or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Double-click' patent lawsuit attacks Apple's iPhone, iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Double-click' patent lawsuit attacks Apple's iPhone, iPad

post #1 of 71
Thread Starter 
A new patent lawsuit takes aim at a number of major technology companies, including Apple, HTC and Nokia, over a patent related to selecting interactive content with a double-click or double-tap.

Hopewell Culture and Design this month sued the companies claiming violation of U.S. Patent No. 7,171,625, entitled "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element." The patent was first filed for ownership in 2002 by assignee Actify, Inc., based in San Francisco, Calif.

The patents notes that double-clicking has been a feature of computers for some time, but it "has not been used to effect user input to a Web browser that uniquely corresponds to the double-click input."

With regard to Apple, Hopewell believes the company's mobile devices are in violation of the '625 patent. Specifically named in the suit are the iPhone and iPad, which it says have software that allows a user to "double click or double tap a visual element representing interactive content and interact with a second version of the interactive content."

Aside from naming the iPhone and iPad, the lawsuit makes no mention of what about iOS in particular it believes is in violation of its patent.



Also named in the suit is Adobe, as Hopewell hopes to prove to a court that its Adobe Reader software is in violation of the '625 patent. From HTC, the Droid Eris, Droid Incredible, Hero and EVO smartphones are specifically listed.

Also a target of the lawsuit is Finnish handset maker Nokia, as Hopewell believes its mobile devices, including the N900 and N97 are in violation of the cited patent. The remaining defendants in the suit are LG Electronics, Motorola, browser maker Opera, Palm, Quickoffice, and Samsung.

Hopewell aims to receive "adequate" damages from the numerous technology companies it is targeting. The lawsuit was filed in a U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, a region known for favorable outcomes in patent lawsuits.
post #2 of 71
They just HAD to get one more patent lawsuit before the end of the year
post #3 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new patent lawsuit takes aim at a number of major technology companies, including Apple, HTC and Nokia, over a patent related to selecting interactive content with a double-click or double-tap....

This sounds like the "inventor" of the double-click is trying to extend it to the double-tap, so he can get paid all over again. Shameless.

It clearly doesn't apply. The title alone: "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element."Implies an "apparatus" (mouse) with which you "click." Tapping with your finger instead of a mouse is entirely different.

Only this particular court (Texas ), would have even entertained the case at all.
post #4 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element."

So... trying to patent the CONCEPT of double-clicking.

Yeah. This will get laughed out of the courtroom. I just wish I was the judge to do the laughing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solipcyst View Post

Not again...

Not to be rude, but are you a throwaway account designed to make fun of solipsism?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #5 of 71
Are you serious? Wow.
post #6 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Hopewell Culture and Design this month sued the companies claiming violation of U.S. Patent No. 7,171,625, entitled "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element." The patent was first filed for ownership in 2002 by assignee Actify, Inc., based in San Francisco, Calif.

Hopewell aims to receive "adequate" damages from the numerous technology companies it is targeting. The lawsuit was filed in a U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, a region known for favorable outcomes in patent lawsuits.

Quote:
Not again...

Agreed. Both companies are based in California, and the suit is filed in Texas? That's a signature mark of a patent troll right there. Another: If you don't have one of the top three hits pointing to their site on a search engine for the organization. Any organization that can afford to pursue in court should have web site. The top ten hits I found were concerning this and other lawsuits.
post #7 of 71
How could the US patent office grant such duplicate idea? Double-clicking on an icon to initiate an action is an idea already implemented more than twenty five years ago by Apple. I wonder what Steve Jobs will react to such lawsuit.
post #8 of 71
Since this was invented by Xerox way before 2002 this had better be thrown out. This is Marshall, Texas though... When will national cases have a national jury? A small pool of jurors in a remote area have way too much power. It is a conflict of interest because they award huge payouts to get the lawyers to come to their town and use their services (airports, hotels, shops, etc.).

Someone needs to get a patent for patent trolling so they can sue all these bastards. They are immune to the reasons big companies don't usually sue each other because they don't make anything so they can't be counter sued. Most of these companies acquire the patents from another company, go to a court that doesn't care about the validity of patents (they just blindly enforce them with enormous payouts), sue everyone they can, then pocket the money and close up shop. They normally buy overly generic patents that should never have been granted in the first place so they can sue the largest number of companies.

According to an article linked on the Wikipedia Marshall Court House page, most of the lawyers involved in these patent trolling cases are former ambulance chasers that needed a new line of work after Texas put limits on medical malpractice payouts.
post #9 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

...
Not to be rude, but are you [Solipcyst] a throwaway account designed to make fun of solipsism?

It's the serial troll recently known as iLuv (probably tekstud).
post #10 of 71
WOW...no recession for lawyers. Maybe I should go back to lawyer school.....

btw..."Jury Trial Demanded". Demanded? Really? REALLY?
post #11 of 71
Agreed. The patent office should hire people who know to throw this stuff out.

It's not just that double click has been around since the Mac, or that the iOs devices are touch, not click, devices but that I can't think of any double touch actions on iOs either.

Dual touch, or multi touch, yes but not the same action twice in rapid succession with one finger.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #12 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's the serial troll recently known as iLuv (probably tekstud).

Yeah, groan. We'll see what his new ID will be when he pops back out of the cesspool.
post #13 of 71
Whichever patent office employee approved this patent should be fired. In it's most basic implementation, this is no different than double-clicking a folder in the Finder and then "interacting" with the contents of that folder. Double-clicking an interface element to then interact in another way with the data that element represents (whether it be Finder folder contents, a Word document, a graph of Quicken data that you can drill into for more details, etc) goes all the way back to the Xerox prototype systems that lead to the Macintosh, easily predating this patent.

Read the patent, and it will become clear that it should have never been issued in the first place. That is, if you can get past the massive amounts of rudimentary UI gobbledygook they used to obfuscate the fact that they didn't invent anything new.
post #14 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Agreed. The patent office should hire people who know to throw this stuff out.

It's not just that double click has been around since the Mac, or that the iOs devices are touch, not click, devices but that I can't think of any double touch actions on iOs either.

Dual touch, or multi touch, yes but not the same action twice in rapid succession with one finger.

Copy and Paste are double taps, but I don't know where a second copy of the content comes in.
post #15 of 71
These patents are getting ridiculous. May be Apple will just make us blow into the iPhone instead and patent that too.
post #16 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

This sounds like the "inventor" of the double-click is trying to extend it to the double-tap, so he can get paid all over again. Shameless.

It clearly doesn't apply. The title alone: "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element."Implies an "apparatus" (mouse) with which you "click." Tapping with your finger instead of a mouse is entirely different.

Only this particular court (Texas ), would have even entertained the case at all.

Another troll happy company looking for an easy payday, off the sweat of a real company.

But I believe they may not be looking at the double tap, but rather the use of double clicking the home button to get to active applications? Still useless, as this has been around since Xerox, but actually utilized by the first consumer PC's via the Lisa/Apple II.
post #17 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

This sounds like the "inventor" of the double-click is trying to extend it to the double-tap, so he can get paid all over again. Shameless.

It clearly doesn't apply. The title alone: "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element."Implies an "apparatus" (mouse) with which you "click." Tapping with your finger instead of a mouse is entirely different.

Only this particular court (Texas ), would have even entertained the case at all.

Time for Sol to change back to is previous footer
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #18 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

This sounds like the "inventor" of the double-click is trying to extend it to the double-tap, so he can get paid all over again. Shameless.

It clearly doesn't apply. The title alone: "Double-Clicking a Point-and-Click User Interface Apparatus to Enable a New Interaction with Content represented by an Active Visual Display Element."Implies an "apparatus" (mouse) with which you "click." Tapping with your finger instead of a mouse is entirely different.

Only this particular court (Texas ), would have even entertained the case at all.

He's also got a patent on the human finger.

We're all going to be paying a license for our fingers now.
post #19 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

These patents are getting ridiculous. May be Apple will just make us blow into the iPhone instead and patent that too.

That's no doubt already patented up to the hilt by the manufacturers of equipment for quadriplegic patients.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #20 of 71
You have to be fscking kidding me! Some PTO examiners need to get fired. How do you fix this broken system?!
post #21 of 71
I would think that the real issue is not that we're dealing with fingers, but that there are no double taps to interact with a web user interface element on the iOS platform. Double tap to zoom is an interaction with the viewport window, not an interface element (I don't believe that web site developers can write an interface element that responds to double tap on iOS, since the browser would intercept those events to treat them as a zoom request from the user).
post #22 of 71
Very bummed, had the idea of patenting "Method to touch other things" idea, should have gone for it.
post #23 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

You have to be fscking kidding me! Some PTO examiners need to get fired. How do you fix this broken system?!

If only the losers of patent trolling had to pay costs, they wouldn't lodge totally groundless claims. As it is, it only costs a few thousand dollars to get into it with the possibility of payouts in the hundreds of thousands or even millions. They can lose 99 out of 100 cases and the last one will pay for all the others with profit left over. If trolls' costs went up by tens of thousands of dollars, they'd hold fire.
post #24 of 71
Possibly the daftest patent since Amazon's 'One Click'.

I have an idea... has the triple click patent already gone? Genius coming through.
post #25 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

I have an idea... has the triple click patent already gone? Genius coming through.

If it has then Apple is probably in violation. If you double click a word in a text string, it selects the whole word. If you triple click it selects the whole line of text.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #26 of 71
This Hopewell Culture and Design doesn't appear to even have a website, at least according to a Google search.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #27 of 71
ondblclick is a javascript event handler that can do whatever a programmer wants to do with a double click, including interacting with a visual object to change its appearance etc. So who do you sue for that?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #28 of 71
When I first touched a Mac, you double-clicked to open an application. A single click on a page inserted the cursor on that page. The IDEA of a double-click cannot be patented. This is surely NOT what Ben Franklin and the rest had in mind with the idea of patents.
post #29 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

If it has then Apple is probably in violation. If you double click a word in a text string, it selects the whole word. If you triple click it selects the whole line of text.

Surely the result of any such action is specifically identified in a patent, i.e. A triple click could be used to do something other than what any patent covers without infringement.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #30 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Surely the result of any such action is specifically identified in a patent, i.e. A triple click could be used to do something other than what any patent covers without infringement.

Which is precisely what is wrong with this patent. There are probably an infinite number of distinctly different things one could do with a double click. Interact with a an active display element? That should cover pretty much everything. Right?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #31 of 71
how long before we are all sued by international megalacorp for infringing upon their patent of "acquiring information using multi-scan organic optical devices"?
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #32 of 71
Whats the deal with all These Trolls coming out from under the Bridge. Your pointless lawsuits are costing my stocks money!
post #33 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

Since this was invented by Xerox way before 2002 this had better be thrown out. ...

Actually, no. Xerox used a three button mouse.

Jobs thought that three buttons would be confusing, especially to new users. He decided Lisa would sport a one button mouse. He tasked the Lisa team with coming up with a way to do everything with a one button mouse. One of the things they came up with was the double-click. Lisa was released in 1983.
post #34 of 71
Companies like this are the hyena's in the computer world.
post #35 of 71
Absolutely assinine.
post #36 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

If it has then Apple is probably in violation. If you double click a word in a text string, it selects the whole word. If you triple click it selects the whole line of text.

OK 'Quadruple Click' then
post #37 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So... trying to patent the CONCEPT of double-clicking.

Yeah. This will get laughed out of the courtroom. I just wish I was the judge to do the laughing.



Not to be rude, but are you a throwaway account designed to make fun of solipsism?

No offense, but how about "Solip-sister"?
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
post #38 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

OK 'Quadruple Click' then

Sorry. A quadruple click is really just two double clicks in short succession so I will need to sue you twice.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #39 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Sorry. A quadruple click is really just two double clicks in short succession so I will need to sue you twice.

And you'll be countersued by the 4x single-click patent holder.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #40 of 71
Double-tapping on a screen to change a view, or to interact with content, or initiate some other action was part of Newton 2.0 interface programming circa 1996.

For example, a Newton user could double tap a blank space to bring up the keyboard; a double or triple tap could scroll items in a "list picker," or double tapping a word, misrecognized by Newton's handwriting recognizer, would bring pop up a list of possible corrections.

This should be a no brainer for Apple's attorneys.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Double-click' patent lawsuit attacks Apple's iPhone, iPad