5 ms·

Right, but using that in a human/computer interface was not possible/intuitive until capacitive touch screen was available, and even then it was a stroke of gen

Right, but using that in a human/computer interface was not possible/intuitive until capacitive touch screen was available, and even then it was a stroke of genius to "port" real life object interaction into the software realm. They didn't patent the gesture, the patented its usage in the human/software interface context.

Retra 11y ago
That is the only context in which that gesture makes sense. You couldn't patent the steering wheel just because you stick it in something that's not a car. You'd have to use it for something that's not steering or wheeling. Slide-to-unlock is obvious because it's based on a bolt that you ... slide to unlock. There's no novelty in unlocking something, software or not, by solving such a simple 'puzzle' as moving your finger sideways. It's certainly not a stroke of genius.
sangnoir 11y ago
> even then it was a stroke of genius to "port" real life object interaction into the software realm This is my first encounter with someone who thinks that "doing X on a computer" is a stroke of genius. If X is not patentable, "porting" it into the software realm shouldn't either.
- WildUtah 11y ago
  You've apparently never met anyone from the patent bar. Their entire purpose nowadays is often to justify monopolies based on nothing more than doing it on a computer. [0] The judges of the CAFC -- the patent court -- make a deliberate effort to pose as innocent fools being astonished by the most basic applications of computers. [1] That's the root of the new power of the patent system. Of course, the current subject proves that even legitimate worthwhile research can produce absurd and abusive patents. [0] http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/13-1505.Opinion.12-3-2014.1.PDF http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-or... [1]http://patentlyo.com/patent/2015/10/concentrated-patent-jurisdictions.html#comment-316474 http://patentlyo.com/patent/2015/10/concentrated-patent-juri...

Retra 11y ago

That is the only context in which that gesture makes sense. You couldn't patent the steering wheel just because you stick it in something that's not a car. You'd have to use it for something that's not steering or wheeling. Slide-to-unlock is obvious because it's based on a bolt that you ... slide to unlock. There's no novelty in unlocking something, software or not, by solving such a simple 'puzzle' as moving your finger sideways. It's certainly not a stroke of genius.

sangnoir 11y ago

> even then it was a stroke of genius to "port" real life object interaction into the software realm This is my first encounter with someone who thinks that "doing X on a computer" is a stroke of genius. If X is not patentable, "porting" it into the software realm shouldn't either.

WildUtah 11y ago
You've apparently never met anyone from the patent bar. Their entire purpose nowadays is often to justify monopolies based on nothing more than doing it on a computer. [0] The judges of the CAFC -- the patent court -- make a deliberate effort to pose as innocent fools being astonished by the most basic applications of computers. [1] That's the root of the new power of the patent system. Of course, the current subject proves that even legitimate worthwhile research can produce absurd and abusive patents. [0] http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/13-1505.Opinion.12-3-2014.1.PDF http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-or... [1]http://patentlyo.com/patent/2015/10/concentrated-patent-jurisdictions.html#comment-316474 http://patentlyo.com/patent/2015/10/concentrated-patent-juri...