Live data from Hacker News

USPTO Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone

macrumors.com

21–26 of 26 posts

Re: USPTO Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone

#21
post #5

If you want to see the prosecution history and documentation of a patent, you can go to the PAIR portal of the uspto[1]. After going through a Captcha, you can then search for a patent# or application #, and then click on the "image wrapper" tab. It's very enlightening to see patents go through rejections and resubmittals, and what the explanations are for rejection or why a rejection should be reconsidered. [1] http…

If you look the patent up on Google Patents, you can download all the "Public PAIR data". It's 56MB for this patent. Inside of the zip there is a file located at: 12101832-image_file_wrapper/12101832-image_file_wrapper.tsv It's a tab-delimited version of the table on the USPTO site for "image file wrapper". It also has all the PDFs in that directory. http://www.google.com/patents/US7479949

Very cool! I did not realize Google Patents had this capability.

Re: USPTO Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone

#22

Finally this is (seeming) insanity is brought to the spotlight. Here's to hoping that between invalidating trivial patents like these and initiatives like Twitters "Innovator’s Patent Agreement" (which requires all inventors to agree before a patent can be used offensively), the current situation will finally come to an end.

Why is this patent trivial?

Re: USPTO Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone

#24

Wow, scrolling down from that article was a hilarious reminder how much more cogent HN comments tend to be than any other comments on the interwebs. "Grrr! USPTO is mean to Apple! How dare they! I'm mad!" Etc.

HN comments about patents also tend to be laughably simplistic... just at the other end of the spectrum.

Re: USPTO Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone

#25

Finally this is (seeming) insanity is brought to the spotlight. Here's to hoping that between invalidating trivial patents like these and initiatives like Twitters "Innovator’s Patent Agreement" (which requires all inventors to agree before a patent can be used offensively), the current situation will finally come to an end.

The problem with Twitter's patent agreement (and others like it) is that it is not legally binding. However good their intentions now (and I believe they are genuine), sooner or later the company will come under new management, or have their assets sold for scrap, at which point all those "defensive" patents get weaponized and used for extortion.
Post reply on HN