5 ms·

I think it is fair to say that Samsung may have crossed some lines as far as "trade dress" goes. But did Apple really invent pinch to zoom? Jeff Han demonstrat

I think it is fair to say that Samsung may have crossed some lines as far as "trade dress" goes. But did Apple really invent pinch to zoom? Jeff Han demonstrated pinch to zoom gestures at TED in 2006, Microsoft Surface in 2007 before the iPhone was released, and I've seen various forms of "pinch to zoom" on different tablets and smart board applications. I think that Apple did a good job developing some multi-touch input standards, like pinch to zoom as an OS standard rather than just a feature specific to an application. I don't think you should be able to patent a standard and it is counter-intuitive to developing a standard to begin with. If we had patents on desktop GUI user input standards like right click, ctrl key modifiers like ctrl-scroll to zoom, etc. then using computers would be a much bigger PITA. EDIT: Many have rightly pointed out that Apple was first to file and that Jeff Han's work was too close to the filing date to qualify as prior art - However, I was simply asking whether he truly believed Apple "invented" pinch to zoom. Legally you can argue that Apple holds a valid patent as demonstrated by them winning this case - but I think it is invalid to say they "invented" anything as intuitive as pinch to zoom which has been demonstrated in a variety of prototypes, tablets, and applications over 2 decades. Also

josephlord 14y ago
The Apple Patent #7,812,826 seems to have been applied for in December 2006 and under US rules at the time the priority date could be 12 months earlier. This makes it quite possible that TED 2006 would be too late to be prior art.
danudey 14y ago
Apple's pinch-to-zoom patent was filed on December 29, 2006, and covers a multitouch display that a) detects two contacts; b) which perform a gesture; c) which affects an image; d) and then the contacts disconnect; e) after which a second set of contacts is detected; f) which perform another operation within a set period of time. In other words, patent #7,812,826 only applies when you pinch to zoom and then pinch to zoom again within a predefined amount of time.
- Xcelerate 14y ago
  Wouldn't it be great to just program things without worrying about patenting what you've done or whether someone else has patented it?
  - tlholaday 14y ago
    Wouldn't it be great to just copy successful devices without paying a designer?
    - mibbitier 14y ago
      "pinch to zoom" is obvious. It's practically the only way you could zoom things on a touch screen. It's like patenting the steering wheel. Don't pretend it's innovative or took any time whatsoever to come up with. It's blatantly obvious and should never have been granted.
      - ahoyhere 14y ago
        If it's obvious, why didn't it exist on any of the touchscreen products which went before the iPhone?
        pjscott 14y ago
        How many of those touchscreens could detect multiple touches at once? That's a prerequisite for doing pinch-to-zoom with a capacitive touchscreen.
        mibbitier 14y ago
        It likely existed on the first light-pen devices from the 80s. Apple just happened to popularize it.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    I understand the appeal of this line of argument, and to an extent I agree with it. I think independent invention is a real problem with patents as applied to software. Yet, Samsung didn't independently invent a phone that diverges from the Android default to look more like the iPhone.
magicalist 14y ago
Does anyone know why Jeff Han's work was not emphasized more as prior art? (there was also more at the time, but I can't recall specifics now). > If we had patents on desktop GUI user input standards like right click, ctrl key modifiers like ctrl-scroll to zoom, etc. then using computers would be a much bigger PITA. This is the key right here. I don't think everyone fully understands what is happening around these UI patents in the rush to defend someone's "inventions" in the face of would-be-counterfeiters. One of the most important aspects of patents is that they do not account for independent invention. Leave Apple out of your mind for a minute. Imagine your startup is developing a web or mobile app, and you come up with a nice way of presenting some kind of responsive UI that's well tailored to the data your app displays. It follows naturally from your data model, you end up with some really nice UX, and you get some internet buzz because it's a distinguishing feature of your app (see: pull to refresh, et al). You will be liable if some company filed a patent for that idea 10 years ago, even if you've never heard of them or their product. What's particularly insidious about these patents is that there's no real mechanism described here, like you'd have to provide for a mechanical device. Instead, you can get away with describing a "computing device" that "receives user input" and acts on it it in a fairly generic way, and suddenly you have a patent on not an invention, but a whole class of interaction or a generic human movement paired with a particular action on screen. And you won't know you've infringed until you're sued! Copyright and trademark have these well covered. They allow for independent invention and are much more specific to a particular expression of an idea. Regardless of copying and just deserts, regardless of the fact that this wasn't going to be settled in this case, no one here should be cheering the current standard for acceptable software patents.
- pooriaazimi 14y ago
  Jeff Han demoed it in late 2006, merely months before iPhone introduction. Apple started working on iPhone (and multitouch screens) in the early 00s and (I'm recalling from memory) they filed their multitouch patent in 2004 or 2005.
  - snowwrestler 14y ago
    In addition they purchased Fingerworks, who began working on capacitive multitouch sensing and gestures in the 1990s. I believe the founders of Fingerworks held several patents in that area--and still work at Apple today. I have a Fingerworks touchpad and it is amazing. Apple is slowly rolling the gestures in their products. For instance with Lion the "click and drag" gesture went from a double-tap-and-hold (Apple standard for years) to a three-finger drag (what it is on my Fingerworks pad).
001sky 14y ago
MSFT just recently acquired Perceptive Pixel last month, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptive_Pixel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptive_Pixel. [Jeff Han's company, and maker of multi-touch user interfaces]. Presumably these patents were still pending during alot of the timeline, as US 7,844,915 has only been out since Nov 2010. It Languished at the patent office for 3.5 yrs? edit: language/clarifications
electromagnetic 14y ago
> I think it is invalid to say they "invented" anything as intuitive as pinch to zoom which has been demonstrated in a variety of prototypes, tablets, and applications over 2 decades. The lunacy here is that apple wasn't even granted the patent over a specific gesture. IE pinch=zoom in and spread=zoom out or vice versa. It's that the movement of pinching/spreading has been patented here in all and every application of the gesture as it would inherently be used for zoom function, despite it being demonstrated prior to that date. This is like Microsofts multi-click patent, that patents all mouse clicks that can have different functionality. short/long/multiple clicks. It's like granting Kleenex a patent over all facial tissues and the right to use a piece of tissue for your face. The only competitive idea being a facial cloth like a hankie.

josephlord 14y ago

The Apple Patent #7,812,826 seems to have been applied for in December 2006 and under US rules at the time the priority date could be 12 months earlier. This makes it quite possible that TED 2006 would be too late to be prior art.

danudey 14y ago

Apple's pinch-to-zoom patent was filed on December 29, 2006, and covers a multitouch display that a) detects two contacts; b) which perform a gesture; c) which affects an image; d) and then the contacts disconnect; e) after which a second set of contacts is detected; f) which perform another operation within a set period of time. In other words, patent #7,812,826 only applies when you pinch to zoom and then pinch to zoom again within a predefined amount of time.

Xcelerate 14y ago
Wouldn't it be great to just program things without worrying about patenting what you've done or whether someone else has patented it?
- tlholaday 14y ago
  Wouldn't it be great to just copy successful devices without paying a designer?
  - mibbitier 14y ago
    "pinch to zoom" is obvious. It's practically the only way you could zoom things on a touch screen. It's like patenting the steering wheel. Don't pretend it's innovative or took any time whatsoever to come up with. It's blatantly obvious and should never have been granted.
    - ahoyhere 14y ago
      If it's obvious, why didn't it exist on any of the touchscreen products which went before the iPhone?
      - pjscott 14y ago
        How many of those touchscreens could detect multiple touches at once? That's a prerequisite for doing pinch-to-zoom with a capacitive touchscreen.
      - mibbitier 14y ago
        It likely existed on the first light-pen devices from the 80s. Apple just happened to popularize it.
- rayiner 14y ago
  I understand the appeal of this line of argument, and to an extent I agree with it. I think independent invention is a real problem with patents as applied to software. Yet, Samsung didn't independently invent a phone that diverges from the Android default to look more like the iPhone.

magicalist 14y ago

Does anyone know why Jeff Han's work was not emphasized more as prior art? (there was also more at the time, but I can't recall specifics now). > If we had patents on desktop GUI user input standards like right click, ctrl key modifiers like ctrl-scroll to zoom, etc. then using computers would be a much bigger PITA. This is the key right here. I don't think everyone fully understands what is happening around these UI patents in the rush to defend someone's "inventions" in the face of would-be-counterfeiters. One of the most important aspects of patents is that they do not account for independent invention. Leave Apple out of your mind for a minute. Imagine your startup is developing a web or mobile app, and you come up with a nice way of presenting some kind of responsive UI that's well tailored to the data your app displays. It follows naturally from your data model, you end up with some really nice UX, and you get some internet buzz because it's a distinguishing feature of your app (see: pull to refresh, et al). You will be liable if some company filed a patent for that idea 10 years ago, even if you've never heard of them or their product. What's particularly insidious about these patents is that there's no real mechanism described here, like you'd have to provide for a mechanical device. Instead, you can get away with describing a "computing device" that "receives user input" and acts on it it in a fairly generic way, and suddenly you have a patent on not an invention, but a whole class of interaction or a generic human movement paired with a particular action on screen. And you won't know you've infringed until you're sued! Copyright and trademark have these well covered. They allow for independent invention and are much more specific to a particular expression of an idea. Regardless of copying and just deserts, regardless of the fact that this wasn't going to be settled in this case, no one here should be cheering the current standard for acceptable software patents.

pooriaazimi 14y ago
Jeff Han demoed it in late 2006, merely months before iPhone introduction. Apple started working on iPhone (and multitouch screens) in the early 00s and (I'm recalling from memory) they filed their multitouch patent in 2004 or 2005.
- snowwrestler 14y ago
  In addition they purchased Fingerworks, who began working on capacitive multitouch sensing and gestures in the 1990s. I believe the founders of Fingerworks held several patents in that area--and still work at Apple today. I have a Fingerworks touchpad and it is amazing. Apple is slowly rolling the gestures in their products. For instance with Lion the "click and drag" gesture went from a double-tap-and-hold (Apple standard for years) to a three-finger drag (what it is on my Fingerworks pad).

001sky 14y ago

MSFT just recently acquired Perceptive Pixel last month, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptive_Pixel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptive_Pixel. [Jeff Han's company, and maker of multi-touch user interfaces]. Presumably these patents were still pending during alot of the timeline, as US 7,844,915 has only been out since Nov 2010. It Languished at the patent office for 3.5 yrs? edit: language/clarifications

electromagnetic 14y ago

> I think it is invalid to say they "invented" anything as intuitive as pinch to zoom which has been demonstrated in a variety of prototypes, tablets, and applications over 2 decades. The lunacy here is that apple wasn't even granted the patent over a specific gesture. IE pinch=zoom in and spread=zoom out or vice versa. It's that the movement of pinching/spreading has been patented here in all and every application of the gesture as it would inherently be used for zoom function, despite it being demonstrated prior to that date. This is like Microsofts multi-click patent, that patents all mouse clicks that can have different functionality. short/long/multiple clicks. It's like granting Kleenex a patent over all facial tissues and the right to use a piece of tissue for your face. The only competitive idea being a facial cloth like a hankie.