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 - Page 3

post #81 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Why do you think so many people who have used Apple products in the past would abandon them for non-Apple products?

I have absolutely no idea what your question means (or asks).
post #82 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigawire View Post

Thank you internet forums lawyer for you interpretation.

Reminds me of those beer commercials. Mr. Internet Forums Lawyer.
post #83 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

No, you got it wrong. The proper response is "All your touch are belong to us."

Actually.....its, "Can't touch this"
post #84 of 111
I think this covers it pretty nicely....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxGpo...layer_embedded
post #85 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Patent lawsuits can take 10 or 20 years to settle, at which point this technology will be outdated anyways.

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

If Apple sues and wins and wants to get a permanent injunction they will easily get one because Apple is selling in the market. Permanent injunctions use to be automatic and are still the norm. The compulsory license is a recent invention and is only relevant in cases where the patentee is not a market participant (e.g., the so-called alleged "troll").

In fact, if Apple were to get really aggressive, they might be able to get a "preliminary injunction". These are awarded at the very beginning of litigation. The key to getting a preliminary injunction is to show "irreparable harm", which Apple should be able to show. The infringement also has to be likely, but not yet proven.
post #86 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut View Post


I'm obviously not a lawyer, and didn't imply that I was, however, I do understand the technology, and was trying to clear up a misconception that I've seen here based on not understanding the difference between single finger scrolling and the patent claim of being able to do that while two finger scrolling within a frame.

Let me help you out here. You are correct, the claims require two gestures using a different number of fingers. None of the claims cover just single finger scrolling of a frame. And yes, I'm a patent attorney. This question is so simple there is no way the Supreme Court would grant cert.

Whether the claim is broad or narrow is in the eye of the beholder. If the consumer wants a user interface that provides different scrolling functionalities using a different number of fingers, then it's broad. If you define the market as something else, it's probably narrow.
post #87 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Nobody plays the patent game better than Steve!

Buh Bye, Android!

True. Apple learned from the past with MicroSoft copying. It appears that everyone is copying Apple now-a-days and Apple has to defend their investment dollars.

Android is old news. 2011 will be huge for Apple.
post #88 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut View Post

I would suggest taking all of the comments ever posted here as opinion. I've yet to see anyone here post, "I'm posting on behalf of the US Supreme Court, and here is our ruling on the matter". Until then, or this gets as far as it gets in terms of the legal course, then it's all opinion of how things will be interpreted and whether the patent could/will be challenged.

Your comment makes it sound like the Supreme Court's decisions aren't an "opinion". You do realize that the Court's written decision is called the "Opinion."

Secondly, I seriously doubt you'll see the Supreme Court doing "claim interpretation". The Supreme Court usually only decides questions of legal doctrine.

Thirdly, when it comes to patent law, the Supreme Court is barely competent at establishing legal doctrine. It is hardly the court to defer to for claim interpretation. The appellate court you are looking for is the Federal Circuit, which was established to hear patent cases (precisely because the other courts lack sufficient expertise).
post #89 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

Let me help you out here. You are correct, the claims require two gestures using a different number of fingers. None of the claims cover just single finger scrolling of a frame. And yes, I'm a patent attorney. This question is so simple there is no way the Supreme Court would grant cert.

Whether the claim is broad or narrow is in the eye of the beholder. If the consumer wants a user interface that provides different scrolling functionalities using a different number of fingers, then it's broad. If you define the market as something else, it's probably narrow.

You have confirmed that you're a lawyer. I have no clue from your post whether you said yes, no, or maybe.

Nice. A real skill.
post #90 of 111
I'm not sure if this is a good idea.

The reason is simple: the Federal government has gone after companies that abuse patent laws to protect market share--especially a number of famous cases against the United Shoe Machinery Company in the first half of the 20th Century.

Apple--being increasingly dominant in the cellphone market and effectively the biggest company in the tablet computer market--is coming really close to being closely monitored so their activities don't deliberately destroy another company like Microsoft did during the 1990's.
post #91 of 111
It won't come as a surprise if we see Nokia and the likes dropping their lawsuites and cross licensing their IP.
post #92 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

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.

Agree completely, it is quite narrow scope of patent and such scenarios can be easily avoided. Still I don't understand why such thing was awarded to Apple : there is nothing really innovative about it, it is just obvious solution that everyone would suggest if wanted to to position frame within a scrollable pane.
post #93 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

Agree completely, it is quite narrow scope of patent and such scenarios can be easily avoided. Still I don't understand why such thing was awarded to Apple : there is nothing really innovative about it, it is just obvious solution that everyone would suggest if wanted to to position frame within a scrollable pane.

More obvious than 1-click? The patent office seems to have a problem with software patents in recognising what is obvious from what isn't. Actually they have a problem with hardware patents too, the laser patent which was worth millions was awarded to a grad student who realized that Charles Townes hadn't fully patented the idea yet.
post #94 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Android looks exactly like iOS. It's pointless.

Yes, nobody can distinguish iOS from Android
post #95 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmj2u View Post

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.

So Apple could potentially cripple the mobile industry?
post #96 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

I am very glad that Apple got this patent. I don't find gestures with two or more fingers particularly convenient or intuitive, and the last thing I would like is everyone starting to copy them. It's bad enough that the likes of Samsung get a very flexible and customizable OS for free, then waste the opportunity to make something good of it, and instead ape Apple's square grid of static icons...

We could have this conversation all over again.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #97 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

More obvious than 1-click?

What would be 1-click good for ? If you want to scroll the outer pane and at the same time scroll with the content within the embedded frame, this is really the first solution that comes to mind.
post #98 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

What would be 1-click good for ? If you want to scroll the outer pane and at the same time scroll with the content within the embedded frame, this is really the first solution that comes to mind.

You misunderstand me. 1-click is a patent and trademark belonging to Amazon that lets you buy stuff with just one click because in essence you already logged in and you turned it on. Technically it's about as unadvanced as you can get, but they have a software patent on it, and Apple pay them for it so that the iTunes store can sell things with a single click.
post #99 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by NinjaBladeMastery View Post

So Apple could potentially cripple the mobile industry?

No, because the person you were replying from completely misinterpreted the patent. Reading the first few lines of a claim is never enough
post #100 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.

Just read the patent. It is *very* broad, it appears to basically grants a patent to any multitouch gesture for navigating in an app. That is, it grants a patent to the notion that multi-touch gestures interact with the UI as if they are touching a physical document.

If Apple does not license this, it may mean that the competition will need to re-invent their UIs to use a different metaphor. That would be HUGE.
post #101 of 111
Apparently too broad. Apple's multi-touch patent application was denied today.

http://9to5mac.com/2011/09/26/apple-...lDay+%289+to+5
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #102 of 111
deleted
post #103 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

I think that's just the trademark for the term "multitouch", not the patent on the technology itself (which on other sites was described as not being so far-reaching after all).

Gotcha. You're absolutely correct. The matching application dates for the patent and the trademark got me.

Thanks for the correction!
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #104 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Gotcha. You're absolutely correct. The matching application dates for the patent and the trademark got me.

How did that "get you"? You just linked to the story (in another thread) a few minutes earlier!
post #105 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

How did that "get you"? You just linked to the story (in another thread) a few minutes earlier!

Huh Ummm. . . for the same reason I said. I was confused by the matched filing dates. I then went back and corrected the post you mention in the other thread.

Go to 9to5Mac and you'll see I wasn't the only one initially confused.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #106 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Go to 9to5Mac and you'll see I wasn't the only one initially confused.

I did!

"Apple has been denied the multi-touch trademark by Patent Office"

I can see how that would be difficult for you to understand.

Perhaps you should consider spending some of your time educating and correcting the anonymous numnuts over at 9to5Mac?
post #107 of 111
I've never claimed to be as smart as you guys. I'll make an occasional mistake.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #108 of 111
deleted
post #109 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Today's winner of the AppleInsider Forum Award for Outstanding Achievements in Pedantry goes to piot, for his best-of-breed accomplishments in this thread.

Long after Gatorguy humbly acknowledged having made a simple mistake, piot's on the scene, making post after post berating Gatorguy in the most trivial and tedious way possible.

Congratulations, piot, on your achievement.

Wow, you do all band together, don't you?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #110 of 111
Edit)
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #111 of 111
deleted
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