or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Broad multitouch patent granted to Apple seen as 'huge blow' to rivals
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Broad multitouch patent granted to Apple seen as 'huge blow' to rivals

post #1 of 111
Thread Starter 
Apple this week was awarded an iPhone-related patent first filed in December of 2007, a victory that intellectual property experts believe will be significant.

On Tuesday, Apple was granted U.S. Patent No 7,966,578, entitled "Portable multifunction device, method, and graphical user interface for translating displayed content." And patent experts who spoke with PC Magazine said Apple's ownership of the invention could allow it to "bully" its rivals.

The story by author Damon Poeter characterized the patent as a "huge blow" to companies like HTC, Samsung, Motorola, Research in Motion and Nokia, who make competing smartphones with touchscreen displays.

"Apple's patent essentially gives it ownership of the capacitive multitouch interface the company pioneered with its iPhone, said one source who has been involved involved in intellectual property litigation on similar matters," the report said. "That's like to produce a new round of lawsuits over the now-ubiquitous multitouch interfaces used in smartphones."

The article noted that it's likely Apple could license its invention to other companies, earning the Cupertino, Calif., company a "tidy new income stream" from its rivals.

Over the years, Apple has been granted numerous patents related to multitouch (1, 2), and has even used its ownership of those inventions to take on its rivals in court. Late last year, Apple countersued Motorola, accusing the company of violating six patents related to multitouch.



Similarly, after HTC and Google brought multitouch features to the Android mobile operating system with the Nexus One smartphone, Apple filed a lawsuit against HTC. Apple has alleged that functionality within Android is in violation of patents Apple owns related to the iPhone.

Apple's latest intellectual property victory is particularly significant given that the current highly competitive smartphone landscape is fraught with litigation. Apple is currently engaged in a lawsuit with rival Samsung, in which it has accused Samsung of copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad.

Apple also recently settled its patent dispute with Finnish handset maker Nokia. To conclude their lengthy legal battle, Apple agreed to pay licensing fees to Nokia.
post #2 of 111
It will be interesting to see where this leads. Apple getting a royalty on every other smartphone sold? Tidy little income stream indeed.
post #3 of 111
Your touch belongs to us!
post #4 of 111
Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow. I do hope this post ends up first simply to make sure everybody realizes this article is completely bogus.

So I urge everyone to actually read the claims in the patent before responding to this article. The patent is good for Apple but it is by no means broad.
post #5 of 111
All the Android phones just use the Android OS to detect multi-touch. For example, the Google Map application is written by Google. It will respond to multi-touch for any Android phone.
post #6 of 111
There are only two outcomes because of this.

Incredibly good or incredibly bad.

Incredibly good: This patent is upheld and everyone on the planet pays royalties to Apple for the tens of millions of devices shipped already. If they want to stop, they start making devices that aren't directly copied from Apple.

Incredibly bad: This patent is seen as "too broad" and overturned, along with Apple's others, making it possible for all Android devices to look identical to the iPhone in both hardware and software, even allowing for identical icons.

I don't see a middle ground happening.

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 #7 of 111
Apple took a huge risk and leapt into the dark on the iPhone, I won't repeat the nay sayers at the time. It was ground breaking, innovative, and industry transforming, therefore, it would seem that Apple should benefit from that risk and not be merely copied. Innovation can happen, e.g., MS well received Windows Mobile 7 UI and model, it makes it hard for copycats to steal the innovation.

Apple does not do licenses, it is not their business model, so at a minimum if the patent stands they will expect competitors to do real innovation and differentiation at least at the UI level demonstrated by MS. For Google this will be a challenge, since their innovation is basically to copy Apple with free software on top of free LINUX. And rights holders, MPEG, JAVA, and Apple should be happy with the minor tweaks done to "differentiate." This disregard for license rights is systemic at Google and contributes to their rep with content providers etc.

Google is clearly able to innovate [some of their Android features e.g., notifications], but they've got to make the serious investment in real innovation across the OS and UI. That costs money and time, 2 years for MS, and that give Apple a market advantage. So they copy and then claim the market needs them to compete in spite of patent rights violations, that by the way, Job's emphasized at the launch in 2007. So my guess is Apple is going to want compensation for past abuses from Google or the cell phone companies, especially SAMSUNG, HTC, and Motorola and that they desist in copying Apple and do their own innovation, maybe license MS OS and UI. This will be irony, but reflects the right thing being done.
post #8 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Apple took a huge risk and leapt into the dark on the iPhone, I won't repeat the nay sayers at the time. It was ground breaking, innovative, and industry transforming, therefore, it would seem that Apple should benefit from that risk and not be merely copied. Innovation can happen, e.g., MS well received Windows Mobile 7 UI and model, it makes it hard for copycats to steal the innovation.

Apple does not do licenses, it is not their business model, so at a minimum if the patent stands they will expect competitors to do real innovation and differentiation at least at the UI level demonstrated by MS. For Google this will be a challenge, since their innovation is basically to copy Apple with free software on top of free LINUX. And rights holders, MPEG, JAVA, and Apple should be happy with the minor tweaks done to "differentiate." This disregard for license rights is systemic at Google and contributes to their rep with content providers etc.

Google is clearly able to innovate [some of their Android features e.g., notifications], but they've got to make the serious investment in real innovation across the OS and UI. That costs money and time, 2 years for MS, and that give Apple a market advantage. So they copy and then claim the market needs them to compete in spite of patent rights violations, that by the way, Job's emphasized at the launch in 2007. So my guess is Apple is going to want compensation for past abuses from Google or the cell phone companies, especially SAMSUNG, HTC, and Motorola and that they desist in copying Apple and do their own innovation, maybe license MS OS and UI. This will be irony, but reflects the right thing being done.

Well said! I agree, Apple has put years of resources in to the design and development of their products and software. It is wrong for other companies just to be able to get and iPhone and reverse engineer it.
post #9 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

Your touch belongs to us!

No, you got it wrong. The proper response is "All your touch are belong to us."
post #10 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

There are only two outcomes because of this.

Incredibly good or incredibly bad.

Incredibly good: This patent is upheld and everyone on the planet pays royalties to Apple for the tens of millions of devices shipped already. If they want to stop, they start making devices that aren't directly copied from Apple.

Incredibly bad: This patent is seen as "too broad" and overturned, along with Apple's others, making it possible for all Android devices to look identical to the iPhone in both hardware and software, even allowing for identical icons.

I don't see a middle ground happening.

Well the courts will have to go back to when this patent was filed and see how many other mobile devices were already in the market with capacitive multi touch screens (0) and determine the validity of the patent. The fact that there are so many multi touch mobile devices today on the market, should not have any affect on the ruling. The courts may decide at this point that Apple cannot prohibit or ban other devices, but at the very least, Apple will be able to charge a fair licensing fee for the use of the IP.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #11 of 111
Boom!
Can I get my icons in cornflower blue?
Reply
Can I get my icons in cornflower blue?
Reply
post #12 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow. I do hope this post ends up first simply to make sure everybody realizes this article is completely bogus.

So I urge everyone to actually read the claims in the patent before responding to this article. The patent is good for Apple but it is by no means broad.


Thank you internet forums lawyer for you interpretation.
Can I get my icons in cornflower blue?
Reply
Can I get my icons in cornflower blue?
Reply
post #13 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Apple does not do licenses, it is not their business model

Sure they do, it's just not their primary income stream, but they do license their tech in lots of instances. In some casees it's an opensource license such as webkit. In some cases they're under FRAND terms such as Apple's AAC patents which were included in the MP4 standard. In some instances as part of cross licensing agreements such as with MS.

In the case of multitouch patents Apple will probably end up licensing, albeit at a steep price - a refusal to do so would mean that every other handset maker would fight tooth and nail to have them invalidated.

So while Apple don't license entire OSes the way that Google or MS do, they certainly do license patents.
post #14 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow. I do hope this post ends up first simply to make sure everybody realizes this article is completely bogus.

So I urge everyone to... etc etc

Why don't you summarize it for us (since you seem to already know), instead of yelling and claiming AI should be ashamed, etc.?
post #15 of 111
I'm withholding judgement until I can see another report from someone other than PCMag. All of these stories on Apple sites and blogs point back to that one article and I'm not sure I can trust the info inside it.
post #16 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow.

It can be as narrow as ever, as long as it's just broad enough that the competition infringe on it, which seems entirely likely in this case. It doesn't have to be used in an offensive move but a defensive one.
post #17 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Apple took a huge risk and leapt into the dark on the iPhone.

I fully agree with you. But I'd like to add that Apple's revolutionary innovation with the iPhone was comparable to their innovation with the Macintosh back in the mid-80s. The significant difference here is that with the iPhone, Apple aggressively patented their ideas before showing their hand to the competition. The old saying goes something like: "Those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them." In this case, I believe Steve Jobs fully learned the lessons and we're not going to see a Mac/Windows repeat!
post #18 of 111
Now lets see what happens. It's going to be wild.
post #19 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Incredibly bad: This patent is seen as "too broad" and overturned, along with Apple's others, making it possible for all Android devices to look identical to the iPhone in both hardware and software, even allowing for identical icons.

I don't see a middle ground happening.

There are lots of different kinds of IP and this sort of software patent is only one of the arrows in Apple's quiver. iPhone's UI is also protected by registered TMs on the icons, by design patents on the enclosures and by trade dress. The multi-touch patents are potentially the most lucrative because they would apply to practically any smartphone made from here on, but the case against Samsung doesn't rest on them.

So middle ground is entirely possible.
post #20 of 111
Pardon me whilst I go grab some popcorn, because this is going to be one mother of a show!

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #21 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by delreyjones View Post

The old saying goes something like: "Those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them." In this case, I believe Steve Jobs fully learned the lessons and we're not going to see a Mac/Windows repeat!

It's not actually that old - Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it - Jorge Santayana (1905).
post #22 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It's not actually that old - Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it - Jorge Santayana (1905).

He's condemned to repeat it....
post #23 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It's not actually that old - Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it - Jorge Santayana (1905).

To be fair, that was 106 years ago, I think its safe to call it an "old saying".

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #24 of 111
deleted
post #25 of 111
The patent, AFAIK, only covers one-finger web page scrolling. With two-finger scrolling on items within that web page. Not terribly broad, but it cuts right to the heart of the "internet experience" on a mobile device. How else could you conceivably scroll a web page? With 3 fingers? Four fingers?

Also, this judgement is likely just the tip of the Apple multi-touch patent iceberg. Apple filed a 290-page patent called "the iPhone patent" and I'm sure every little detail of the iPhone GUI (and that of other existing and future Apple devices) is covered in that document.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #26 of 111
This is gold, Jerry, GOLD!!!!!!
post #27 of 111
After reading the first few lines in the patent, it looks like it applies to switching pages on a multi-touch device. It is narrow in that it specifically states that the idea being patented is the switch from one screen to another using either a vertical or horizontal swipe. It is unique in that during that swipe, you can see elements of both screen in real time as they are changed, depending on the speed at which the swipe is delivered.

Swipe slow and you will be able to see content from both screens, swipe fast and you will watch the contents of each screen wiz by...

All Android smartphones seem to do this on the home screen and on the applications screen... WebOS uses this kind of UI for multitasking and so does the PlayBook... So it will be very interesting to see how this turns out.
post #28 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow. I do hope this post ends up first simply to make sure everybody realizes this article is completely bogus.

So I urge everyone to actually read the claims in the patent before responding to this article. The patent is good for Apple but it is by no means broad.

Wrong! This is a very broad patent, as stated by experts that PC Magazine consulted, and by others as well.
post #29 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Ya know, when you produce one of the most popular blog sites for all things Apple, then maybe we'll take your word for it. As of now, I trust AI's reporting until proven wrong (and I don't remember that ever happening).

The claims in the patent are in actuality very narrow. I urge you to read the publicly available information.

As for AI they have been wrong so many times it is now a running joke. The quality of the articles hosted here have gone down considerably over the last few months. Especially in regards to accuracy and technical knowledge.
post #30 of 111
Wasn't it just a few years ago the Apple faithful said, when Apple was being sued over patents, that shouldn't a company just work on being innovative to stay ahead of the competition? Litigation is a losers way of fighting back, or something along those lines. And there was just a thread yesterday that said that Android devices are not impacting Apple at all. Apple is making as many devices as they possibly can. So i guess it just depends whos side your on. I guess if Apple is suing it is all for the betterment of humanity. Long live the Apple Reich!!!
post #31 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The claims in the patent are in actuality very narrow. I urge you to read the publicly available information.

As for AI they have been wrong so many times it is now a running joke. The quality of the articles hosted here have gone down considerably over the last few months. Especially in regards to accuracy and technical knowledge.

Considering the patents they have just bought affect EVERY competing device on the market, I think thats a very broad range indeed. I also beleive they mean 'broad' as in the number of applications this patent can relate to - given that swiping to change views is pretty much one of the basic principals of touch screen technology - well, you can figure it out from there.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #32 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacVicta View Post

I'm withholding judgement until I can see another report from someone other than PCMag. All of these stories on Apple sites and blogs point back to that one article and I'm not sure I can trust the info inside it.

I trust it, as they asked well known patent attorneys their opinion. From the bit I've seen of it, it covers not just a capacitive screen, but the way we interact with it.

One finger and multiple fingers gestures to move and activate icons and functions on touch devices is what the patent covers. It also covers this in a more specific way, which saves it from covering touch entirely. But the way this is done in the patent does cover pretty much the way everyone is doing it now.

As is, it seems to cover every interpretation of a touch device.

So what we have here is a patent that may be considered to be "essential". Essential in the way of patents that they and Apple were posturing around until recently. If so, then Apple could be forced to license it According to FOSS, the way Nokia is required to for their essential patents.

While this wouldn't change Apples profitability too much, it could add a billion a year to it, depending on what they would get per phone, and how many touch phones were to sell each year, and, of course, whether other companies figure out a way around it.
post #33 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sipadan View Post

This is gold, Jerry, GOLD!!!!!!



"These lawsuits are making me thirsty..."

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 #34 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

There are lots of different kinds of IP and this sort of software patent is only one of the arrows in Apple's quiver. iPhone's UI is also protected by registered TMs on the icons, by design patents on the enclosures and by trade dress. The multi-touch patents are potentially the most lucrative because they would apply to practically any smartphone made from here on, but the case against Samsung doesn't rest on them.

So middle ground is entirely possible.

Yes, it is. It would depend on just how Apple would use this. They could themselves interpret it narrowly, and go to companies for a narrow license. They could also interpret it broadly, and attempt to go that way.

I would think that as long as Apple doesn't attempt to use this to strangle the industry, they will get away with it.

Interestingly enough, if the patent system moved much more quickly, and Apple had received this patent by the end of 2007, before others attempted to compete, they would have been allowed to prevent direct competition, as it hadn't yet developed. But once an industry does develop, companies aren't allowed to kill it with patents.
post #35 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by phalanx View Post

Wasn't it just a few years ago the Apple faithful said, when Apple was being sued over patents, that shouldn't a company just work on being innovative to stay ahead of the competition? Litigation is a losers way of fighting back, or something along those lines. And there was just a thread yesterday that said that Android devices are not impacting Apple at all. Apple is making as many devices as they possibly can. So i guess it just depends whos side your on. I guess if Apple is suing it is all for the betterment of humanity. Long live the Apple Reich!!!

No one has sued anybody. This is simply about Apple being awarded a patent. We'll have to see if Apple brings any litigation from this.

And Apple suing a company for patent violations against a device or devices they have actually brought to market is far different from patent trolls like Paul Allen who never did a damn thing with their vague patents except sit back and wait for someone to actually create something and make revenue with it before deciding to swoop in and demand a cut of the pie.

If Apple violated someone else's legitimate patent, I'm all for them having to pay a penalty or license the product. Apple actually does license lots of patents held by others. (See the recent Nokia decision.)
post #36 of 111
It always amazes me how Inscestual Relationships in that tech industry happen:
  • Apple's iPhone gets copied by Android, yet Apple uses Google Maps, GV etc.
  • Apple's iPhone gets copied by Samsung, yet Apple uses Samsung RAM, Flash and more..

All those suits are there to adjust the $$ Math of who pays whom and how much, etc!!!

Lawyers get paid, while their fees are used to offset the Taxes those Corporations pay on their Profits!

In the end, I wonder if there is any advantage for doing business honestly from the beginning, and use the those Litigation Costs for R&D, thus reinvesting in themselves, and maybe making products more affordable earlier? It'd be great to see your thoughts on that!

Another Opportunity Cost of that madness is that none of us will live forever, and that includes everyone in all those tech companies! Thus, it's sad to see all that distraction , taking away the focus from the creative process of making great products to make our lives more fun!!!

End of Idealism Attack, back to LIFE!!! Happy Summer 2011 to all!!!

Go  Apple!!!

Reply

Go  Apple!!!

Reply
post #37 of 111
This is NOT a huge blow to Apple's competitors.

Patent lawsuits can take 10 or 20 years to settle, at which point this technology will be outdated anyways.

Plus, the settlements are just cash payouts anyways, so the infringing companies still get to steal and use the technology anyways.
post #38 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Really AI should be ashamed of itself! This is not a broad patent at all and in fact is rather narrow. I do hope this post ends up first simply to make sure everybody realizes this article is completely bogus.

So I urge everyone to actually read the claims in the patent before responding to this article. The patent is good for Apple but it is by no means broad.

Y'know, I can answer in even bigger type whenever I want.

But if I have something worth saying, it's the saying and saying it well that matters. The size of your point is not the point. And doesn't make a point.

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #39 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Wrong! This is a very broad patent, as stated by experts that PC Magazine consulted, and by others as well.

I really don't care what PC Magazine says nor do I really care about their experts. The only thing that count is the claims in the patent which you can see below.
Quote:
What is claimed is:

1. A method, comprising: at a portable multifunction device with one or more processors, memory, and a touch screen display; displaying a portion of web page content in a stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein the portion of web page content includes: a frame displaying a portion of frame content, and other content of the web page, comprising content of the web page other than the frame content; detecting a translation gesture by a single finger on or near the touch screen display; in response to detecting the translation gesture by the single finger, translating the web page content to display a new portion of web page content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein translating the web page content includes simultaneously translating the displayed portion of the frame content and the other content of the web page; detecting a translation gesture by two fingers on or near the touch screen display; and in response to detecting the translation gesture by the two fingers, translating the frame content to display a new portion of frame content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, without translating the other content of the web page.

2. A method, comprising: at a portable multifunction device with one or more processors, memory, and a touch screen display: displaying a portion of page content in a stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein the portion of page content includes: a frame displaying a portion of frame content, and other content of the page; detecting an N-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display; in response to detecting the N-finger translation gesture, translating the page content to display a new portion of page content in the stationary application window, on the touch screen display, wherein translating the page content includes simultaneously translating the displayed portion of the frame content and the other content of the page; detecting an M-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display, where M is a different number than N; and in response to detecting the M-finger translation gesture, translating the frame content in the stationary application window, to display a new portion of frame content on the touch screen display without translating the other content of the page.

3. The method of claim 2, where N is equal to 1 and M is equal to 2.

4. The method of claim 2, wherein the page content is web page content.

5. The method of claim 2, wherein the page content is a word processing, spreadsheet, email or presentation document.

6. The method of claim 2, wherein the frame content comprises a map.

7. The method of claim 2, wherein the frame content comprises a scrollable list of items.

8. A graphical user interface on a portable multifunction device with one or more processors, memory, and a touch screen display, comprising: a portion of page content in a stationary application window on the touch screen display, which includes: a frame displaying a portion of frame content, and other content of the page; wherein: in response to detecting an N-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display, the page content is translated to display a new portion of page content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein translating the page content includes simultaneously translating the displayed portion of the frame content and the other content of the page; and in response to detecting an M-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display, where M is a different number than N, the frame content is translated to display a new portion of frame content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, without translating the other content of the page.

9. A portable multifunction device, comprising: a touch screen display; one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including: instructions for displaying a portion of page content in a stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein the portion of page content includes: a frame displaying a portion of frame content, and other content of the page; instructions for detecting an N-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display; instructions for translating the page content, in response to detecting the N-finger translation gesture, to display a new portion of page content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein the instructions for translating the page content include instructions for simultaneously translating the displayed portion of the frame content and the other content of the page; instructions for detecting an M-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display, where M is a different number than N; and instructions for translating the frame content, in response to detecting the M-finger translation gesture, to display a new portion of frame content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, without translating the other content of the page.

10. The portable multifunction device of claim 9, where N is equal to 1 and M is equal to 2.

11. The portable multifunction device of claim 9, wherein the page content is web page content.

12. The portable multifunction device of claim 9, wherein the page content is a word processing, spreadsheet, email or presentation document.

13. The portable multifunction device of claim 9, wherein the frame content comprises a map.

14. The portable multifunction device of claim 9, wherein the frame content comprises a scrollable list of items.

15. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by an electronic device with a display, cause the electronic device to: display a portion of page content display in a stationary application window on the touch screen display, wherein the portion of page content includes: a frame displaying a portion of frame content, and other content of the page; detect an N-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display; translate the page content, in response to detecting the N-finger translation to display a new portion of page content in the stationary application window on the touch screen, wherein translating the page content includes simultaneously translating the displayed portion of the frame content and the other content of the page; detect an M-finger translation gesture on or near the touch screen display, where M is a different number than N; and translate the frame content, in response to detecting the M-finger translation gesture, to display a new portion of frame content in the stationary application window on the touch screen display, without translating the other content of the page.

16. The computer readable storage medium of claim 15, where N is equal to 1 and M is equal to 2.

17. The computer readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the page content is web page content.

18. The computer readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the page content is a word processing, spreadsheet, email or presentation document.

19. The computer readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the frame content comprises a map.

20. The computer readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the frame content comprises a scrollable list of items.

The claims, the important part of a patent, are very narrow if you read the above. To call the claims board is just inflammatory.

in a nut shell the patent covers using more than one finger in a content window, contained within another, to scroll that content without impacting the larger containing window. It is an extremely specific patent and does not materially effect the competition as there are many methods available to address scrolling within a sub window. A common approach will likely be tapping a content window to select it then scrolling with one finger.

If you don't like my cut and past job you can go here: http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...S=PN/7,966,578 (I hope I got the entire link there)

In any event I can see how this patent can be called broad at all. It covers specific use of two finger scrolling. Something that is unique and innovative from Apple. Because of the tight focus of the patent it does not materially effect the ability of other to compete.

Frankly this patent is only a problem if alternative systems have been copying Apple directly. To bad for them if they have been to lazy to come up with their own solutions.
post #40 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

This is NOT a huge blow to Apple's competitors.

Patent lawsuits can take 10 or 20 years to settle, at which point this technology will be outdated anyways.

Touchscreens aren't ever going away.

Quote:
Plus, the settlements are just cash payouts anyways, so the infringing companies still get to steal and use the technology anyways.

Unless, you know, they're told that they can't.

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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Broad multitouch patent granted to Apple seen as 'huge blow' to rivals