3 ms·

Why didn't their patent hold up? It seems like it was a novel idea that they invested a lot in bringing to market.

takeda 9y ago
The patent can be either used to block competition from implementing the same features so your product is unique, or licenses could be sold to use it by others. I'm convinced that the latter is happening and the Swype app just got redundant.
losvedir 9y ago
I was curious about that, too, especially since the article so eloquently put it: "for whatever reason". It linked to the patent[0], and it struck me that in the abstract, it ends with: "The present invention then generates a list of possible words associated with the entered part and presents it to user for selection." That's kind of a... specific... outcome of the swiping and I'm surprised that's in there. As I understand it, people get all up and arms about ridiculous patent titles, but it's the full abstract that determines what it exactly covers, and if you deviate just a bit, the patent doesn't apply. In the case of the Google keyboard I use, when I finish swiping it doesn't "present a list of possible words for selection" - it just chooses the "best" one. There is a list elsewhere of alternatives, but I wonder if that's just different enough of a UX that the patent doesn't apply. [0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US7098896 https://patents.google.com/patent/US7098896
- Bjartr 9y ago
  It's not the abstract that matters, it's the list of claims, which is even more specific.
- alexbeloi 9y ago
  >In the case of the Google keyboard I use, when I finish swiping it doesn't "present a list of possible words for selection" - it just chooses the "best" one. IANAL. They probably dropped the ball in writing "presents it to user". If they had stopped at "generates a list of possible words associated with the entered part." There would very likely be a sub-process that generates a list of possible words in all other implementation, that sub-process should be violating the patent regardless of what the user sees.
narag 9y ago
That's discouraging. I have an idea for a writing (not typing) system and it seems I will archive it for good.
- andybak 9y ago
  So you'd rather nobody got the benefit of it if you can't profit from it? Seems slightly bitter. If you genuinely can't benefit then give it away. Aside from the karma there might be unexpected secondary benefits.
  - narag 9y ago
    Give away what? The idea? It's useless by itself. It would take months to implement and produce something patentable.
    - andybak 9y ago
      Yes the idea. If you never plan to use it, put it out there.
      - narag 9y ago
        That didn't work. Please don't tell me to identify it... could put me in trouble. I think there wasn't interest because handwritting seems like old tech :)

The patent can be either used to block competition from implementing the same features so your product is unique, or licenses could be sold to use it by others. I'm convinced that the latter is happening and the Swype app just got redundant.

losvedir 9y ago

I was curious about that, too, especially since the article so eloquently put it: "for whatever reason". It linked to the patent[0], and it struck me that in the abstract, it ends with: "The present invention then generates a list of possible words associated with the entered part and presents it to user for selection." That's kind of a... specific... outcome of the swiping and I'm surprised that's in there. As I understand it, people get all up and arms about ridiculous patent titles, but it's the full abstract that determines what it exactly covers, and if you deviate just a bit, the patent doesn't apply. In the case of the Google keyboard I use, when I finish swiping it doesn't "present a list of possible words for selection" - it just chooses the "best" one. There is a list elsewhere of alternatives, but I wonder if that's just different enough of a UX that the patent doesn't apply. [0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US7098896 https://patents.google.com/patent/US7098896

Bjartr 9y ago
It's not the abstract that matters, it's the list of claims, which is even more specific.
alexbeloi 9y ago
>In the case of the Google keyboard I use, when I finish swiping it doesn't "present a list of possible words for selection" - it just chooses the "best" one. IANAL. They probably dropped the ball in writing "presents it to user". If they had stopped at "generates a list of possible words associated with the entered part." There would very likely be a sub-process that generates a list of possible words in all other implementation, that sub-process should be violating the patent regardless of what the user sees.

narag 9y ago

That's discouraging. I have an idea for a writing (not typing) system and it seems I will archive it for good.

andybak 9y ago
So you'd rather nobody got the benefit of it if you can't profit from it? Seems slightly bitter. If you genuinely can't benefit then give it away. Aside from the karma there might be unexpected secondary benefits.
- narag 9y ago
  Give away what? The idea? It's useless by itself. It would take months to implement and produce something patentable.
  - andybak 9y ago
    Yes the idea. If you never plan to use it, put it out there.
    - narag 9y ago
      That didn't work. Please don't tell me to identify it... could put me in trouble. I think there wasn't interest because handwritting seems like old tech :)