http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm..._mc/microsoftgrantedpatentonbuttonclicktiming
Sounds like there's going to be a bunch of patent wars coming...
Sounds like there's going to be a bunch of patent wars coming...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft patents button
- Thread starter MacFan26
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is just ****ing great! Why doesn't someone patent:
Device for entering data into a limited memory machine using the letters of the alphabet.
Instrument that provides visual feedback on the functioning of a personal computing machine.
Component that allows a two machines to communicate using filaments of copper.
Component used to supply power to a limited memory machine.
Better yet, I'm going to get a patent on doorknobs, or trash cans, or floor mats, or silverware. Idiots.
Device for entering data into a limited memory machine using the letters of the alphabet.
Instrument that provides visual feedback on the functioning of a personal computing machine.
Component that allows a two machines to communicate using filaments of copper.
Component used to supply power to a limited memory machine.
Better yet, I'm going to get a patent on doorknobs, or trash cans, or floor mats, or silverware. Idiots.
stoid said:
Not that I'm trying to defend Microsoft (I'm actually trying to defend the law behind the granting of the patent), but they didn't actually patent the act of pressing a button or the button itself for that matter. They patented the various outputs that can happen based on unique user interaction with a button (i.e., if you click the button one thing happens, if you hold the button down another thing happens, etc.). This is the same logic that lets everyone patent new inventions, because they are not necessarily inventing a completely new product, just a new (novel) way to use it or different type of interaction that was not thougth of before.
That being said, it seems to me that there is a case here for obviousness of the patent, as mice have been using double clicks and single-clicks forever to achieve different results. I guess if someone wants to challenge it, the courts will have to decide.
- reaper
stoid said:
The problem with most of these is that I think IBM got the patent back in the 60s (at least) and they've all run out.
reaper said:
The problem is, though, that such actions *already* exist. Microsoft merely swept in there to patent something already in use. (I have seen apps that use buttons in the "click and hold" method, but not in a desktop icon) Thats where this becomes morally questionable, the "click" and "double-click" aren't novel concepts.
*begins writing MS a cheque for double-clicking 69,570,398 times in his lifetime* 
Double clicking....holding down a button..... Wow, great ideas, MS.
Double clicking....holding down a button..... Wow, great ideas, MS.
Abstract said:
Yeah and don't forget original.
I hope the patent watchdogs take this to the supreme court. This is just plain wrong. Did microsoft claim to invent this type of interface?? I don't know patent laws at all, but I thought if the original company lets the patent lapse then that idea becomes public domain. It seems to me that they are claiming intellectual property that they did not invent, develop, or purchase from another company but merely use with their operating systems.P.S. If I were the makers of a gestures program, I'd sue Microsoft for this infringment!
MS Invented...?
I could have sworn Apple Mac firstly intorduced the mouse with double clicks? Or any click for that matter?!?!
Was it not that DOS was MS first OS and Apple came about with the FIRST OS even with a mouse? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I could have sworn Apple Mac firstly intorduced the mouse with double clicks? Or any click for that matter?!?!
Was it not that DOS was MS first OS and Apple came about with the FIRST OS even with a mouse? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
scam patents
This is ridiculous. I have several synths and other things that react in various ways depending on how you hold down, push, or how hard you press a button or slider or knob. stupid. I saw this story on Wired and it led me to this site: http://www.fightthepatent.com/
It seems there are a lot of bogus patents. Check out the article involving Acacia and adult websites. It seems as though they've patented the entire idea of loading audio or video from servers.
http://www.fightthepatent.com/v2/PornPartners.html
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/pr/Claims/FAQsgeneralinternet.pdf
I think I'll patent the sending of letters to the North Pole.
This is ridiculous. I have several synths and other things that react in various ways depending on how you hold down, push, or how hard you press a button or slider or knob. stupid. I saw this story on Wired and it led me to this site: http://www.fightthepatent.com/
It seems there are a lot of bogus patents. Check out the article involving Acacia and adult websites. It seems as though they've patented the entire idea of loading audio or video from servers.
http://www.fightthepatent.com/v2/PornPartners.html
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/pr/Claims/FAQsgeneralinternet.pdf
I think I'll patent the sending of letters to the North Pole.
Little thing called prior art somebody seems to have forgotten. Put aside the fact that this is basically patenting double-clicking, click-and-holding-or long-clicking, which have been a UI tool since before Microsoft even HAD a GUI of their own. They ostensibly patented a way to have specific application buttons on a PDA do different things depending on how you push them--push the "mail" button and you get your mail; push and hold it, and you get a new message; double-push it and something else happens. Whatever.
Yes, it's useful functionality. It's also a simple (I believe the patent office term is "obvious") PDA extension of concepts that have been around for years on desktop OSes--I'm sure I could find a dozen pieces of shareware and mouse drivers that provide the same functionality.
Furthermore, even if you connect it to a "Hardware application button", as opposed to a general purpose mouse button, it's STILL been done before: If I push the power button on my Mac, it goes to sleep. If I push and hold it, my computer hard-powers-down. Ooh, there's a piece of prior art that's been in use by a dozen companies for several years! How about the buttons on my calculator watch--pushing and holding several of them causes the application tools within my watch to do different things than a simple push. Guess what--that tech has been around for at least a decade.
The Patent Office has gone off the deep end.
Yes, it's useful functionality. It's also a simple (I believe the patent office term is "obvious") PDA extension of concepts that have been around for years on desktop OSes--I'm sure I could find a dozen pieces of shareware and mouse drivers that provide the same functionality.
Furthermore, even if you connect it to a "Hardware application button", as opposed to a general purpose mouse button, it's STILL been done before: If I push the power button on my Mac, it goes to sleep. If I push and hold it, my computer hard-powers-down. Ooh, there's a piece of prior art that's been in use by a dozen companies for several years! How about the buttons on my calculator watch--pushing and holding several of them causes the application tools within my watch to do different things than a simple push. Guess what--that tech has been around for at least a decade.
The Patent Office has gone off the deep end.
eargh...
didn't microsloth try to copyright "ie" caliming that everyone knows it as "Internet Explorer" rather than the somewhat older and much more common understanding of the term as "id est", latin for That Is.......
this latest attempt by Redmond will surely backfire once again (i hope......)
didn't microsloth try to copyright "ie" caliming that everyone knows it as "Internet Explorer" rather than the somewhat older and much more common understanding of the term as "id est", latin for That Is.......
this latest attempt by Redmond will surely backfire once again (i hope......)
Cool new fact. Thanks, I didn't know that ie stood for "id est", although I knew what ie means.
Does the patent office actually reject patent applications anymore, or do they let everything go through as a patent? I say that anytime someone tries to patent someone obvious, it shouldn't go through, and the company should be fined for wasting their time.
My old Handspring Visor has a backlight that turns on when you hold the power button down for a second, and turns on/off if you press it normally. If you push the down button, it'll go one position down a list, and if you hold it, it'll move quickly down a list. Handspring should have patented this.
Just to add....my calculator resets when you push the AC button, but shuts off when you hold it.
Does the patent office actually reject patent applications anymore, or do they let everything go through as a patent? I say that anytime someone tries to patent someone obvious, it shouldn't go through, and the company should be fined for wasting their time.
My old Handspring Visor has a backlight that turns on when you hold the power button down for a second, and turns on/off if you press it normally. If you push the down button, it'll go one position down a list, and if you hold it, it'll move quickly down a list. Handspring should have patented this.
Just to add....my calculator resets when you push the AC button, but shuts off when you hold it.
Abstract said:Cool new fact. Thanks, I didn't know that ie stood for "id est", although I knew what ie means.
Haha, I didn't know that either. That's great that you mentioned your calculator. Just goes to show that buttons like that are in a lot of other things than just computers and pda's. My car for instance, holding the power button turns the stereo off, but pushing it changes the modes from tape to cd, etc.
Does this mean Microsoft is gonna try to sue Apple for using the Play/Pause button on an iPod to turn it off, too?
How stupid can you get?
How stupid can you get?
This doesn't matter...
...since if they ever tried to enforce it, they would almost certainly fail, and have the patent revoked. Basically having a patent like this is useless, since it is not realisticly enforcable. Let them have it.
...since if they ever tried to enforce it, they would almost certainly fail, and have the patent revoked. Basically having a patent like this is useless, since it is not realisticly enforcable. Let them have it.
From what I heard last time my lab tried to patent something, the patent office is so overwhelmed that their system is basically:Abstract said:
Poke the patent a bit, find a few obvious things to complain about, and reject it on those counts (even if it is a legit patent). If whoever wants the patent bothers to come back with reasonable answers to the issues the first time through, the patent is granted.
Not only does this end up rejecting legit patents on the first run, just to weed out the people who won't even bother trying again, but it allows crap like this one through, since they're really not checking very hard for show-stoppers.
And there is a financial penalty for trying to patent something you can't: The cost of patent lawyers and application fees. Of course, if you're Microsoft, that's not exactly a deterrant.