Apple wins portable device UI 'scroll bar' patent

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 73
    gabe1kgabe1k Posts: 8member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    I don't think you understand the patent system.  You don't get a patent unless it's a unique and/or new implementation or process.  The patent office doesn't just hand them out to anyone who applies.  



     


    You are correct in that I don't understand the patent system as well as some people. However, a patent for scroll bars on a mobile device seems to me like something other companies could also apply for. 


     


    That being said, I really haven't used any other mobile OS's so it's entirely possible that no other mobile device uses this ui element and that it's unique to Apple.

  • Reply 22 of 73
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


     


    Actually, the patent system tends to hand out patents now and worry about their validity later. That's why all of these patent cases that go to court are so time-consuming and costly.



     


    That is just not accurate. The patent application and review process is lengthy and very detailed.

  • Reply 23 of 73
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gabe1k View Post


     


    You are correct in that I don't understand the patent system as well as some people. However, a patent for scroll bars on a mobile device seems to me like something other companies could also apply for. 


     


    That being said, I really haven't used any other mobile OS's so it's entirely possible that no other mobile device uses this ui element and that it's unique to Apple.



     


    You must keep in mind that the summary of the patent found here is not completely accurate. If you want the real details, read the patent. It is very specific.

  • Reply 24 of 73
    See below.
  • Reply 25 of 73
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MattBookAir View Post



    Indeed. I find it difficult to imagine Apple users would bother to cruise the Android forums. Then again, while AppleInsider often shows up in the main Google News pages, for example, I've never seen an Android site there, so I guess nobody but the Android devotees knows about them.


     


    It speaks to the level of interest in all things Apple... still.

  • Reply 26 of 73
    Strange there are so many anti-Apple trolls on a site called "AppleInsider". Guess the Android users are feeling heat.

    Indeed. I find it difficult to imagine Apple users would bother to cruise the Android forums. Then again, while AppleInsider often shows up in the main Google News pages, for example, I've never seen an Android site there, so I guess nobody but the Android devotees knows about them.
  • Reply 27 of 73
    bmason1270bmason1270 Posts: 258member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gabe1k View Post


     


    You are correct in that I don't understand the patent system as well as some people. However, a patent for scroll bars on a mobile device seems to me like something other companies could also apply for. 


     


    That being said, I really haven't used any other mobile OS's so it's entirely possible that no other mobile device uses this ui element and that it's unique to Apple.



    It doesn't matter if anyone else uses the element or not. Apple filed for and was granted a patent for it.


     


    Everyone acts like the design doesn't matter. That, "well it is software", and oh sooooooo obvious that dissapearing scroll bars are like the wheel. That, if i write the code just a little different to achieve the same affect then no problem. It isn't stealing. "The look and feel is the same for the element but the 'code' is different so no problem"


     


    Well, if GM redesigns the Corvette to look nearly identical to a Ferrari but the engine is still the Vettes would Ferrari not sue? Would GM get away with saying, "well it is still a Corvette engine, The comparisons to design are mearly in response to aerodynamics and of obvious and purposeful design elements."

  • Reply 28 of 73
    minicaptminicapt Posts: 219member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bain Kennedy View Post


    Umm I'm an Apple fan and all but really???


     


    You mean there's absolutely no prior art to this?  I had J2ME apps that I built that did this.



    The patent under discussion contains a list of prior patents considered relevant to this one. The earliest listed is dated 1989.


    - that patent contains a list of relevant/associated patents, the earliest of which is dated 1977.


    - that patent, in turn has it own list of relevant patents, the earliest of which is dated 1966.


     


    i think it probable that 'prior art' is being involved in some esoteric fashion, somehow.


     


    Cheers

  • Reply 29 of 73
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,297member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pragmatous View Post


     


    Because it's software development and software development ideas doesn't deserve the right to be patented. When you're building a house and the basic fundamental tools are patented so only "XYZ" company has the rights to use it that creates a monopoly. Last I knew promoting monopolies are illegal. Software development is similar to building a house. You shouldn't be able to patent check boxes and scroll bars because they are fundamental to software development. If you design an engine to create video games or create a application to perform a task that I can see patenting. You should not be able to patent basic fundamental tools required to develop software such as the slide to unlock or checkboxes. Patents were never designed to stifle innovation and promote monopolies.



    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!  Really!!!!!!!! WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO DECIDE WHICH CREATIVE DESIGNS DESERVE TO BE PROTECTED?!!!!!  If you took the time to read TROLL  you would know that there is more to the patent that just being a scroll bar.  There are certain behaviors that Apple designed to happen when other events are present.  It is what makes the OS feel the way it does.  Its not about the scroll bar.  Its the fact that it is invisible unless certain conditions are present.  This is what they are protecting.  They designed their customer experience and that effort that deserves protection, and that by the way no-one cared enough about to focus on even after Apple had been doing so for years.  Some tried to out do them but and was supported by the likes of you.  Web OS, Surface and the like.  A monopoly is when consumers don't have a choice.  They have lots of them, but if they want Apple's elegance they have to buy an Apple product.  If those you support want to provide an elegant experience, they should recognize problems and come up with solutions on their own that fit them.  Keep in mind. Apple provides lots of support to open source, including the browser engine being used on most mobiles.  Android is suppose to be completely open source so whatever they do is available to use or not use. All of those open source code writers should be able to create their own elegant design solutions.  

  • Reply 30 of 73
    schmidm77schmidm77 Posts: 223member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pragmatous View Post


     


    Because it's software development and software development ideas doesn't deserve the right to be patented. When you're building a house and the basic fundamental tools are patented so only "XYZ" company has the rights to use it that creates a monopoly. Last I knew promoting monopolies are illegal. Software development is similar to building a house. You shouldn't be able to patent check boxes and scroll bars because they are fundamental to software development. If you design an engine to create video games or create a application to perform a task that I can see patenting. You should not be able to patent basic fundamental tools required to develop software such as the slide to unlock or checkboxes. Patents were never designed to stifle innovation and promote monopolies.



     


    The whole point of patents is to grant a monopoly. I agree that this patent is ridiculous, but I don't agree that software patents should never enjoy patent protection. Similar to if you develop a new type of pump that is 20% more efficient at pumping water (which is patentable), if you develop a clever new technique for video compression that is 20% more efficient, I think that should be equally patentable.

  • Reply 31 of 73
    caliminiuscaliminius Posts: 944member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

    (RANT, RANT, RANT)


     


    No offense, but on the surface, this patent sounds absolutely absurd. A disappearing scroll bar? Really? Maybe there's something unique in it's implementation that warrants protection, but it sounds pretty stupid. Call me a fandroid if you want (I own an iPhone 4S BTW), but I'm going to call it like I see it. It really doesn't seem very different to hiding the OS X Dock or the Windows Taskbar. And, no I'm not technologically stupid enough to think that taking it to a mobile OS makes it particularly different. Hiding a GUI element to free up screen real estate isn't some new invention.

  • Reply 32 of 73
    schmidm77schmidm77 Posts: 223member


    Hiding interface items until some event occurs, for whatever reason, is not even close to an original concept. So Apple applied it to scrollbars, big deal.

  • Reply 33 of 73
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 311member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gabe1k View Post


    These were my thoughts initially. But then I remembered that it really doesn't matter if they hold the patent, it's if they go after anyone over it. And if Apple didn't get it, someone else would have.


    I guess we just have to wait and see what they do with it.



    And THAT is what's wrong with the current patent system.

  • Reply 34 of 73
    bighypebighype Posts: 148member


    Great news! Even more bad news for those photocopiers in Mountain View and Korea!


     


    Time for Samsung and Google to start crapping their pants even more.

  • Reply 35 of 73
    sensisensi Posts: 346member


    Ridiculous if not pathetic, soon to be invalidated software patent on the ubiquitous 'scroll bars'. The US office patent is digging its own hole.

  • Reply 36 of 73
    sensisensi Posts: 346member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


     


    Patents never lie.



    Patents are constantly invalidated and ridiculed in courts.

  • Reply 37 of 73
    sr2012sr2012 Posts: 896member
    And more lawsuits to follow.
  • Reply 38 of 73
    rmb0037rmb0037 Posts: 142member
    I swear. It's like people think there's only one way to design software. Innovation is OFFICIALLY over if people are seriously thinking this cannot be patented. Android and the judicial system have proven that patents are almost useless because, as said before, you can implement the same idea but they ask for the "code", which of course will be different, but the patent isn't on the code. It's on what WE AS CUSTOMERS see. So therefore, this is legit, and android is crap. And stolen. Fair and square.
  • Reply 39 of 73
    bighypebighype Posts: 148member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sensi View Post


    Ridiculous if not pathetic, soon to be invalidated software patent on the ubiquitous 'scroll bars'. The US office patent is digging its own hole.



    You're obviously an Android troll. There's so many ways to have scroll bars on a window (go look at your favorite desktop OS) and none of these are patented or the patents have long expired. When Apple unveiled their phone in 2007, it had a unique way to display them and Google copied that particular, Apple created, way. Had they spent the time & energy on INVENTING NEW STUFF instead of RIPPING OTHERS OFF, they wouldn't be in such sad shape today.


     


    You can cry all you want about patents but RIPPING OFF innovative companies SHOULD have a price. Google and Samsung don't invent much and just blatantly copy Apple and save money on R&D and design. It's time they paid the price.


     


    Cheaters are always caught. Stealing NEVER pays off.

  • Reply 40 of 73
    rmb0037rmb0037 Posts: 142member
    bighype wrote: »
    You can cry all you want about patents but RIPPING OFF innovative companies SHOULD have a price. Google and Samsung don't invent much and just blatantly copy Apple and save money on R&D and design. It's time they paid the price.

    Cheaters are always caught. Stealing NEVER pays off.

    Agreed. This is theft at it's finest.
Sign In or Register to comment.