US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
1–10 of 108 posts
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#2my first reaction to this was "bah, software patents. I love living in the EU."
But, this got me thinking - it a patent about something like a touch interface (intrinsically linked to hardware, but where software is required) software or not?
This also works for double clicks, key repeat delay, and stuff like joysticks.
Once you've invented the mouse, can you then patent every way of clicking and shaking? similarly, following the touchscreen, can we then patent every conceivable way to tap/swipe/pinch it?
I want to say "no, all these patents are obvious and dumb," but the "software is mathematics" mantra really doesn't hold for these kind of fluffy, hands-on concepts.
hmm.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#3We all saw "pinch to zoom" publicly demonstrated in that multi-touch Ted talk before the iPhone was unveiled.
I'm not sure why the "overscroll bounce" was rejected, as it was Apple's unique invention and not obvious.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#4my first reaction to this was "bah, software patents. I love living in the EU." But, this got me thinking - it a patent about something like a touch interface (intrinsically linked to hardware, but where software is required) software or not? This also works for double clicks, key repeat delay, and stuff like joysticks. Once you've invented the mouse, can you then patent every way of clicking and shaking? similarly,…
Being able to use more than one finger is what's based on hardware (for which Apple wouldn't have the patent anyway - the panel maker would). The contraction and expanding action is based on software.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#5We all saw "pinch to zoom" publicly demonstrated in that multi-touch Ted talk before the iPhone was unveiled. I'm not sure why the "overscroll bounce" was rejected, as it was Apple's unique invention and not obvious.
"Overscroll" was rejected on multiple counts of obviousness and lacking in novelty, due to prior art [0].
[0] http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/10/patent-office-tentatively...
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#6But I presume the companies that have been paying royalties for half a decade won't get their money back.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#7my first reaction to this was "bah, software patents. I love living in the EU." But, this got me thinking - it a patent about something like a touch interface (intrinsically linked to hardware, but where software is required) software or not? This also works for double clicks, key repeat delay, and stuff like joysticks. Once you've invented the mouse, can you then patent every way of clicking and shaking? similarly,…
The point is that the most heinous software patents are actually patents on abstracts concepts and uses. Things like patenting "One click purchase" and "Detect phone numbers on an email".
This is such an example.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#8Pinch to zoom absolutely should have been rejected.
Watch the 2002 movie Minority Report for what I consider prior art on the 2007 patent filing at http://www.google.com/patents/US7844915.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#9my first reaction to this was "bah, software patents. I love living in the EU." But, this got me thinking - it a patent about something like a touch interface (intrinsically linked to hardware, but where software is required) software or not? This also works for double clicks, key repeat delay, and stuff like joysticks. Once you've invented the mouse, can you then patent every way of clicking and shaking? similarly,…
Even living in the EU you suffer from the patent patent systems around the world since it will influence the way companies develop/charge for products - especially if it's in a major market such as the US.
The cost of dealing with patents is just incorporated into the cost of the final product so we all suffer.
Re: US patent office rejects claims of Apple 'pinch to zoom' patent
#10my first reaction to this was "bah, software patents. I love living in the EU." But, this got me thinking - it a patent about something like a touch interface (intrinsically linked to hardware, but where software is required) software or not? This also works for double clicks, key repeat delay, and stuff like joysticks. Once you've invented the mouse, can you then patent every way of clicking and shaking? similarly,…
Being able to use more than one finger is what's based on hardware (for which Apple wouldn't have the patent anyway - the panel maker would). The contraction and expanding action is based on software.
Don't Apple own the multitouch technology though? Presumably through their purchase of Fingerworks.