3 ms·
Apples pinch-to-zoom patent covers what we call pinch-to-zoom on a touchscreen. There is no other logical way to implement pinch to zoom on a touchscreen. Ther
by learc83 14y ago
Apples pinch-to-zoom patent covers what we call pinch-to-zoom on a touchscreen. There is no other logical way to implement pinch to zoom on a touchscreen.
Therefore, they effectively have a patent on the feature pinch-to-zoom on smartphones.
It is also obvious. Had I been working on the iPhone and decided I wanted to implement the pinch-to-zoom feature from minority report, I would have done it exactly as described in Apple's patent--there is no other logical way to do it--using a touchscreen.
I can't use a different underlying algorithm, or even a different kind of touchscreen. If I implement pinch-to-zoom on a touchscreen I am violating their patent.
- tensor 14y agoI think Apple's patent is actually multitouch on a resistive touch screen. They do not have a patent on implementing gestures by measuring the speed and distance of multiple touch input points. The later is what has plenty of prior art and the former is exceedingly trivial and really should not be patentable.
- jussij 14y agoI think the problem in this case is the jury just decided to ignored prior art. Quoting from this link: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-apple-samsung-juror-speaks-out/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-appl... > "He had experience. He owned patents himself...so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art." "In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." I doubt that in the appeal Apple will be so lucky.