PDA

View Full Version : Apple Trademarking 'Multi-touch'




MacRumors
Jul 7, 2007, 09:23 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/07/06/apple_pushing_for_multi_touch_trademark.html) that Apple has started trademark applications "in a Far East intellectual property office" for the term "multi-touch".

"Multi-touch" is one of the key technologies that is seen in Apple's new iPhone, but there has been analyst and user speculation that Apple would utilize this technique in future desktop or notebook functionality.

Apple's recent multitouch mouse patent application (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/05/apple-investigating-mulittouch-mouse/) provides further evidence that Apple is exploring other non-iPhone uses for this technology.

Apple is not the only company utilizing "multi-touch" technology. Microsoft recently introduced (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/05/30/microsoft-launches-multitouch-surface-computing/) their own version of it in their "Surface Computing" project. Whether or not Apple can actually receive trademark protection for this term remains to be seen.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/07/apple-trademarking-multi-touch/)



pavelbure
Jul 7, 2007, 09:28 AM
i don't think they can get trademark protection for this.

cheunghy
Jul 7, 2007, 09:30 AM
Application received here in Hong Kong.

http://ipsearch.ipd.gov.hk/trademark/jsp/result_main.jsp?SOAPQC=-1&FILE_NO_TYPE=A&FILE_NO=&FILE_NO_SMM=5&FILE_NO=&FILE_NO_SMM=3&TM_TEXT=&TM_TEXT_SMM=0&TM_TEXT_OP=0&TM_TEXT=&TM_TEXT_SMM=0&TM_TEXT_OP=0&TM_TEXT=&TM_TEXT_SMM=0&TM_CODE=&TM_CODE_OP=1&CLASS_NO=&MARK_TYPE=Y&SPECIAL_SIGNS=Y&COLOUR_CLAIM_DESCRIP_STYLE=&COLOUR_CLAIM_DESCRIP_STYLE_SMM=0&APPL_NAME=Apple+Inc.&APPL_NAME_SMM=0&LICENCEE=&LICENCEE_SMM=0&ADD_FOR_SERVICE=&ADD_FOR_SERVICE_SMM=0&FILE_DT=&FILE_DT_SMM=5&FILE_DT=&FILE_DT_SMM=3&RREG_DT=&RREG_DT_SMM=5&RREG_DT=&RREG_DT_SMM=3&EXP_DT=&EXP_DT_SMM=5&EXP_DT=&EXP_DT_SMM=3&PUB_DT=&PUB_DT_SMM=5&PUB_DT=&PUB_DT_SMM=3&TM_SPEC=&TM_SPEC_SMM=0&TM_DIS=&TM_DIS_SMM=6&STYPE=S&TYPE=S&LIVE_STATUS=Y

Xeph
Jul 7, 2007, 09:31 AM
i heard Microsoft's 'Surface Computing' is not multi-touch technology, in fact, it is camera-supported fake

pdpfilms
Jul 7, 2007, 09:36 AM
i heard Microsoft's 'Surface Computing' is not multi-touch technology, in fact, it is camera-supported fake

Explain?:confused:

thecritix
Jul 7, 2007, 09:40 AM
they shouldn't be allowed to trademark this, its a definition of the technology not a product name.

plumbingandtech
Jul 7, 2007, 09:41 AM
they shouldn't be allowed to trademark this, its a definition of the technology not a product name.

Maybe. But if they do something like this:

Multi-Touch™


(cap M cap T hyphen.)

Who knows... it is a long shot...

but multi touch or multitouch could still be used by others.

kalisphoenix
Jul 7, 2007, 09:42 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/07/06/apple_pushing_for_multi_touch_trademark.html) that Apple has started trademark applications "in a Far East intellectual property office" for the term "multi-touch".

How exciting! I imagine Apple patent lawyers riding the Orient Express through exotic lands in a race against time.

Xeph
Jul 7, 2007, 09:44 AM
Explain?:confused:

it's here :)
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07/BE8D0C58-313E-453E-9E8B-D443BE6E1DDE.html

ElectricHermit
Jul 7, 2007, 09:46 AM
Explain?:confused:

MS' tech relies on IR sensors positioned about the touch 'interface'. Apple's relies on a capacative touch panel - it actually senses the proximity of your touch. From a UI perspective, it may make no difference, though Apple's is regarded as superior.

grafikat
Jul 7, 2007, 09:47 AM
Hmmm.
It'd be great if this was getting incorporated into a UMPC

Hattig
Jul 7, 2007, 09:48 AM
i don't think they can get trademark protection for this.

Why?

It's an application for use of the term "multi-touch", presumably in the computing field (software and hardware). I doubt there is an existing trademark, nor was the term in common use beforehand. Microsoft got a trademark on Windows in the 80s, and the term was in common use in the field (WIMP) for years before.

The fact there were prior implementations is meaningless, this isn't a patent application.

TheAnswer
Jul 7, 2007, 09:50 AM
How exciting! I imagine Apple patent lawyers riding the Orient Express through exotic lands in a race against time.

Even in it's heyday, the Orient Express only would have gotten them as far east as Istanbul.

pdpfilms
Jul 7, 2007, 09:52 AM
MS' tech relies on IR sensors positioned about the touch 'interface'. Apple's relies on a capacative touch panel - it actually senses the proximity of your touch. From a UI perspective, it may make no difference, though Apple's is regarded as superior.

I thought this was the case. Jeff Han's concepts were based on this tech, and it was long said that he was part of the Surface team.

Though I don't see how it's any less multi-touch than apple's solution. Just... more old school.

mediter
Jul 7, 2007, 09:56 AM
Explain?:confused:

See Daniel's Article in RoughlyDrafted Magazine:
Microsoft Surface: the Fine Clothes of a Naked Empire (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07/2152AFA3-DE5C-4A92-BE17-672C7858E854.html)

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 10:15 AM
i don't think they can get trademark protection for this.

Why would you say that? Is this based on your twenty years experience as a TM attorney? It sounds more as if you just wished to make a post, rather than are posting from a position of knowledge of the situation.

For those interested in FACTS, here is the definition of a trademark from the USPTO:

A trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name.

A service mark is any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce, to identify and distinguish the services of one provider from the services provided by others, and to indicate the source of the services.

This is the US, not Chinese definition, but it would seem to fit for Multi-Touch used by Apple in Commerce for a technology they are pioneering, and wish to distinguish from other technologies.

Maybe. But if they do something like this:

Multi-Touch™


(cap M cap T hyphen.)

Who knows... it is a long shot....

I believe (but I am not sure) that Trademarks are case insensitive. The dash would make a difference, though. If you search existing Trademarks on the USPTO site, the results are full caps, which would make me think this.

If others use the same term, but have not TMed it, oh well, the race goes to the swiftest!

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 10:22 AM
To add to this, it looks as if Apple already holds the Trademark for "Multi Touch" in the US:

IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Handheld mobile digital electronic devices with electronic mail, digital data transmission, audio player, video player, handheld computer, personal digital assistant, electronic organizer, electronic notepad, telephone, computer gaming, and camera functions, and computer software for use with such devices (Filed June 30, 2007) (APPLICANT) Apple Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=d3jel1.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=Multi+Touch&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query


This does seem a bit limiting, in that it only holds for "Handheld [and/or] mobile digital electronic devices..." if they do make a mouse version, I am not sure that is covered...

BKKbill
Jul 7, 2007, 10:24 AM
Even in it's heyday, the Orient Express only would have gotten them as far east as Istanbul.
Good one. Do you think if companies keep copy-writing all these sayings there will be anything left to say.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 7, 2007, 10:35 AM
To add to this, it looks as if Apple already holds the Trademark for "Multi Touch" in the US:

(Filed June 30, 2007) (APPLICANT) Apple Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=d3jel1.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=Multi+Touch&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query


This does seem a bit limiting, in that it only holds for "Handheld [and/or] mobile digital electronic devices..." if they do make a mouse version, I am not sure that is covered...

how the heck did you find that info, man you're good. I like the trademark idea though, keeps apple competitive

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 10:49 AM
how the heck did you find that info, man you're good.

Yankee: The Internet- it's your friend! :D

I like the trademark idea though, keeps apple competitive

I am not sure of the history, or how things actually shook out.... but what if Apple had an enforceable TM/Copyright on Windows... and/or Mouses (Mice?)? Down the road, Multi-Touch will be as indispensable as a computer mouse. And other "versions" of MT will be just not quite usable as the Apple version. I mean, come on- IR cameras to detect fingers? How BULKY and UNWEILDING is that????

theveeb
Jul 7, 2007, 10:55 AM
To add to this, it looks as if Apple already holds the Trademark for "Multi Touch" in the US:

Nice find! They don't own the trademark, they've only filed for it on June 30, 2007 according to TESS.

mdntcallr
Jul 7, 2007, 11:09 AM
after using my iphone for a week...

Apple ought to call the technology "Multi-Tap"

they streamlined the options too much... so you literally have to tap 5-7 times to get where you need to go. instead of having a 4-5 buttons on a blackberry or treo that get you where you need in 1-2 taps

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 11:20 AM
Nice find! They don't own the trademark, they've only filed for it on June 30, 2007 according to TESS.

It shows "Live", which I guess means active. How do you see if it is granted?

It is in the system, none-the-less...

BKKbill
Jul 7, 2007, 11:25 AM
I really think Multi-Touch is the one that will put the mouse to bed. The pad with fingers will be the next biggie.

ajhill
Jul 7, 2007, 11:39 AM
Apple bought a display manufacturer a few years back when their powerbooks started selling well. So a multitouch iMac might not be as far fetched as you might think at first. Steve Jobs has said that the new iMacs would be off the charts. Kinda like Apple stock of late.

Guess buying a LCD manufacturer was foresight. It wouldn't surprise me if Jobs had the display people working just as hard as he rides everyone else at the company to push technology further.

Personally I'm glad Steve Jobs is a perfectionist who rides everyone until the produce products so good that consumers and reviewers use words like "elegant" and "magic". To the best of my knowledge I have never heard either word being applied to a Microsoft product. X-box is as close to a hit as they have and its now another 1.15 BILLION in the hole, for a total of 7.15 Billion in the RED. The only thing magical at Microsoft is how fast the cash seems to disappear. $7,000,000,000 losses on a consumer device? How many decades will it take for them to earn that money back and break even?

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 11:46 AM
So a multitouch iMac might not be as far fetched as you might think at first.

I am not so sure. AN iMac with a multi touch input maybe, but not a multi touch iMac.

What I mean is that an iMac is a desk top system. The monitor is vertical at the back... and your keyboard/mouse is within reach in front of you.

To make the screen mutli touch would be a step backward for input ease... no one will want to reach that far back for input, no matter how nice the interface.

I think it is more likely that a multi touch input device will be added, like the mouse referred to elsewhere on this forum. I just think it would be cost prohibitive to have a multi-touch lcd panel (in addition to the regular screen) to replace something as big as a keyboard, no matter how cool that might be.

But I do not doubt that is the direction Apple is headed.

lil' brudder
Jul 7, 2007, 12:13 PM
Did anyone else notice the whole "computer gaming" thing? What is the iPhone gonna turn into psp/ds competition now?

MagnusVonMagnum
Jul 7, 2007, 12:15 PM
Williams (aka Bally-Williams) trademarked the term "Multi-Ball" for pinball and started to sue when Data East (later became Sega and is now Stern) used the term in their own games. They eventually settled, but for a long time their games switched to calling multi-ball modes "Tri-Ball" and the like. The problem with something like tri-ball is it implies a maximum of 3 balls whereas multi-ball is anything more than one, thus any game Data East made that had more than 3 had to have yet another name attached to it needlessly because of such stupid laws (and they are STUPID because they use no common sense half the time, especially patent offices which allow patents for really dumb things--software being the worst of all lately.) Williams also held the patents for many pinball standard parts and so Data East flippers always sucked because they could not use a good solenoid configuration lest Williams sue them for using their method of wrapping copper around an iron core....)

What's all this got to do with Apple? Stifling innovation, that's what. Block the little building block parts so the bigger picture can't be made by others. Given Apple's own name problems with another Apple out there that came FIRST and given they broke their own agreement to stay out of the music industry, you'd think Apple might have learned something along the way, but in truth I expect all businesses to act like cads in all things regardless of their own past.

So if all this goes through just imagine what others will have to call their multi-touch pads instead of multi-touch. Tri-Touch? Double-Touch? Fingery-Touch? You would THINK "multiple touch" is self descriptive and so it shouldn't be allowed, but it didn't stop Williams with Multi-ball (describing multiple balls on the playfield at once).

narco
Jul 7, 2007, 12:46 PM
My initial response to this news was to get angry and write a lengthy reply about how I hate the patent office, but then I figured if Apple doesn't patent this, someone will - and they will try to sue. It's happened before, so there's nothing wrong with Apple trying to save their butts.

Fishes,
narco.

gwangung
Jul 7, 2007, 12:54 PM
My initial response to this news was to get angry and write a lengthy reply about how I hate the patent office, but then I figured if Apple doesn't patent this, someone will - and they will try to sue. It's happened before, so there's nothing wrong with Apple trying to save their butts.

Fishes,
narco.

Grrrr....what gets me angry are people who confuse patents, trademarks and copyrights.

They make PERFECT sense...if you stop a second to think about it.

narco
Jul 7, 2007, 01:11 PM
Grrrr....what gets me angry are people who confuse patents, trademarks and copyrights.

They make PERFECT sense...if you stop a second to think about it.

Sorry to make you angry, buddy. I will take a few seconds to think about it during my lunch break. My apologies - I won't pretend to know anything about patents, trademarks and copyrights any longer. Apparently I did a miserable job at it anyway.

DOWN WITH THE SYSTEM.

Fishes,
narco.

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 01:11 PM
What's all this got to do with Apple? Stifling innovation, that's what. Block the little building block parts so the bigger picture can't be made by others.

I do not agree. Apple is protecting their name for this, uh, device. And they will protect their method of how they accomplish this. But just because someone cannot use the term "Multi Touch" does not stifle anything. Other companies will develop their own solutions if this takes off and proves popular. They will just have to call it something different. It does NOT stop them from making similar solutions.

Even in your example, the multi-ball effect proved to be popular. Did other makers stop using it- no. They just had to rename it. Tri-Touch is a silly example, but nothing wrong with "Digit-All Input" or "Touch sensitive" or "Pressure-Matic".

You would THINK "multiple touch" is self descriptive and so it shouldn't be allowed

I think the difference may be that, while it is descriptive, it is a relatively new term, not one used before in this context. Prior to Williams Multi-Ball, was that term used for any specific idea? Not really. Same here... Just a thought!

numlock
Jul 7, 2007, 01:24 PM
why apply for a trademark in the far east?


and what possible benefits is there to having a multitouch imac?

carfac
Jul 7, 2007, 01:41 PM
why apply for a trademark in the far east?

Well, if you have a mark, you want to protect it everywhere it is sold. China is a MAJOR emerging market. Might also have something to do with that is where they will be made????

and what possible benefits is there to having a multitouch imac?

You might as well ask what possible benefit is it to an iMac to use a mouse? A better, more user-friendly input device is a benefit to ANY computer...Mac or PC. A full touch screen iMac, I agree- that would be more a hassle than a useful tool. But an iMac with a MT interface/input device is what I would consider the next logical step.

NewSc2
Jul 7, 2007, 02:03 PM
what about all those videos we saw for Jeff Han's "multi-touch" products?

color guy
Jul 7, 2007, 02:15 PM
http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2007/JazzMutant-Dexter-Ships.html

bjb
Jul 7, 2007, 02:40 PM
For those interested in FACTS, here is the definition of a trademark from the USPTO:

A trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name.


The definition doesn't help much in determining whether a word is capable of being protected. The USPTO and the courts will classify the word along a "spectrum." At one end are generic terms that can never be protected. These are words that are necessary to describe a product, so that protecting them would prevent competitors from selling a competing product. A classic example is "light" as in beer.

Next up the list is "merely descriptive": such terms describe the actual characteristics of a product. They can be protected, but only after the public has come to associate the term with the source of the product. Examples include "DietRite" for colas and "Windows" for operating systems.

Then there are suggestive, arbitrary, and fanciful terms, which are always protectable. "Microsoft" is a suggestive term, "Apple" is an arbitrary term, and "Xerox" is a fanciful term.

"Multi-touch" is at best descriptive, and might even be generic. If the former, it can't be protected until consumers begin to associate the word "multi-touch" with Apple products - as the definition says, a trademark identifies the source of the product, not the product itself. But if there is no other way to describe devices that operate in this way, then "multi-touch" is generic and cannot be protected.


I believe (but I am not sure) that Trademarks are case insensitive. The dash would make a difference, though. If you search existing Trademarks on the USPTO site, the results are full caps, which would make me think this.


Not only are they case-insenstive, but they are also insensitive to dashes (and other punctuation) and alternative spellings. The whole idea is to avoid consumer confusion. So if "Multi-touch" is protectable, a competitor cannot use "Multitouch" or even something like "Multi Tutch."

Porco
Jul 7, 2007, 03:00 PM
Microsoft Numerous-Press™!

stevehayter
Jul 7, 2007, 03:30 PM
As I understand it, aren't the cameras in the Microsoft Surface technology used for other purposes? Such as detecting different types of objects that are placed on the 'surface', detecting what they are, and providing some sort of action for said object?

Digital Skunk
Jul 7, 2007, 03:52 PM
Unless Apple is putting multi-touch into that new 12" widescreen MacBook Pro mini or ultra portable 11" widescreen laptop with amazing battery life... or that new iPod that is a year behind schedule or the iPhone Version 2 that is opened to other carriers besides Cingular.

Then we can see some real technology being produced and used by the masses. Until Apple gets on the ball with making real innovative technology... why worry about stupid trademarks?

As I understand it, aren't the cameras in the Microsoft Surface technology used for other purposes? Such as detecting different types of objects that are placed on the 'surface', detecting what they are, and providing some sort of action for said object?

Actually you are right. Another poster said that Apple's touch sensitive tech was more advanced than Microsofts but he/she was far mistaken. The device that MS made has the ability to interact with not only other objects but other tech. You could place your cell phone next to it and it would send info to the device and it worked with PDAs and other tech that was compatible with it. That is actually pretty innovative... the iPhone's touch screen just lets you work your way through a very intuitive and innovative User Interface, but it can't interact with anything other than your finger.

entropys
Jul 7, 2007, 05:12 PM
Another poster said that Apple's touch sensitive tech was more advanced than Microsofts but he/she was far mistaken. The device that MS made has the ability to interact with not only other objects but other tech. You could place your cell phone next to it and it would send info to the device and it worked with PDAs and other tech that was compatible with it. That is actually pretty innovative... the iPhone's touch screen just lets you work your way through a very intuitive and innovative User Interface, but it can't interact with anything other than your finger.

Wouldn't it be cheaper and simpler to just use RFID? the MS solution is actually cumbersome and potentially error prone.

dude-x
Jul 7, 2007, 05:13 PM
I am going to trademark "SmartTouch" and "Touch Yourself".

Man I am going to make jillions!

twoodcc
Jul 7, 2007, 06:10 PM
cool. I hope that apple gets it

morphineseason
Jul 7, 2007, 06:44 PM
I don't get it? I could have sworn Steve Jobs said that multi-touch technology belonged to them at the iPhone debut keynote. I know he at least said the iPhone and its features were either patented, copyrighted, or trademarked...I just forget which one; but even with one of those, wouldn't Apple have the rights to it to begin with? I'm probably missing something.

Digital Skunk
Jul 7, 2007, 06:50 PM
Wouldn't it be cheaper and simpler to just use RFID? the MS solution is actually cumbersome and potentially error prone.

Not that the MS way is perfect... just that it does more than what the iPhone's touch screen can do. If I could place my friend's cell phone or iPhone next to my own and get his contact number or something like that then it would be more useful. Other than that it is just a touch screen.

I don't get it? I could have sworn Steve Jobs said that multi-touch technology belonged to them at the iPhone debut keynote. I know he at least said the iPhone and its features were either patented, copyrighted, or trademarked...I just forget which one; but even with one of those, wouldn't Apple have the rights to it to begin with? I'm probably missing something.

You have it right... Apple is trying to trademark the name 'multi-touch'

morphineseason
Jul 7, 2007, 06:59 PM
Not that the MS way is perfect... just that it does more than what the iPhone's touch screen can do. If I could place my friend's cell phone or iPhone next to my own and get his contact number or something like that then it would be more useful. Other than that it is just a touch screen.



You have it right... Apple is trying to trademark the name 'multi-touch'

I knew I missed something. That's kind of bad on Apple's part...waiting until this late in the game to trademark the name "multi-touch", considering Steve was referring to it as just that at the iPhone debut keynote. They need to be quicker about these things, especially in a world where Microsoft steals nearly all of Apple's ideas ;)

Abstract
Jul 7, 2007, 07:35 PM
what about all those videos we saw for Jeff Han's "multi-touch" products?

He should have trademarked it.


The term MultiTouch or Multi-Touch is allowed to be trademarked because it's not a word in common usage by companies. Everyone calls this technolog "touch-screen", and that's what it essentially is for common folk (despite the need to place 2 fingers on the screen to control things in some instances). If Apple tried to trademark "Touch-Screen" technology, I don't think they'd be successful, or I certainly hope not. However, "MultiTouch" should be up for grabs.

zac4mac
Jul 7, 2007, 09:09 PM
@ Color Guy - nice link, I thought it might be spam and passed it by at first.

http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2007/JazzMutant-Dexter-Ships.html

Dexter looks cool, the "unique surround panner" caught my eye.

lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 7, 2007, 10:17 PM
that Far East intellectual property office = Hong Kong S.A.R.


78826


78827

bj3949
Jul 8, 2007, 01:42 AM
I don't know why Apple isn't making a multi-touch laptop on the screen rather than on the mouse pad???

Much Ado
Jul 8, 2007, 05:29 AM
What's all this got to do with Apple? Stifling innovation, that's what. Block the little building block parts so the bigger picture can't be made by others.


What?

I...what?

They trademarked a NAME. That is not stifling innovation! This is not a patent.

Look, i can think up my own names on the spot:
Touch
Connect
Impact
Powertouch

When Apple trademarked MacBook Pro, they were not stifling the laptop industry.

/rant.

stevehayter
Jul 8, 2007, 05:50 AM
Wouldn't it be cheaper and simpler to just use RFID? the MS solution is actually cumbersome and potentially error prone.But that would limit any functionality to objects that have RFIDs.

For example, I could walk into a store and place a t-shirt my friend has on the counter. The surface technology, as I understand it, could 'scan' (its the only word I can think of using with the lack of sleep i've had) it, and tell me whether it's stocked, or provide suggestions for alternatives.

It's not the best analogy, but it gets the point across.

Edit: Just checked out Wikipedia, and it uses the glass example. In a restaurant, a wine glass could be put down, and the table/display could provide a list of wines. This is what Microsoft is trying to achieve with the technology.

Yes, this could be done with RFID, but it is kind of limiting.

theveeb
Jul 8, 2007, 08:45 AM
It shows "Live", which I guess means active. How do you see if it is granted?

"Live" means it's an active filing/registration within the PTO, not "dead" (e.g., abandoned, rejected).

On the initial search results list in TESS the 2nd column will have a registration number if the trademark has been granted/registered. On the page for the specific filing there will be an entry for Registration Number and Registration Date once registered. Prior to registration the trademark will be published for opposition. This would be a point where Buxton, Han, etc. could oppose the trademark if they chose to. Prior to that the PTO could refuse the registration for being merely descriptive.

From PTO glossary: http://www.uspto.gov/main/glossary/index.html
"A mark is considered merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the specified goods or services. If a mark is merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of the goods or services to which it relates, the mark will be refused registration on the Principal Register under §2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1).

Examples of descriptive marks include: MEDICAL GUIDE for website services featuring medical guides, DENIM for jeans, and SPICY SAUCE for salsa."

pieman02
Jul 8, 2007, 11:33 AM
Well if Apple doesn't, someone else will...

And I know I am not talking about trademarks here, but when Apple said they had over 200 patents on the iPhone or whatever, does anyone has any clue on the kinda stuff they patented? Surely they can't patent multitouch itself, as its been around for a while, and Apple didn't even create it...

Maccus Aurelius
Jul 8, 2007, 01:30 PM
I hold the patent to the MacRumors name. Arn, you'll be hearing from my lawyer in a couple of months (I'm lazy). :p

Anyway, I don't see the big complaint about Apple trying to trademark a name. I think it's pretty obvious that the general public is going to be more aware of the technology through the iPhone than anything else.

MacNut
Jul 8, 2007, 07:47 PM
While not much, this is what "Wiki" has to say.
Multi-touch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch)Multi-touch has at least a 25 year history, beginning in 1982, with pioneering work being done at the University of Toronto (multi-touch tablets) and Bell Labs (multi-touch screens).

Kwill
Jul 8, 2007, 10:15 PM
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Handheld mobile digital electronic devices with electronic mail, digital data transmission, audio player, video player, handheld computer, personal digital assistant, electronic organizer, electronic notepad, telephone, computer gaming, and camera functions, and computer software for use with such devices
Seems to exclude desktop computers and their monitors. Specifically mentions "handheld mobile digital electronic devices" and "handheld computer." Sorry iMac. :(

Kwill
Jul 8, 2007, 10:24 PM
From PTO glossary: http://www.uspto.gov/main/glossary/index.html
"A mark is considered merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the specified goods or services. If a mark is merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of the goods or services to which it relates, the mark will be refused registration on the Principal Register under §2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1).

Examples of descriptive marks include: MEDICAL GUIDE for website services featuring medical guides, DENIM for jeans, and SPICY SAUCE for salsa."

"Multi-touch" is pretty much dead in the water. Nice try though. There are more creative terms that can be coined from the "Calamari" commercial.

MikeTheC
Jul 8, 2007, 10:38 PM
Hate to say it, but if we're talking about multi-touch, I'd just as soon touch something other than a computer, thank you very much! :)

Seriously, I hope it all works out.

steve jr.
Jul 8, 2007, 10:53 PM
What?

Look, i can think up my own names on the spot:
Touch
Connect
Impact
Powertouch


You owe Impact of McKinley Senior High School, a funded project under the KnowledgeWorks Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and The Ohio High School Transformation Initiative - transforming Ohio's public schools from a one-size-fits-all education system into schools where respect for the individual is paramount, and every child is considered "college material." - $15,000 for using the Impact brand/name without proper authorizaion.





Gotcha ;) :D j/k obviously

- Steve

Much Ado
Jul 9, 2007, 04:37 AM
Gotcha ;) :D j/k obviously

- Steve

Good spot ;)

Although i think 'Impact' within the confines of an electronic device input system is still allowed under trademark.

BKKbill
Jul 9, 2007, 04:47 AM
What?

I...what?

They trademarked a NAME. That is not stifling innovation! This is not a patent.

Look, i can think up my own names on the spot:
Touch
Connect
Impact
Powertouch

When Apple trademarked MacBook Pro, they were not stifling the laptop industry.

/rant.

Apple has iGesture they got it when Fingerworks was bought roughly 2 years ago. They used to create and sell keyboards with gesture-recognizing touchpads. http://www.fingerworks.com/

SiliconAddict
Jul 9, 2007, 08:35 AM
This will be overturned. There is simply no way in heck such a basic concept could or should be held by one company. I mean using 2 or more fingers to interact with a screen is NOT a new concept. I mean while Apple's at it why don't they trademark a braking system on a car that isn't binary as in on or off?
It really is stupid, and I will be the first one t call fanboy on anyone who defends Apple on this. No one be it Apple, Microsoft, Nokia, Toshiba or anyone else should be able to get this patent.

rhedpixel
Jul 9, 2007, 01:52 PM
Well... Sort of

http://www.rastervector.com/files/Pixar_Touch.html

No flames for bad joke please (I think its funny)

seelab
Jul 10, 2007, 10:20 AM
The iBar is a really nice multi-touch technology (http://www.multitouchtechnology.com/). I can't wait to see more of this technology.