Apple Awarded Major Patent Protection For Smart Phones And Tablets

[The Central Scrutinizer]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387401,00.asp

 

[steve s]

"Unless this patent becomes invalidated, it would allow Apple to stifle innovation and bully competitors."

Isn't that exactly what the fanboys used to criticize Microsoft for?

Steve S

 

[AvalonXQ]

I'm not understanding the concern.

Every claim requires the translation of both frame and non-frame content with a gesture including some number of fingers, and a translation of only frame content with a gesture including a different number of fingers.

I own an iPhone, and I can't think of how the iPhone itself actually uses this feature.

 

[not daSkeptic]

Looks to me like the patent system is working as expected. The claims seem rather specific, and it's not Apple's fault if others implemented the technology during the pending phase.

 

[AvalonXQ]

So, I found an explanation of what the patent actually covers.

I'll admit, I'm not even convinced that this blogger's example is valid; I would need to look at the patent's definition of "translation" to see if zooming is actually covered.

But this blogger, at least, agrees with me about just how narrow this patent actually is. Doomsayers aren't paying close attention to the claims, and I'm really wondering what sorts of "patent experts" these journalists consulted.

 

[not daSkeptic]

... I would need to look at the patent's definition of "translation" to see if zooming is actually covered.

By my reading, any gesture involving the movement of an arbitrary number of fingers across the surface of the screen would be covered.

 

[This is The End]

By my reading, any gesture involving the movement of an arbitrary number of fingers across the surface of the screen would be covered.

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch'.

 

[not daSkeptic]

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch'.

No, the gestures are not patentable; and to my knowledge nobody has claimed otherwise. The patent in question is for a method in a portable device involving a touch screen that is manipulated by such gestures.

 

[This is The End]

No, the gestures are not patentable; and to my knowledge nobody has claimed otherwise. The patent in question is for a method in a portable device involving a touch screen that is manipulated by such gestures.

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch' on a portable device.

 

[Darat]

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch' on a portable device.

I would have thought there was prior art (MS's various tables and surfaces come to mind which pre-date the iPhone by several years), but even if there isn't I suspect that if the patent is as broad as some sources are claiming that it would be ruled in the public interest to invalidate the patent.

Saying that I see it as more of a spoiling exercise by Apple to try and scare other companies from using similar ideas whilst there is uncertainty of the breadth and validity of the patent. Whilst that is certainly not nice business ethics it is a common strategy for companies like Apple.

 

[This is The End]

I would have thought there was prior art... <snip>

That brings up a very good point. That being $ony.... I mean Sony. If this patent was actually possible Sony would have been on top of it years before Apple. Sony's patent lawyers are on the ball.

 

[AvalonXQ]

By my reading, any gesture involving the movement of an arbitrary number of fingers across the surface of the screen would be covered.

Translation is a reference to what happens to content, not what the fingers do. You need frame and non-frame translation with N fingers, and only frame translation with M fingers. I'm not convinced yet that zooming meets the definition of translation.

Despite my earlier posts, people still don't feel the need to actually read the claims before debating their breadth. Not very skeptical IMO.

 

[Ferguson]

I'm not understanding the concern.

Every claim requires the translation of both frame and non-frame content with a gesture including some number of fingers, and a translation of only frame content with a gesture including a different number of fingers.

I own an iPhone, and I can't think of how the iPhone itself actually uses this feature.

The iPhone and iPad use it as described, to scroll frames within pages. Some sites, like facebook, will have a page (the news feed) that you scroll through, with one finger, then you click something, like '17 friends like this' which pops up a frame with the list of friends that liked it. How do you scroll through that list without scrolling the whole page? With two fingers. I discovered it by accident a few months ago, and its saved my *** a few times on various sites.

I agree that as written I dont believe it covers zooming, just scrolling frames within scrolling pages.

 

[BenBurch]

Isn't that exactly what the fanboys used to criticize Microsoft for?

Steve S

That's what patents are FOR.

 

[AvalonXQ]

The iPhone and iPad use it as described, to scroll frames within pages. Some sites, like facebook, will have a page (the news feed) that you scroll through, with one finger, then you click something, like '17 friends like this' which pops up a frame with the list of friends that liked it. How do you scroll through that list without scrolling the whole page? With two fingers. I discovered it by accident a few months ago, and its saved my *** a few times on various sites.

Ah, so they use it pretty much exactly as claimed! That's great to know; I actually wasn't aware of that.

So, who here is honestly going to argue that the inability to have this feature without paying Apple a small royalty is going to destroy the smartphone market?

 

[not daSkeptic]

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch' on a portable device.

That analogy only works if one generalizes the issue to the manipulation of controls on portable device. But Apple has not done this. Their claims cover a specific implementation of said controls.

 

[not daSkeptic]

Translation is a reference to what happens to content, not what the fingers do.

I can see how the text could be interpreted either way:

An N-finger translation gesture is detected ... In response, the page content ... is translated ...

This could mean a gesture involving finger translation, to which the system responds by translating the content; or it could mean a finger gesture conveying a desire for the content to be translated, to which the system responds by doing so. Not really a significant difference in my opinion.

 

[This is The End]

Highlighting mine:

That analogy only works if one generalizes the issue to the manipulation of controls on portable device. But Apple has not done this. Their claims cover a specific implementation of said controls.

I guess I read these posts incorrectly.

...I would need to look at the patent's definition of "translation" to see if zooming is actually covered.

By my reading, any gesture involving the movement of an arbitrary number of fingers across the surface of the screen would be covered.

I still say my analogy stands. I'll touch it up a bit more for you again though!

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch' on a portable device to make a video game character jump or shoot!

 

[AvalonXQ]

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing a button', 'turning a knob', or 'flipping a switch' on a portable device to make a video game character jump or shoot!

And why wouldn't that be patentable if you were the first person to figure out how to implement doing it that way?

 

[This is The End]

The iPhone and iPad use it as described, to scroll frames within pages. Some sites, like facebook, will have a page (the news feed) that you scroll through, with one finger, then you click something, like '17 friends like this' which pops up a frame with the list of friends that liked it. How do you scroll through that list without scrolling the whole page? With two fingers. I discovered it by accident a few months ago, and its saved my *** a few times on various sites.

Ah, so they use it pretty much exactly as claimed! That's great to know; I actually wasn't aware of that.

So, who here is honestly going to argue that the inability to have this feature without paying Apple a small royalty is going to destroy the smartphone market?

OK, now I have to get my analogy shoes on, but I think I have nailed it:

Surely that isn't patentable. That would be like patenting 'pushing X # of buttons at once', on a portable device to make a video game character jump or shoot. That is called toggling, and there is much precedent for it.

Even if the effect is specific. Using 2 fingers to make a character do X (jump, shoot, move) would not be patentable.

This is how they have gotten around having multiple moves with only a few buttons for years....