5 ms·

Interesting, I guess there's so much prior work around* it should be easy to dismiss the patent. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager https://

Interesting, I guess there's so much prior work around* it should be easy to dismiss the patent. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager

jeroenhd 9y ago
Exactly! The first thing I thought of when I read the title of the patent was the tmux session I had opened in my terminal. Given how GNU/Unix Screen has been available for thirty years I doubt this patent will hold up in court.
- kalleboo 9y ago
  > I doubt this patent will hold up in court. Of course the problem with the patent system is, who can afford to court? Even if they get completely pro-bono legal help from someone like the EFF, it's a massive time-sink and also means their game is no longer on sale.
- geocar 9y ago
  > The first thing I thought of when I read the title of the patent was the tmux session I had opened Looking at these screenshots[1] and these diagrams[2] I can't possibly agree that this is what you're doing with tmux. [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks.com/moom/ http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks... [2]: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/US20130219331A1-20130822-D00000.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/... > I doubt this patent will hold up in court. I don't think a judge would be amused by that defence either.
  - asdfgadsfgasfdg 9y ago
    I agree this set up of window positioning is much less useful than actual tiling window managers.
wereHamster 9y ago
Please go read the patent, it describes an "apparatus and method" that is much more advanced than traditional tiling window managers. The patent doesn't even compare to simple terminal based tiling of sub-shells. It also describes a GUI to control the positions, and describes in detail how it's supposed to work. There is a section "Description of the Related Art" in the patent which makes references to existing (at that time, year 2008) approaches and why they are not good enough. Example: "[...] Windows provides [...] commands which are accessible from the Windows taskbar. However, these commands are not as intuitive as they could be and they do not provide a desired level of control when positioning windows".
- forgotpwtomain 9y ago
  > Please go read the patent, it describes an "apparatus and method" that is much more advanced than traditional tiling window managers. I read/skimmed the patent, I cannot find anything described which is obviously novel. Care to provide a quote of these particular features?
  - geocar 9y ago
    A judge is not going to skim the patent. They will patiently read each and every independent claim, and evaluate whether Moom implements any of them. In evaluating claims 1 and 2 (¶9) I imagine that a judge will get to this screenshot[1] and compare it to this diagram[2] and ask the authors of Moom for their justification. This justification can indeed be that it isn't novel, but I do not think the judge is likely to accept it because the patent examiner did indeed grant the patent. In evaluating claim 3 (¶17) it may be that Moom is not infringing, but it is difficult to tell from screenshots and a video. [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks.com/moom/ http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks... [2]: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/US20130219331A1-20130822-D00000.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/...
    - asdfgadsfgasfdg 9y ago
      > because the patent examiner did indeed grant the patent. I am not a patent lawyer but I don't think that how it works. The patent examiner is not qualified to do and does not do an exhaustive check for novelness. They mainly do a procedural check.

jeroenhd 9y ago

Exactly! The first thing I thought of when I read the title of the patent was the tmux session I had opened in my terminal. Given how GNU/Unix Screen has been available for thirty years I doubt this patent will hold up in court.

kalleboo 9y ago
> I doubt this patent will hold up in court. Of course the problem with the patent system is, who can afford to court? Even if they get completely pro-bono legal help from someone like the EFF, it's a massive time-sink and also means their game is no longer on sale.
geocar 9y ago
> The first thing I thought of when I read the title of the patent was the tmux session I had opened Looking at these screenshots[1] and these diagrams[2] I can't possibly agree that this is what you're doing with tmux. [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks.com/moom/ http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks... [2]: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/US20130219331A1-20130822-D00000.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/... > I doubt this patent will hold up in court. I don't think a judge would be amused by that defence either.
- asdfgadsfgasfdg 9y ago
  I agree this set up of window positioning is much less useful than actual tiling window managers.

wereHamster 9y ago

Please go read the patent, it describes an "apparatus and method" that is much more advanced than traditional tiling window managers. The patent doesn't even compare to simple terminal based tiling of sub-shells. It also describes a GUI to control the positions, and describes in detail how it's supposed to work. There is a section "Description of the Related Art" in the patent which makes references to existing (at that time, year 2008) approaches and why they are not good enough. Example: "[...] Windows provides [...] commands which are accessible from the Windows taskbar. However, these commands are not as intuitive as they could be and they do not provide a desired level of control when positioning windows".

forgotpwtomain 9y ago
> Please go read the patent, it describes an "apparatus and method" that is much more advanced than traditional tiling window managers. I read/skimmed the patent, I cannot find anything described which is obviously novel. Care to provide a quote of these particular features?
- geocar 9y ago
  A judge is not going to skim the patent. They will patiently read each and every independent claim, and evaluate whether Moom implements any of them. In evaluating claims 1 and 2 (¶9) I imagine that a judge will get to this screenshot[1] and compare it to this diagram[2] and ask the authors of Moom for their justification. This justification can indeed be that it isn't novel, but I do not think the judge is likely to accept it because the patent examiner did indeed grant the patent. In evaluating claim 3 (¶17) it may be that Moom is not infringing, but it is difficult to tell from screenshots and a video. [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks.com/moom/ http://web.archive.org/web/20110309004337/https://manytricks... [2]: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/US20130219331A1-20130822-D00000.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20130219331A1/...
  - asdfgadsfgasfdg 9y ago
    > because the patent examiner did indeed grant the patent. I am not a patent lawyer but I don't think that how it works. The patent examiner is not qualified to do and does not do an exhaustive check for novelness. They mainly do a procedural check.