6 ms·
Entrepreneur Wins $625 Million Payout From Apple
- aresant 16y agoThese images do a good job illustrating the similarties between coverflow and scopeware: http://www2.freedownloadscenter.com/ReviewImages/s1025.jpg http://www2.freedownloadscenter.com/ReviewImages/s1025.jpg http://www.hardwarecentral.com/graphics/screenshots/1050351976600vgat436.jpg http://www.hardwarecentral.com/graphics/screenshots/10503519... And a review of the original patents via Apple Insider 2008: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/17/lawsuit_targets_time_based_sorting_in_apples_ipods_time_machine.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/17/lawsuit_target... An interesting 5 year old Google answers thread about the fate of Scopeware -> http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/603242.html http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/603242.html
- DevX101 16y agoaresant's last link is very interesting. I have a suspicion that a lazy lawyer posted that thread, and never bothered up to follow up on licensing. $625M later...
- bialecki 16y agoWow, Longhorn is cited as putting them out of business. If only they could've seen the future...
- bmelton 16y agoYou've just touched on why the 'release early, release often' mantra, in some cases, makes sense. If he were in fact going to be beaten by Longhorn (who knows), it's likely that Apple would have gotten him anyway, but this proves that giving up on the rumor that Microsoft is swinging into your space is naive, pussy-footed thinking at its finest. If, in fact, Longhorn WAS his only threat, he would have had what, 6 years in which to prosper, and possibly even dominate as a 'preferred' alternative to what Microsoft was offering. He did just fine on his own, of course, so the conversation is moot.
- kls 16y agoI am glad the mobile world is blowing up in global thermo nuclear patent war. I hope that it will be so bloody that it leaves a bad taste in everyone mouth for a long time in regards to software patents. I am happy to see a little guy win who was actually trying to push software based on his patent rather than a patent troll or Apple but I would have rather he had not had a case due to software not being patentable. I think the mobile space highlights the damage that software patents do.
- napierzaza 16y agoApple might have lost this time. But the only winners are the big companies when it comes to patents. MS and others have a huge portfolios that crushes everyone who does anything like what they have a patent for. Why are you glad? Do you think patent laws will be overturned by this in the future? They're all just going to continue playing the same game.
- kls 16y agoWhy are you glad? No one can win at the game they are playing, it was always mutually assured destruction, when it came to the big players suing the big players. Apple made a move on HTC thinking that they where not a big enough fish to start a meltdown. Their analysis was wrong, it did. Now with the big fish not focusing on their core competency it gives others an opportunity in the market. The mobile patent wars has grown to big for any of them to control, now the only way they will be able to draw it to an end will be to lobby for patent reform. There is no doubt in my mind that these wars are close to boiling over into the desktop market. Until someone mistepped and started the unwinable war, it was a game stack against the little guy and a tool used exclusively on them. Now the weapon has been turned on the wielders, which was the logical first step that had to happen before any weight would be put behind reform.
- bhiggins 16y agoMore like failed entrepreneur who turned bitter. First blamed Microsoft, now Apple. Maybe he should blame himself.
- kjksf 16y agoHis motivations are irrelevant. The problem is with the patent system that allows getting monopoly for minor (however useful they might be) ideas and awards mind-boggling damages after long and costly trials. Blaming actors in that system is not helpful because it changes focus from relevant (the patent system is broken) to irrelevant (motivations of people or companies that take advantage of the system).
- maxawaytoolong 16y agoInterestingly, he was a victim of the Unabomber. From Wikipedia: In 1993, Gelernter was critically injured opening a mailbomb sent by Theodore Kaczynski, who at that time was an unidentified but violent opponent of technology, dubbed by the press as "the Unabomber".[2] He recovered from his injuries but his right hand and eye were permanently damaged. He chronicled the ordeal in his 1997 book Drawing Life: Surviving the Unabomber.
- evo_9 16y agoStupid tiny iPhone arrows... Sorry I downvoted you when I was trying opposite. I upvoted 2 other post to rectify.
- sasvari 16y agoyeah, that was also my first association when I read Gelernter. remembered him from the movie Das Netz: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Netz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Netz
- tav 16y agoHe has also made some significant contributions to computer science — linda/tuple spaces in particular have been extremely influential in distributed computing. Not to mention his sci-fi works.
- seles 16y agoThere's getting to be so many patents that it might be harder to determine if original software you've written is patented than actually developing it.
- cvg 16y agoI'm curious to know how the technology is used after a patent suit like this. Do companies like Apple usually license the patented technology or do they remove the offending code? I imagine there could be a lot more money involved if the appeals are shot down.
- turboway 16y agoI am interested to see when a broader coalition against the existing patent system is forming. or even if ... The world of patents has become perverted in recent years: patents are seen as valuable things in themselves – the more the merrier – irrespective of whether they do, truly, promote innovation. Worse: in the world of software, they are actually brakes on that innovation, particularly as they begin to interact and form impenetrable patent thickets. http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Is-Microsoft-running-out-of-steam-1102654.html http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Is-Microsoft-running-o...
- dkasper 16y agoDavid Gelernter is an interesting guy; I remember hearing him on NPR's OnPoint talking about his book Judaism: A Way of Being. Link if anyone's interested: http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/12/david-gelernter http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/12/david-gelernter
- pwpwp 16y agoMirror Worlds patents that are probably the issue here: http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=XJ4SAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=XJ4SAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=pcASAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=pcASAAAAEBAJ Personally, I find it outrageous for an academic to demand credit for "inventing" displaying files side by side, searching files by content, and archiving files by time. The Sumerians probably already did this.
- megablast 16y agoSure, they did it. But they didn't do it on a computer. Then on the internet. Then on a mobile device. They are all completely different issues, worthy of an extra patent or two. I am just waiting for the next big thing, so I can patent everything all over again. Do you think iPads count as computers or a completely new device?
- dstein 16y agoPretty much all software patents boil down to "method of organizing information".
- gargantuan 16y agoI'll just file a patent on a business method profiting from patents on methods of organizing information.
- Tichy 16y agoMy first reaction was the same. However, I bet Apple tried to patent these things, too. So it would be sort of balancing justice - you want software patents, let them bite you...
- gojomo 16y agoI have mixed feelings about this. I think Gerlernter is an important computer science visionary. There are still good ideas for today's interfaces in his 1993 book predating the web 'Mirror Worlds'. But I also don't think he deserves $625 million for having patented some of his ideas/predictions about computer interfaces. In his own writings, the tone is often prophetic: not "here's my nifty invention" but "this is the inevitable path we're on". Seeing what everyone else will see a few years early is a valuable skill; it's not so valuable it needs to be rewarded with a 20-year patent monopoly.
- qjz 16y agoBut he followed up by forming a company, developing, and shipping actual software based on these ideas. This doesn't look like mere patent trolling.
- tyng 16y agoHe may have tried, but his execution wasn't anywhere near Apple's. Instead of suing Apple for money, he should have praise Apple for making his vision a reality
- kls 16y agoYou mean like Apple praised Google for Android? or Microsoft for Windows? I am sorry but Apple is one of the worst offenders when it comes to litigating copycats. I think we need to get rid of software patents all together but historically Apple has never praised copy cats of their original ideas why should this guy be any different? Because it is Apple?
- Samuel_Michon 16y agoIs Google's Android better than iOS? Is Microsoft's Windows better than Mac OS X? There are no obvious answers. Now, compare some screenshots of Gelernter's Scopeware and Apple's CoverFlow. In this case it's obvious that Apple's implementation is a lot better, in its presentation as well as its ease of use. There are dozens of cases where Apple took someone else's idea and improved on it, but I can't think of any good examples where the reverse happened.
- patrickgzill 16y agoPrior art: Zoomracks. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoomracks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoomracks
- GHFigs 16y ago"Steven Jobs may be no inventor, but to his credit he recognized elegance when he saw it and understood its significance." -- David Gelernter, in his 1998 book Machine Beauty. About ten pages after the above quote, Gelernter describes pretty much everything this suit was about in some detail, e.g. a use of the "time travel" metaphor very much like Time Machine's Finder interface, wherein the whole interface reverts to a previous state. Even if you don't agree with the verdict (or the damages, yikes) it's unthinkable after reexamining this book that folks at Apple didn't get some ideas from Gelernter's work, perhaps without even realizing it. Incidentally, it is a great book that I highly recommend.
- kls 16y agoSure they did, The iPhone was a eerily similar concept to a device patented in the late seventies or early eighties. I wish I could dig up the link, but man it looked like a wholesale copy of this patent. Multi-touch and everything. Someone at Apple is rifling through old patents for ideas.
- b-man 16y agoNot exactly patented, but the concepts behind tablets, smartphones, and the PC itself can be traced directly to -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook
- kls 16y agoAs well there are a good deal of precidence of Apple doing this: http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/Konfabulator_Inventors_Not_Flattered_by_Apple_Rip-off/ http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/Konfabulator_Inventor... http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/08/08/apples-research-rip-off-department/ http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/08/08/apples-research-rip-of... http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/apple-tablet-ebook/ http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/apple-tablet-ebook/ http://gizmodo.com/5046463/apple-admits-british-man-invented-ipod-in-1979-uses-him-to-win-patent-lawsuit http://gizmodo.com/5046463/apple-admits-british-man-invented...
- tyng 16y agoThe verdict would suggest, and it's a common misunderstanding to think that, the person who comes up with the idea first is more important for innovation than the person who executes it. This is encouraging talkers and discouraging doers. Yes Gelernter may be the first person that came up with the "mirror world" idea (not to mention he has already made money from the books he sold), but instead of suing Apple for money, he should have praise Apple for making his vision a reality.
- atomical 16y agoIf the world worked this way no one would innovate because the bigger players would start their copy machines every time someone with courage and a few great ideas sought to change the world. If someone has a plan to rid us of the patent system and protect innovation I have yet to hear it...
- kls 16y agoThe real world does not work that way, there is a lot of time, energy and risk put into success. The big players tend to opt for purchasing the little guy because the time, energy and risk have already been accounted for. Even the big guys fail at endeavors so many times it makes more sense to acquire the small guys who has mixed the formula correctly.
- kjksf 16y agoThis is a common claim but easily debunked. We know that patent protection is not necessary for innovation. Patents are relatively new invention (1623 in UK per Wikipedia). And yet there were so many things invented before that, of much more fundamental nature than any software patent. Second argument is an economic thought experiment. Let's say there is no word processing software yet and there's a million dollars to be made in word processing software. If we go by your "no innovation without monopoly" rule, no one will invent word processing out of fear that someone else will take part of the possible profits. That's complete bollocks. If there's money in it, people will do it. Patents are more likely to be harmful because they limit competition and lack of competition hurts customers with higher prices for existing stuff and less possibility to build on stuff that has been done before. This case shows this well: the guy's idea might be swell, but do we really expect everyone to either not to anything similar in the future or pay him $625 million for the privilege? Does anyone really claims that given billions of educated people on the planet no one would come up with this idea independently even if this one guy kept it to himself?
- gallerytungsten 16y agoNotice it says Apple is going to appeal. Of course, they'll drag this out a while, and will likely settle for a much lower number in the end.
- niallsmart 16y agoCoverflow wasn't even developed in-house at Apple, they acquired it. According to wikipedia "Cover Flow was conceived by artist Andrew Coulter Enright[1] and originally implemented by an independent Macintosh developer, Jonathan del Strother. Enright later named the interaction style fliptych to distinguish it from the particular Cover Flow implementation.[2]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Flow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Flow
- VladRussian 16y agoa really bad thing about current patents (enforcement) is that it redistributes significant resources - time&money - from possibly productive purposes in an engineering company to [both sides] lawyers' pockets. A "40% patent layers tax". A parasitic drag if to speak aerodynamically.
- jrockway 16y agoExcellent. When software patents start costing huge companies $625 million a pop, they'll be gone Real Soon.
- dctoedt 16y agoOr monkey see, monkey do - the huge companies might instead redouble their efforts to get their own patents. Years ago Microsoft got nailed by Stac for infringement of a patent on disk compression techniques (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#Microsoft_lawsuit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#Microsoft_laws...), which seems to have spurred Microsoft into applying for patents of its own.
- jonhendry 16y agoGelernter isn't exactly what I think of when I read "entrepreneur". Technically, I suppose he is, but I just think of an entrepreneur as someone with more on the line. It's like the old joke about the chicken and the pig and their commitment to breakfast. He's the tenured chicken providing the idea eggs, not the pig providing the bacon and working to make a viable business.