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

Apple Wins Broad Patent on iPhone Multi-Touch User Interface

in hindsight.....

nostaws said:
I think a lot of these awarded patents are way too broad and stifle creativity. Whether it is Lodys or Apple, some of these patents are just a logical progression of ideas.
Click to expand...

it's always easier, after something is created, to look at it and see how the person who made the jump was just extending "a logical progression of ideas."

other people might say it was a creative leap.

if you spend much time in the "creating' mode it doesn't always seem at all the "next logical step" but often is a misstep with great results.

this is not an attack on the post, but simply a way of saying how it easy it is for critics sitting on the sidelines to say how things should have, could have, must have...gone down.
 
writingdevil said:
it's always easier, after something is created, to look at it and see how the person who made the jump was just extending "a logical progression of ideas."

other people might say it was a creative leap.

if you spend much time in the "creating' mode it doesn't always seem at all the "next logical step" but often is a misstep with great results.

this is not an attack on the post, but simply a way of saying how it easy it is for critics sitting on the sidelines to say how things should have, could have, must have...gone down.
Click to expand...

Indeed. This may seem obvious now, but the "secondary indicia of non-obviousness" say otherwise: (1) the invention's commercial success, (2) long felt but unresolved needs, (3) the failure of others, (4) skepticism by experts, (5) praise by others, (6) teaching away by others, (7) recognition of a problem, (8) copying of the invention by competitors, and (9) other relevant factors.
 
cmaier said:
Thanks.

Patent doesn't cover what everyone says. It covers only the use of one finger to move a web page while using two fingers to scroll a frame. (or m fingers and n fingers).
Click to expand...

If multi-touch with two fingers or more is now protected, this is going to put a serious damper on my making out techniques. :eek:
 
This is awesome.

I'm completely favorable to competition. I do think that it leads to innovation and new technologies, with the consumer being the one who benefits the most from it.

On the other hand, I'm 100% against copying, and for the past 4 years that is basically the ONLY thing the industry has done: copy the iPhone. A few companies copied not only the physical dimensions, looks and design, but also the operating system looks.

I hope this gives Apple more ammunition to keep the iPhone unique, so all the other manufacturers can try to come up with something cool on their own, as I also hope that more patents related to the iPhone will be still granted to them. They invented it, nothing more fair than that.
 
Are we dense or what?

GFLPraxis said:
Disclaimer: I despise our broken patent system and realize this will unfortunately likely be used to strongarm competitors.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what patents are for. The give you legal protection should someone try to rip off your invention. In this case Apple did invent something very unique so the patent grant is reasonable.
That said, I really wonder what people like the folks at Samsung were thinking. Steve Jobs got on stage and ranted about how hard they'd patented it during the introduction presentation. This was Jobs' baby. I'm not surprised that he was willing to press the big red lawsuit button in the patent arms race, and they really are going to get what was coming to them.
Click to expand...
It is pretty simple, they saw that they could potentially copy this interface, which was demonstrating great success, without the investment in time and money to develop their own. It is a classic rip off.
However, sued competitors = less innovation all around.
Click to expand...
Actually exactly the opposite. Sue Samsung with success and Samsung is forced to innovate to stay in the market. Your position seems to imply the rest of the world is too stupid to compete with Apple. This isn't true but there is a lack of willingness to innovate when a rip off is a quicker track to profits.
Hopefully this isn't broad enough to hurt the actually interesting competitors (especially WebOS/Windows Phone 7) and only hits designs like Samsung's.
Click to expand...

No what it needs to do is to hit every one that tries to directly rip off Apples efforts here. That is the whole point of the patent system, it levels the playing field no matter what your connections are. Further why do you believe that it isn't possible to develop alternatives to the approach outlined in the patent? Patents actually drive innovation as companies seek ways to compete, Apple securing this patent is a good thing for all platforms.
 
kdarling said:
Hardly. The only multi-touch gesture specific to Apple that I can think of, is their three-finger handicapped zoom mode switcher.



The history of touch did not begin in 2007 :)

To those of us developing on touchscreens for decades before Apple, they brought nothing unusual to the table. (I myself first developed on capacitive screens starting in 1992. If you went to Foxwoods and other casinos back then, you might've used my work.)

This patent needs to be struck down as obvious to anyone practiced in the art. Using multiple fingers is a time-honored way of expressing alternative actions on a multi-touch screen, as seen by pinch gestures back in the early '90s, and by the use of more than one finger to denote ctrl-Click or context actions.

(This patent reminds me of the one Apple's trying to get for imitating knob rotations with two fingers, another gesture that's been done for years.)
Click to expand...

Interesting. I had never encountered such touch gestures before in any other context. It was always point and click and nothing else.

So those other companies back in the '90s patented all these multi-touch gestures, right?
 
igorleandro said:
This is awesome.

I'm completely favorable to competition. I do think that it leads to innovation and new technologies, with the consumer being the one who benefits the most from it.

On the other hand, I'm 100% against copying, and for the past 4 years that is basically the ONLY thing the industry has done: copy the iPhone. A few companies copied not only the physical dimensions, looks and design, but also the operating system looks.

I hope this gives Apple more ammunition to keep the iPhone unique, so all the other manufacturers can try to come up with something cool on their own, as I also hope that more patents related to the iPhone will be still granted to them. They invented it, nothing more fair than that.
Click to expand...

Look, everyone needs to read the posts by cmaier, someone who has KNOWLEDGE of this area.

This patent does NOT do what you think. The original article has not read the claims of the patent correctly and some fanboys are getting hot and heavy over a complete NON-ISSUE. This will NOT affect competitors in the way you think.
 
ChrisTX said:
They're only "way too broad" because now EVERYONE is copying, and using for free Apples ideas on multitouch. People tend to forget that before the first iPhone in 2007 no one was pinching to zoom, using double tap, slide to unlock, etc. It's only broad when you forget where all of this came from.
Click to expand...

You are forgetting:
Close four or five fingers together to return to the home screen.
Scroll up or down with four or five fingers to view the multitasking tray.
Scroll left or right with four or five fingers to switch between open apps.
 
This is just ignorant and reflects a misunderstanding of what patents are.

Les Kern said:
Predict it will be like this: Either a company invents a whole new method or they pay Apple. Even in these monopoly-loving days of corporatist rule, Apple will not be allowed to shut anyone down. Won't happen.
Click to expand...

The best thing that could happen is that Apple does in fact whip out a few manufactures, especially those coping Apples software directly. In the end it isn't the big deal that many are making it out to be as this is a very easy patent to get around. I can think of a half dozen ways right off the top of my head. All this patent does is protect Apples unique implementation nothing more. It does not exclude other approaches at all.
 
SuperMatt said:
Does patent law lend itself to patent trolls more than to companies that actually ship products? It sure seems to. An idiotic patent like Lodsys files all these lawsuits. However, when Apple sues Samsung for obviously ripping them off, some judge says "can't we just all get along?" Justice is FAR from blind in this country. Sorry.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the recent Apple vs. Samsung is NOT about patents, but "Trade Dress" (completely different IP beast I think).
 
Lone Deranger said:
Really? I think it's just the opposite. In this case, rather than looking at an iPhone and copying that, the competitors will now have to think for themselves for a change.
The way Apple decided to do the iPhone, it's GUI, the user experience, the Appstore, etc. is not the only way to do a Mobile phone. However, looking at the majority of the competition's product line you'd be forgiven if you'd thought otherwise.
I'd rather see Samsung, HTC, Nokia, etc, come up with their own solution to mobile communication. If they can, and are prepared to invest in such a project for the long haul, just like Apple did (remember, Apple worked for years in secret before they felt they got it right), we might actually see some true innovation.
Click to expand...

http://www.ificlaims.com/news/top-patents.html
"IFI CLAIMS Announces Top Global Companies Ranked By 2010 U.S. Patents"
Samsung #2 - 4551 patents
Apple #46 - 563 patents

I wouldn't exactly say others should come up with their own solution to mobile communication. There's plenty of innovation coming out of others.



Proof Apple can't agree with itself in how to measure how innovative a company is.

--S Jobs says 'we patented the hell out of iphone etc', meaning Apple believes innovative company like itself owns tons of patents. Hence Apple is an innovative company.
--And yet despite Samsung hitting #2 spot in top 50 list (and apple is #46) in the annual list for 10+ years (granted not all are mobile related but obviously important things like ram, how to manufacture certain parts), Apple's lawyers claim Samsung doesn't innovate.

Hey I'm typing this on a mac and checking email on my iphone so don't call me a hater. just saying what i see.
 
Last edited:
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