Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Denied Trademark for Multi-Touch

ChrisTX said:
Please list some of these devices, and/or cite examples. Otherwise your argument is null and void. I can't recall any specific device before the original iPhone that was using multi touch. No one pinched to zoom, or double tapped to zoom until Apple came along. It's only so commonplace now because everyone else is ripping on Apples idea. BlackBerry, Palm OS, and Windows Mobile were the smartphones of yesteryear, and none of them had any multi touch.
Click to expand...

As in my previous post: <sigh>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch

One of the early implementations of mutual capacitance touchscreen technology was developed at CERN in 1977[4][5] based on their capacitance touch screens developed in 1972 by Danish electronics engineer Bent Stumpe. This technology was used to develop a new type of human machine interface (HMI) for the control room of the Super Proton Synchrotron particle accelerator.
Click to expand...

Multi-touch technology began in 1982, when the University of Toronto's Input Research Group developed the first human-input multi-touch system. The system used a frosted-glass panel with a camera placed behind the glass. When a finger or several fingers pressed on the glass, the camera would detect the action as one or more black spots on an otherwise white background, allowing it to be registered as an input. Since the size of a dot was dependent on pressure (how hard the person was pressing on the glass), the system was somewhat pressure-sensitive as well.
Click to expand...

Apple does an awesome job of putting things together in a cohesive whole. It was a smart move to go for the trademark but the technology wasn't groundbreaking. At the time using it in a phone-sized device was pretty impressive though.
 
Bastards, go get them Steve/Tim, crush those android fanboy pygmy's who made this disgraceful decision

Everyone associates multitouch with Apple
 
and this is why the patent office is the most ****ed up place, next to the DMV. Patent "plastic music box" no prob, patent how to toast bread, sure, patent mutitouch, whoa whoa whoa, nope sorry can't do that.
 
wikus said:
There actually were devices that used multitouch long before 2007. Also, apple did NOT invent multitouch.

I've noticed an ongoing trend in the mac community and its that apple is responsible for all inventions and they are always the first to do something.... factually not the case.
Click to expand...

That's correct. Apple did not invent multitouch, but you have to agree that they invented the first successful implementation of the technology.
 
CWT1965 said:
Bastards, go get them Steve/Tim, crush those android fanboy pygmy's who made this disgraceful decision

Everyone associates multitouch with Apple
Click to expand...

Best to let it go.

As for the actually important battles, Apple is winning those. Most importantly, on the ground, for the consumer.
 
Granted In my field it was used all the time, it may not have been house-common. But it was very tech common pre 97.

Here is a paper written in 1997 about past multi-touch devices.
http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

There where even multitouch phones before the iPhone if you will believe it.

Yes, bill buxton does work for MS now. But if you dont actually know who he is and what he has done for HCI, hold your tongue.
 
In a related move, Apple has purchased the United States Patent and Trademark Office for an undisclosed sum.

The USPTO was immediately closed and all employees furloughed.

Apple declined comment, but peals of laughter were heard coming from behind the doors at Apple's HQ in Cupertino. One obscene finger gesture was seen in the windows of Apple's HQ along with what appeared to be exposed buttocks creating "pressed ham" on another window.
 
gohanmzt said:
If I'm not mistaken, Jeff Hann was using the term "multi touch" to refer to his invention, which consisted in one or two users interacting with elements displayed in a touch-sensitive screen before apple presented the iphone.
Click to expand...

While that is true the term was not is general use until Apple started using the term on the iPhone. It's the " general usage" point that the appeals board used to deny Apple the trademark.

Jeff hann never tried or wanted to trademark the word.

Apple did.
 
Peace said:
This denial was not for a "patent". It was for a trademark term or word.

Apple has been going through litigation with the trademark office early 2007 . Long before the word was in general use.

Had Apple not come out with the iPhone with multi-touch in 2007 the "terminology " would not be in " general use " today.

The trademark office was wrong.
Click to expand...
I think I understand the principle, that you can trademark a new product name you invented, e.g., FoodPreparizer, but not a word in common usage, e.g., Appetizer, and that the phrase Multi-Touch is in common usage today.

So are you saying that the trademark office was supposed to evaluate the request as if it's the era of the request, not the present era? Is that distinction addressed in the official guidelines for trademark evaluation and approval?
 
noverflow said:
Granted In my field it was used all the time, it may not have been house-common. But it was very tech common pre 97.

Here is a paper written in 1997 about past multi-touch devices.
http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

There where even multitouch phones before the iPhone if you will believe it.

Yes, bill buxton does work for MS now. But if you dont actually know who he is and what he has done for HCI, hold your tongue.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter who invented it it matters who bought it to the public's attention and made it mass market and that was Apple, Mr Hoover didn't invent the vacuum cleaner but the word hoover is always associated with vacuum cleaning "I will hoover the lounge" and so on.
 
*LTD* said:
That may very well be, but what commercial product was actually using it en masse before Apple? We're talking about just a trademark here. Rights to a name.

In this context, Apple's attempt to trademark it is perfectly understandable, as bold (and after a certain point, as doomed) as it was.
Click to expand...

You, and most here, have misunderstood the reasoning behind the denial. It is not that other products are using the term "multi-touch" as a description of their product, it is that "multi-touch" is a generic descriptive term regarding how a myriad of devices - yes, many since the iPhone, but also yes, many before - are interacted with by their user.

This isn't about whether or not Apple made it popular or not, it's that the term is a mainstream description more than a named proprietary technology. Saying that Apple should be able to trademark it is akin to saying that Toyota can trademark the term "driving" because they are one of the most successful automakers right now.

Thus, from the foregoing, we find that “multi-touch” not only identifies the technology, but also describes how a user of the goods operates the device.
Click to expand...
 
Peace said:
While that is true the term was not is general use until Apple started using the term on the iPhone. It's the " general usage" point that the appeals board used to deny Apple the trademark.

Jeff hann never tried or wanted to trademark the word.

Apple did.
Click to expand...

Correct, also the term was there but it was used to describe how the user interacted with the device, which is what the USPTO is saying is the basis for the denial.
 
Doctor Q said:
I think I understand the principle, that you can trademark a new product name you invented, e.g., FoodPreparizer, but not a word in common usage, e.g., Appetizer, and that the phrase Multi-Touch is in common usage today.

So are you saying that the trademark office was supposed to evaluate the request as if it's the era of the request, not the present era? Is that distinction addressed in the official guidelines for trademark evaluation and approval?
Click to expand...

Not at all . Had the trademark office done it properly Apple would have received the trademark in 2007 when the terminology was not in general usage but was used by Apple.
 
Reading through this thread makes me question the literacy level of some of you.

Let's say I make skipping super popular. Everyone does it and associates me with it. Everyone starts skipping everywhere. Would that give me the right to trademark the word, even though it existed and was it in use before?

Just the word mind you, not the process.
 
CQd44 said:
Reading through this thread makes me question the literacy level of some of you.

Let's say I make skipping super popular. Everyone does it and associates me with it. Everyone starts skipping everywhere. Would that give me the right to trademark the word, even though it existed and was it in use before?

Just the word mind you, not the process.
Click to expand...

To be honest. I don't understand your point but I can state one thing.

Had Apple not come out with the iPhone in 2007 the state of "smartphones " would be dismal today. Bash Apple all you want but it was Apple that started this craze and they deserve some credit for it. Period.
 
Within 2 hours of this decision, the USPTO will award a patent for "producing text using a keyboard-like device" to a one-man legal services firm in a basement in Jersey.
 
chrono1081 said:
I'm glad this trademark got denied. Its too common of a word for it to be trademarked.
Click to expand...


I am with you. I am also waiting for them to deny the App Store one as well because that is generic as well.
*LTD* said:
Apple should have applied for this well before 2007. But you can only be so prescient. The term has since achieved a level of generic use that it's too late. Hindsight is 20/20, though.



No, it's damn smart. Apple should attempt to trademark as many terms relating to mobile as possible (so should others.) Some of them Apple will actually get and they'll be able to wield it later.

Some of the attempts won't pan out, like "App Store." You won't win every trademark application. Apple loses nothing in trying, as long as the claim is examined on its own merits and is done so without prejudice (which is expected, anyway.)
Click to expand...

Even if they had chances are it would of been declared generic and as such denied by now any how on the same reasons.

Apple tries to see how far they can push the descriptive stuff. On "App Store" Apple has more of less been told that it is going to be denied when the judge denied Apple request to stop Amazon use of it saying that it looks like it is to generic.

C00rDiNaT0r said:
Was anyone using multitouch on smartphones before Apple? IIRC they all required stylus until the iPhone came out!
Click to expand...
Phone no but other devices yes. Take for example MS table thing (what ever it was called) and it has been around for a long time before hand and was a standard term used by designers before hand.
 
Peace said:
Had Apple not come out with the iPhone in 2007 the state of "smartphones " would be dismal today. Bash Apple all you want but it was Apple that started this craze and they deserve some credit for it. Period.
Click to expand...

Multitouch, coming from "multiple touch" - a touch screen that supports multiple touches of input.

Now, if Apple "got some credit" as you wish it had, what would you think would be a good way for the likes of Android phones to advertise a feature of interaction via multiple touches of input on a screen?

It'd be a consumer nightmare, with unnecessary confusion.
 
Kilamite said:
Multitouch, coming from "multiple touch" - a touch screen that supports multiple touches of input.

Now, if Apple "got some credit" as you wish it had, what would you think would be a good way for the likes of Android phones to advertise a feature of interaction via multiple touches of input on a screen?

It'd be a consumer nightmare, with unnecessary confusion.
Click to expand...

There wouldn't even be android devices had it not been for Apple.

Ask Eric Schmidt ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back