Apple Awarded Patent That Lets Users Share Content With Others While on Hold

techwhiz · Jul 24, 2013

This is an idea and not an implementation.

Ideas should not get a patent, an invention should.
This is why the system is broken. If you patent an idea, no other company can even code around it. These patents are overly broad and serve to stifle innovation.

The patent system was never meant for this....

macUser2007 · Jul 24, 2013

gibsona said:
This is an excellent example of how the European Software Directive (91/250/ECC) actually prevents stupid protectionism and allows both competition and innovation. The US should take a look at doing something similar.

Actually, many of the "patents" like the one discussed in this thread will not hold up under a challenge in the US either and the patent holders know this.

But they also know that there must be a challenge first, and those are expensive.

It's akin to mining the field around your product: competitors can get through, but they will be bloodied and suffer losses, and the smaller ones simply cannot afford the losses.

Medic311 · Jul 24, 2013

i was just awarded a patent that when "a phone" is on a flat surface (it determines this with the gyro) and someone calls me, i just have to press anywhere on the screen and it answers the call. no need to swipe in a special location, it knows it's on a desk and not in a pocket so pocket answering won't be an issue. i drew some diagrams like in this patent defining a flat surface, a rectangular-shaped object with a screen, and a schematic showing the action of touching anywhere on the screen to answer the phone call.

as i said, the patent office awarded me this patent so i am set for life. i will sue anyone who implements a product that performs this way b/c i was the innovator and i should be compensated for coming up with this BRILLIANT idea.

i'll see you in court

-medic

doelcm82 · Jul 24, 2013

doelcm82 said:
If you're calling your local community service organization to find out the date and time of the next Lesbian Rap Group meeting or Christian Singles mixer, and the agent has to put you on hold.

skier777 said:
If this is the case, the agent should have a landline and a computer...

That's old-school thinking. The agent could be working from home.

Besides, sending multimedia on hold from a land line is covered by a 2000 patent from Nortel (though I don't think they quite envisioned the iPhone at the time they filed the patent).

----------

Medic311 said:
i was just awarded a patent that when "a phone" is on a flat surface (it determines this with the gyro) and someone calls me, i just have to press anywhere on the screen and it answers the call. no need to swipe in a special location, it knows it's on a desk and not in a pocket so pocket answering won't be an issue. i drew some diagrams like in this patent defining a flat surface, a rectangular-shaped object with a screen, and a schematic showing the action of touching anywhere on the screen to answer the phone call.

as i said, the patent office awarded me this patent so i am set for life. i will sue anyone who implements a product that performs this way b/c i was the innovator and i should be compensated for coming up with this BRILLIANT idea.

i'll see you in court

-medic

What's the patent number? Someone may want to license the technology from you.

Microsoft has applied for a similar patent that is more comprehensive, though, so their version may be more useful (it doesn't rely on the phone being flat).
Patent application number: 20120214542

SAdProZ · Jul 24, 2013

macsmurf said:
"And what was especially galling to Jeff? When he called them to ask, What am I stealing from you guys? they wouldnt tell him.

Kelling: That was a question they wouldnt answer. They said they wouldnt answer that until we got into court. So they wouldnt even identify what parts of our business or what they thought we were doing to use... to use their technology.

But to go to court, to answer that question, was gonna cost money. A lot of money.

Kelling: It was between two and five million dollars and thats more than our company could handle, honestly. We knew we had to settle this thing somehow. There would be no more FotoTime today if we had to do that.

[...]

As far as we can tell, and not a lot of this information is public, most of the companies being sued ended up doing what Jeff did and agreed to pay FotoMedia money. Some of them were put out of business."

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack

IT's a good example, and I appreciate the reply. But I did say "Please give a good example that is representative of how software patents don't work for the majority of patent owners?" Majority.

I'm aware of exceptional stories like this. As an entrepreneur it frightens me I have to deal with the evils of the world. That doesn't mean the patent system "just needs to go away." What are the evils of the world going to do then? In your example, the court system failed. If there was no patent system, there would be no court system at all at my disposal. Jeff decided the expense wasn't worth it. But I"ve heard cases where sharks like FotoMedia eventually met their match and a larger company or a non-profit decides to take on the case and fight the bullies back, so at some point they get corrected.

Nothing in this world is a perfect system. Nothing is fair. You just have to try to use the tools available to knock things in your favor.

SAdProZ · Jul 24, 2013

MegamanX said:
Just so much miss information in there I am not even sure what to start.

My suggestion to you is get off the Apple Koolaid.

Example of slide to Unlock. MS had that one one of their phones YEARS before the iphone came out.
Android had touch screen out before the iPhone, Apples basic look looks a lot like a samsung device release a little before the iPhone and the LG prada.

That just goes to show you a lot of people had the same idea. Multitouch had been around for over 10 years before the iPhone, App store was not an Apple idea.
Android was built and able to go tablet with very little work. The iPad for the most part is a big iPod touch.....

I apologize if I'm misinformed about slide-to-unlock. I'm no scholar on the feature but just picked that example at random. And to be fair your examples no one is arguing here (App store, iPad is a big iPod touch).

But back to Slide to Unlock, shouldn't the owner have patented it? And it's not to say "I patented it, you can't use it." It's "I patented that, if you're going to use it, let's talk."

Not drinking the Apple koolaid, nor mean to say they invented the universe. I'm simply saying Apple is a dominant force in the market, which forces others to react and they know the nature of competition. So software patents is part of the game. (Don't hate the player, hate the gameaka human nature)

Please remember I'm not arguing software patents don't need to be improved systematically. I'm arguing against getting rid of them all-together because that eliminates what motivation exists for the smaller guy. I think they should be retooled to help the little guy better.

techwhiz · Jul 24, 2013

SAdProZ said:
Please remember I'm not arguing software patents don't need to be improved systematically. I'm arguing against getting rid of them all-together because that eliminates what motivation exists for the smaller guy. I think they should be retooled to help the little guy better.

They need to fixed such that you need to patent the implementation and not the idea. You need to patent the code to make it work.

Also the stuff that people pull saying " one embodiment will have software running on a computing device with or without a display, performing a function .....", is just bull.

It's not describing a real system or the software, but the USPTO lets that stuff get through. We need a revamp. It's either real in the form of hardware, an algorithm, process, or formula, or you don't get the patent.

SAdProZ · Jul 24, 2013

techwhiz said:
They need to fixed such that you need to patent the implementation and not the idea. You need to patent the code to make it work.

Also the stuff that people pull saying " one embodiment will have software running on a computing device with or without a display, performing a function .....", is just bull.

It's not describing a real system or the software, but the USPTO lets that stuff get through. We need a revamp. It's either real in the form of hardware, an algorithm, process, or formula, or you don't get the patent.

I find that rational. I completely agree.

I thought they needed to describe implementation. I know there are different types of patents though. It's confusing. I have a friend in the patent office and will ask him sometime.

skier777 · Jul 24, 2013

pirg said:
Oh really? Which phone?

All of my ****** ones from virgin mobile. I used features called email and facebook and calanders and the internet and multitasking built in.

My point was that if you simply allowed better multitasking, there wouldnt be much need for this.

pirg · Jul 24, 2013

skier777 said:
All of my ****** ones from virgin mobile. I used features called email and facebook and calanders and the internet and multitasking built in.

My point was that if you simply allowed better multitasking, there wouldnt be much need for this.

Oh so you didn't read the patent. Got it.

MegamanX · Jul 24, 2013

SAdProZ said:
I apologize if I'm misinformed about slide-to-unlock. I'm no scholar on the feature but just picked that example at random. And to be fair your examples no one is arguing here (App store, iPad is a big iPod touch).

But back to Slide to Unlock, shouldn't the owner have patented it? And it's not to say "I patented it, you can't use it." It's "I patented that, if you're going to use it, let's talk."

Not drinking the Apple koolaid, nor mean to say they invented the universe. I'm simply saying Apple is a dominant force in the market, which forces others to react and they know the nature of competition. So software patents is part of the game. (Don't hate the player, hate the gameaka human nature)

Please remember I'm not arguing software patents don't need to be improved systematically. I'm arguing against getting rid of them all-together because that eliminates what motivation exists for the smaller guy. I think they should be retooled to help the little guy better.

No they should not of. MS ins one of many examples that caused Apple to have that crapent invalidated.
It should NEVER of been granted because it what is called an obvious solution. It was a nature solution to come to. Nothing really special about it.

Pinch to Zoom is another example that Apple tried to patent or though they had a patent on. It something that is natural solution to come by so should never be patented.

This is one of those things where it should not really be patent it is crap.

haruhiko · Jul 24, 2013

MegamanX said:
No they should not of. MS ins one of many examples that caused Apple to have that crapent invalidated.
It should NEVER of been granted because it what is called an obvious solution. It was a nature solution to come to. Nothing really special about it.

Pinch to Zoom is another example that Apple tried to patent or though they had a patent on. It something that is natural solution to come by so should never be patented.

This is one of those things where it should not really be patent it is crap.

The obvious and natural way of zooming a photo, a website or even Google Maps before 2007 was to scroll up and down on a magnifier bar, which may be on the screen by default, or enabled through a menu. That was the natural way.

MegamanX · Jul 24, 2013

haruhiko said:
The obvious and natural way of zooming a photo, a website or even Google Maps before 2007 was to scroll up and down on a magnifier bar, which may be on the screen by default, or enabled through a menu. That was the natural way.

You are confusing desktop with multi touch. Also pinch to zoom and what not had been in use for years in the industry.

cmChimera · Jul 25, 2013

macUser2007 said:
The post right above you summarized some of the reasoning, as well as a few other posts in this thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/17624501/).

Thank you for linking me to another post that is completely uninformed. Now I know you're not alone.

koban4max · Jul 25, 2013

appleisking said:
Cool story bro. Now, name even one person who has used that feature.

a friend.

----------

gnasher729 said:
I rarely get phone calls from people close enough so that the phones can touch.

well.....lol...

SAdProZ · Jul 25, 2013

MegamanX said:
No they should not of. MS ins one of many examples that caused Apple to have that crapent invalidated.
It should NEVER of been granted because it what is called an obvious solution. It was a nature solution to come to. Nothing really special about it.

Pinch to Zoom is another example that Apple tried to patent or though they had a patent on. It something that is natural solution to come by so should never be patented.

This is one of those things where it should not really be patent it is crap.

As a graphic design, and trust me on this as I speak for every design thinker, design professor, design author, and design professional: the most "obvious" solutions are the hardest solutions to come by.

Every person without sense thinks elegant "obvious" solutions take a sec to think up. But you guys could not be more wrong.

In fact "obvious" design aesthetic is what drives Apple's philosophy and entire industries have trouble copying it because its effing hard!

Try it sometime.

Tech198 · Jul 27, 2013

wow...

People will need to be on hold for a while while they "decide" to share content..

Whats the idea with this again ? Your on a call.... People can't *wait* anymore can they.

Good technology, but just like everything that's not really major/needed, people will use it "just because it's their"

This sounds good, but seems to me, Apple's just "filling in the gap" where ever possibly by allowing people to do as much sharing as they can while their *waiting*

Oletros · Jul 28, 2013

SAdProZ said:
Verizon panicked, partnered with Samsung, and there is court ordered evidence that Samsung and Verizon scrambled to compete,]

What are you talking about?

----------

SAdProZ said:
As a graphic design, and trust me on this as I speak for every design thinker, design professor, design author, and design professional: the most "obvious" solutions are the hardest solutions to come by.

Every person without sense thinks elegant "obvious" solutions take a sec to think up. But you guys could not be more wrong.

In fact "obvious" design aesthetic is what drives Apple's philosophy and entire industries have trouble copying it because its effing hard!

Try it sometime.

Mm, you know that pinch to zoom has been used in multi touch devices way before Apple shown it on the iPhone, don't you?

SAdProZ · Jul 30, 2013

Oletros said:
What are you talking about?

----------

Mm, you know that pinch to zoom has been used in multi touch devices way before Apple shown it on the iPhone, don't you?

Yes, I know that, and it's not my argument. Not sure how your rhetorical question is an objection. This entire discussion is all over the place. Let's just drop it.

Apple Awarded Patent That Lets Users Share Content With Others While on Hold

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68000

macrumors 68000

macrumors 68040

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 6502

macrumors 6502a

macrumors regular

macrumors 604

macrumors regular

macrumors 601

macrumors 68000

macrumors 6502a

Cancelled

macrumors 603

macrumors 6502a

Our Staff