Martin, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission

Benjamin H. Wu, Deputy Under Secretary for Technology



Panelists:

Jon Brendsel, Director of Technology, VeriSign

Lyle Ginsburg, Managing Partner, Products Operating Group, Accenture

Ralph M. Kling, Principal Researcher, Intel

Ron Moser, Strategic Applications Analyst for RFID, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Thomas M. McAuliffe, Vice President, Strategy & Business Development,

Secure Asset Solutions, Motorola

Robert Poor, Chief Technology Officer, Ember

Piyush Sodha, President & CEO, Matrics, Inc.

C. Stewart Verdery, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Homeland Security for Border

and Transportation Security Policy and Planning



11:00 - 11:30 Break



11:30 –1:15 Panel 2: Policy Issues Related to Sensor Technologies



Moderators:

Jon W. Dudas, Acting Under Secretary for Intellectual Property and Director of the

U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Michael D. Gallagher, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and

Information

Elizabeth Prostic, Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of Commerce



Panelists:

Paula Bruening, Staff Counsel, Center for Democracy and Technology

Sandra R. Hughes, Chief Privacy Officer, Procter & Gamble

Ari Juels, Principal Research Scientist, RSA Laboratories

Elliot Maxwell, Fellow, Center for the Study of American Government, Johns Hopkins University

Paul Moskowitz, Research Staff Member, IBM Watson Research Center

Ravi Rajapakse, Chief Technology Officer, Savi Technologies

Steven J. Winter, Senior Vice President, Global Service and Intellectual Property,

Intermec Technologies Corporation

Badri A. Younes, Director, Spectrum Management, U.S. Department of Defense

1:15 Close

Leahy on RFID and Micro-Monitoring...

Remarks Of Senator Patrick Leahy
The Dawn of Micro Monitoring: It's Promise, And Its Challenges
To Privacy And Security
Conference On “Video Surveillance: Legal And Technological Challenges”
Georgetown University Law Center
Tuesday, March 23, 2004

First, I want to thank Georgetown University Law Center for hosting this conference. It’s always good to have an opportunity to return to my alma mater. I also thank the Center for American Progress, The Constitution Project and Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering for their roles in supporting this event. As a former prosecutor I am especially glad for the strong representation here from the law enforcement community. Chief Ramsey, good to see you again. And thanks to all the experts who have gathered here today to talk about these timely issues.

People Want To BE Safer

In our post-9/11 world, technology often has been our crucial but silent partner in helping us to ramp up our law enforcement and national security capabilities. We in this city are profoundly aware of the new risks we face. But we also need to do it right. The public does not want false assurances, nor do they want to be unduly alarmed. What the American people want is to actually be safer. And we still have a way to go in accomplishing that.

Tension Between Liberty And Security

In our constitutional system there is always tension between liberty and security – and never more so than since September 11th. One of the difficult challenges we face is to strike the right midpoint. Our constitutional checks and balances are intended to help us do that.

The video technologies you are discussing today offer tools that are better, faster and smarter, on scales of magnitude that are unprecedented. As an advocate of emerging technologies who also has a keen interest in them, I watch these breakthroughs with great interest.

I have sought to find ways to encourage the commercial sector to create new products and opportunities, and I have promoted use of new technologies by law enforcement agencies, while also protecting consumer privacy and constitutional freedoms. That was the balance I sought to strike in my work on CALEA and in other legislation that blends law enforcement’s needs, the needs of our robust technology sector, and the privacy interests of the American people. The hands-off approach to the Internet that I have favored is another example, and right now I am working with others to extend the Internet tax moratorium, to keep the Internet free from discriminatory and multiple state and local taxes.

On The Cusp Of A Micro-Monitoring Revolution

The marriage of information-gathering technology with information storing technology, manipulated in increasingly sophisticated databases, is beginning to produce the defining privacy challenge of the information age. Modern databases, networks and the Internet allow us to easily collect, store, distribute and combine video, audio and other digital trails of our daily transactions. We are on the verge of a revolution in micro-monitoring – the capability for the highly detailed, largely automatic, widespread surveillance of our daily lives.

RFIDs

And one of the most dramatic and dazzling new challenges we all will be facing soon is the emergence of a relatively new, surveillance-related technology called radio frequency identification -- R–F–I–D for short.

RFID tags are tiny computer chips that can be attached to physical items in order to provide identification and tracking by radio. Their potential invasiveness is obvious from their size, which, as shown in this picture, already is surprisingly small. And they will only get smaller.

In their basic function, RFID chips are like barcodes, which by now are ubiquitous in our stores and offices and crime labs and manufacturing plants.

Barcodes On Steroids

But RFID chips are like supercharged barcodes – barcodes on steroids, if you will. They are so small they can be tagged onto almost any object. They do not have to be in open view; RFID receivers just have to be within the vicinity – at a security checkpoint, in a doorway, inside a mailbox, atop a traffic light. And RFID chips can carry a lot more information than barcodes. Some versions are recordable so that they can carry along the object's entire history.

RFID chips are more powerful than today’s video surveillance technology. RFIDs are more reliable, they are 100 percent automatic, and they are likely to become more pervasive because they are significantly less expensive, and there are many business advantages to using them. RFIDs seem poised to become the catalyst that will launch the age of micro-monitoring.

I have followed RFID technology for some time and have welcomed its potential for many constructive uses. I have supported the use of RFIDs in a Vermont pilot program for tracking cattle to curtail outbreaks, like mad cow disease, and our Vermont program is now being emulated for a national tracking system. RFID technology may also help thwart prescription drug counterfeiting, a use the FDA encouraged in a recent report. Leading retailers like Wal-Mart and Target – as well as the Department of Defense -- are requiring its use by suppliers for inventory control. Fifty million pets around the world have embedded RFID chips. Of course, many of us already have experience with simpler versions of the technology in “smart tags” at toll booths and “speed passes” at gas stations.

But this is just the beginning. RFID technology is on the brink of widespread applications in manufacturing, distribution, retail, healthcare, safety, security, law enforcement, intellectual property protection and many other areas, including mundane applications like keeping track of personal possessions. Some visionaries imagine, quote, “an internet of objects” – a world in which billions of objects will report their location, identity, and history over wireless connections. Those days of long hunts around the house for lost keys and remote controls might be a frustration of the past.

These all raise exciting possibilities, but they also raise potentially troubling tangents. While it may be a good idea for a retailer to use RFID chips to manage its inventory, we would not want a retailer to put those tags on goods for sale without consumers’ knowledge, without knowing how to deactivate them, and without knowing what information will be collected and how it will be used. While we might want the Pentagon to be able to manage its supplies with RFID tags, we would not want an al Qaeda operative to find out about our resources by simply using a hidden RFID scanner in a war situation.

Drawing Lines

Of course these are just some of the foreseeable possibilities, and a lot depends on enhancements in the technology, reductions in costs, and developments in voluntary standard-setting, systems and infrastructure to manage RFID-collected information. But the RFID train is beginning to leave the station, and now is the right time to begin a national discussion about where, if at all, any lines will be drawn to protect privacy rights.

The need to draw some lines is already becoming clear. Recent reports revealed clandestine tests at a Wal-Mart store where RFID tags were inserted in packages of Max Factor lipsticks, with RFID scanners hidden on nearby shelves. The radio signals triggered nearby surveillance cameras to allow researchers 750 miles away to watch those consumers in action. A similar test occurred with Gillette razors at another Wal-Mart store.

These excesses suggest that Congress may need to step in at some point. When privacy intrusions reach the point of behavior that is absurdly out of bounds, we find ourselves having to deal with such issues as the “Video Voyeurism Prevention Act,” a bill now before Congress that would ban the use of camera to spy in bathrooms and up women’s skirts, a practice that by now has even been given a name, “upskirting,” which I’m sure is as new to you as it is to most of us in Congress.

Other powerful new technologies are on the horizon, like sensor technology and nanotechnology. All the more reason to think about these issues broadly and to establish guiding principles serving the twin goals of fostering useful technologies while keeping them from overtaking our civil liberties.

With RFID technology as with many other surveillance technologies, we need to consider how it will be used, and will it be effective. What information will it gather, and how long will that data be kept? Who will have access to those data banks, and under what checks-and-balances? Will the public have appropriate notice, opportunity to consent and due process in the case mistakes are made? How will the data be secured from theft, negligence and abuse, and how will accuracy be ensured? In what cases should law enforcement agencies be able to use this information, and what safeguards should apply? There should be a general presumption that Americans can know when their personal information is collected, and to see, check and correct any errors.

These are all questions we need to consider, and it is entirely possible that Congress may decide that enacting general parameters would be constructive. It is important that we let RFID technology reach its potential without unnecessary constraints. But it is equally important that we ensure protections against privacy invasions and other abuses. Technology may also help with the answers -- for example, “blockers” that deactivate RFID tags, and software that thwarts spyware.

Beginning A National Dialogue

There is no downside to a public dialogue about these issues, but there are many dangers in waiting too long to start. We need clear communication about the goals, plans and uses of the technology, so that we can think in advance about the best ways to encourage innovation, while conserving the public’s right to privacy.

We have seen this time and time again where a potentially good approach is hampered because of lack of communication with Congress, the public and lack of adequate consideration for privacy and civil liberties.

Take for example the so-called CAPPS II program. No doubt in a post-9/11 world, we should have an effective airline screening system. But the Administration quietly put this program together, collected passengers’ information without their knowledge and piloted this program without communicating with us and before privacy protections were in place. The result was a recent GAO analysis that showed pervasive problems in the screening program and admissions that we are now set back in our efforts to create an effective screening system.

As another example, the Administration recently funded the MATRIX program to provide law enforcement access to state government and commercial databases. This was potentially a useful crime-fighting tool. But there was insufficient information about the program and about potentially intrusive data mining capabilities, and there were unaddressed concerns about privacy protections. Now 11 out of 16 states participating in the program have pulled out – many, citing privacy concerns – thus hampering the effectiveness of the information sharing program. Again, had some of these issues been vetted in advance, we may have been able to enhance law enforcement intelligence.

Just recently, there were reports about the FBI’s new Strategic Medical Intelligence program, in which doctors have been enlisted to report to the FBI “any suspicious event,” such as an unusual rash or a lost finger. The goal of preventing bio-terrorism is important. But there are many unanswered questions about the program’s privacy protections and its ability to identify truly suspicious events and not unrelated personal medical situations. Hopefully, this program will not be hampered by lack of communication and oversight.

I have written oversight letters to the Justice Department and to the Department of Homeland Security on all of these issues and am waiting for their responses.

I want to make sure that mistakes like those are not repeated, especially with RFID technology, where there is so much potential value. That is why I asked to speak with you today, to begin the process of encouraging public dialogue in both the commercial and public sectors before the RFID genie is let fully out of its bottle.

This is a dialogue that should cut across the political spectrum, and it should include the possibility of constructive, bipartisan congressional hearings. The earlier we begin this discussion, the greater the prospects for success in reaching consensus on a set of guiding principles.

When several of us from both parties banded together years ago to found the Congressional Internet Caucus, we were united by our appreciation for what the Internet would do for our society. Years later, we remain united, we remain optimistic, and partisanship has never interfered in the Caucus’s work.

That is the spirit in which I hope a discussion can now begin on micro-monitoring.

Thank you for your interest in these cutting-edge issues, and thanks for this opportunity to share some ideas with you.