Apple wins patent for Cover Flow media selection GUI
Apple on Tuesday was granted a patent regarding browsing and selection of digital media on a connected device using the Cover Flow interface first seen in iTunes 7.
The newly-won U.S. Patent No. 8,230,360 for a "User interface for selection from media collection" describes the basic idea of selecting media through Cover Flow, Apple's solution to browsing through and selecting from large collections of digital media by using corresponding images like album covers or movie posters.
The patent's first claim covers a system in which a "connected" device collects multimedia content from one or resources and displays the items in a specified group which can be rearranged visually to accomodate orderly viewing. While it falls short of explaining Apple's 2010 D613,3000 design patent for Cover Flow itself, the media selection property leans heavily on the older innovation and expands on the utility as it applies to selecting content items for purchase, rental and playback. The design patent spawned from Apple's 2006 purchase of the media-browsing GUI originally created by developer Steel Skies.
From Claim 1 of the '360 patent:
This GUI action is representative of the Cover Flow mechanism which has made its way into iDevices and most recently the OS X version of Safari.
Illustration from the '360 patent depicts the Apple TV's iTunes store. | Source: USPTO
The filing's illustrations almost exclusively feature what appears to be the original Apple TV interface while the corresponding literature makes a point to mention the patent covers a number of devices and consumption of media from a variety of sources.
Apple clearly had iterations of the iTunes store in mind with the '360 patent and notes ""A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, at a computing device, one or more content items from one or more resources, wherein content items include multimedia content, audio content, video content, image content, and user generated content[...]."
Cover Flow was a hotly-contested invention for Apple as the iPod maker was sued in 2008 for allegedly infringing upon a number of patents relating to the creation of "streams" of documents sorted by time. Apple was initially hit with $625 million in damages owed but ultimately won an appeal reversing the decision in 2011.
The newly-won U.S. Patent No. 8,230,360 for a "User interface for selection from media collection" describes the basic idea of selecting media through Cover Flow, Apple's solution to browsing through and selecting from large collections of digital media by using corresponding images like album covers or movie posters.
The patent's first claim covers a system in which a "connected" device collects multimedia content from one or resources and displays the items in a specified group which can be rearranged visually to accomodate orderly viewing. While it falls short of explaining Apple's 2010 D613,3000 design patent for Cover Flow itself, the media selection property leans heavily on the older innovation and expands on the utility as it applies to selecting content items for purchase, rental and playback. The design patent spawned from Apple's 2006 purchase of the media-browsing GUI originally created by developer Steel Skies.
From Claim 1 of the '360 patent:
Described in supporting claims is the well-known "stacking" or "flow" or content images "wherein content items in a starting state, a middle state, and an ending state overlap as they accumulate."[...]wherein the group of content items is capable of having multiple states within the display, wherein the multiple states include a starting state, a middle state, and an ending state, wherein a starting state initially includes a flat content item on the left and one or more tilted content items on the right, wherein a middle state includes one or more tilted content items on the left and on the right, wherein an ending state initially includes one or more tilted content items on the left and a flat content item on the right, and wherein the state of the group of content items changes when a non-selectable content item in the group is selected[...]
This GUI action is representative of the Cover Flow mechanism which has made its way into iDevices and most recently the OS X version of Safari.
Illustration from the '360 patent depicts the Apple TV's iTunes store. | Source: USPTO
The filing's illustrations almost exclusively feature what appears to be the original Apple TV interface while the corresponding literature makes a point to mention the patent covers a number of devices and consumption of media from a variety of sources.
Apple clearly had iterations of the iTunes store in mind with the '360 patent and notes ""A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, at a computing device, one or more content items from one or more resources, wherein content items include multimedia content, audio content, video content, image content, and user generated content[...]."
Cover Flow was a hotly-contested invention for Apple as the iPod maker was sued in 2008 for allegedly infringing upon a number of patents relating to the creation of "streams" of documents sorted by time. Apple was initially hit with $625 million in damages owed but ultimately won an appeal reversing the decision in 2011.
Comments
Cover Flow is possibly the most useless way of presenting anything to chose from.
Apple should file a continuation application and extend it to television graphics, online Flash presentations, and any of the other hundreds of copycat iterations that have been seen for years now.
Great. Yet more years of litigation news. I'd rather just read about the cool stuff.
This is a ridiculous patent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance
This is a ridiculous patent.
It's an awesome patent. Why else would everyone copy the Cover Flow look? Also, Apple bought the company that created this particular look for iTunes in 2006.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Cover Flow is possibly the most useless way of presenting anything to chose from.
Are you sure about that? Would you rather scroll through music files by opening up folders on a windows desktop? Cover flow may not be the best, but it certainly is an improvement over drilling down through file folders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
Great. Yet more years of litigation news. I'd rather just read about the cool stuff.
Unfortunately patents are disparaged a lot in the software industry and negative content draw lots of attention to a news forum. It is kind of like car accidents or shootings; for some odd reason it interests people.
That's nice. You apparently haven't learned that patents are one of the reasons we have such cool stuff. Without the ability to protect R&D investments, why should someone invent anything new?
I don't mind that it exists but I hate that when my phone in landscape mode there is no other option to control iPod/Music app than then with Cover Flow.
I don't get your argument. You're comparing it to using an app that was designed specifically for choosing files and folders in a very archaic system. Using only the iTunes app or iPod/Music app in Cover Flow is horrendous. In fact, it's so poor that you can't even do every task from that mode.
go to this link. I know it has nothing to do with this. But I find the comments rather stupid. CNN doesn't really get it.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/24/technology/apple-earnings/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I don't mind that it exists but I hate that when my phone in landscape mode there is no other option to control iPod/Music app than then with Cover Flow.
I don't get your argument. You're comparing it to using an app that was designed specifically for choosing files and folders in a very archaic system. Using only the iTunes app or iPod/Music app in Cover Flow is horrendous. In fact, it's so poor that you can't even do every task from that mode.
So sell your current phone and buy some other phone if you hate it so much.
Those people are ridiculous. I think I read one reasonable comment.
That makes perfect sense. /s
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I don't mind that it exists but I hate that when my phone in landscape mode there is no other option to control iPod/Music app than then with Cover Flow.
...
I hate this so much when I'm trying to play music in my car. I rest the iPhone sideways to watch the road, then swing it up to pick a song and it slowly changes away from Cover Flow. Cover Flow also totally ignores that I've drilled down to a genre, for example. Shows me totally dissimilar music. Thank god for orientation lock.
That's where I run into the most trouble, too.
Any patent related to images on a screen are just stupid. Every image on a computer screen or TV is unique. Why not patent every possible combination of colors that can every exist?
So somebody decides to post a pretty graphical interface on a screen that looks like images being pulled out of a deck of cards or in a 3D folder. It looks good. The images become links to open whatever information is related to them. Why the hell does that need to be patented? I understand the desire for a company to grab as many ideas as possible to patent just for making profits, but I don't understand how this deserves a patent. I do understand that the fundamental GUI deserves a patent but not clicking movable images that just represent links.
I want to patent pixel number 1,200,555 on screens that are 1920 X 1080 when I send a signal to it to turn it greenish blue when I move a mouse or other pointing device over it and click. That click will then open a file on the device.
That is just a stupid patent idea. Perhaps the cover flow idea might deserve a copyright but probably not.
Should people patent books, not the content, but the design? They have covers and pages attached to a spine and the pages can be turned. Doing that would be stupid. Coverflow as a patented idea of moving images on a screen is just as stupid in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's nice. You apparently haven't learned that patents are one of the reasons we have such cool stuff. Without the ability to protect R&D investments, why should someone invent anything new?
Wrong. Spend some time to watch this talk http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels
Should people patent books, not the content, but the design? They have covers and pages attached to a spine and the pages can be turned. Doing that would be stupid. Coverflow as a patented idea of moving images on a screen is just as stupid in my opinion.
Imagine if website design were patented (don't be confused with copyright and trademark) and the patent owner decided to "protect" the IP and sued everyone else.
wait.. Google has one http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/09/03/1223207/Google-Patents-Its-Home-Page
Quote:
Originally Posted by iang1234
Wrong. Spend some time to watch this talk http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
very interesting video.
only thing she didn't mention that id be interested in knowing is, how much R&D goes into fashion compared to the tech world, we saw the stats on money spent & earnings but that doesn't help.
if R&D is very expensive & people can copy the work, there might not be any profit there, or as much as they need.
Apple clearly had iterations of the iTunes store in mind with the '360 patent and notes ""A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, at a computing device, one or more content items from one or more resources, wherein content items include multimedia content, audio content, video content, image content, and user generated content[...]." - Um no this is not iTunes Store-related at all. This is Apple TV and Apple TV only. The variety of sources mentioned is the fact that an Apple TV can pull the resources from various devices including AirPlay and users photos on a Mac on the same network.
Since AppleInsider took on new writers there's been some bum articles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Cover Flow is possibly the most useless way of presenting anything to chose from.
Agreed. it looks flashy, but of no use to me whatsoever.