12 ms·
It seems ridiculous that using two fingers on a screen can be patented. I would think that the general public would agree. I've thought that a great strategy f
by JoelSutherland 18y ago
It seems ridiculous that using two fingers on a screen can be patented. I would think that the general public would agree.
I've thought that a great strategy for Palm would be to get sued by Apple. Shouldn't that tarnish Apple's great image?
- LurkingGrue 18y agoIt hasn't before so why would it tarnish them now?
- tptacek 18y agoI don't understand why you think multi-touch is obvious or unpatentable. Prior to the iPhone, were multi-touch consumer touchscreen devices well-known? To answer your second question: No, among Apple's customers and prospects, a patent lawsuit will tarnish Palm, not Apple.
- jonknee 18y ago> Prior to the iPhone, were multi-touch consumer touchscreen devices well-known? It doesn't matter if anything was well known, multi-touch simply isn't new technology: http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html
- greendestiny 18y agoBesides shouldn't the idea by itself of taking a single touch input device and making a multiple touch input device be the very definition of obvious. How they actually built the multi touch input device is a different matter.
- tptacek 18y agoWokay, that's a pretty credible response. =)
- GHFigs 18y agoFurthermore, during the development of the iPhone, Apple was very much aware of the history of multi-touch, dating at least back to 1982, and the use of the pinch gesture, dating back to 1983. This is clearly demonstrated by the bibliography of the PhD thesis of Wayne Westerman, co-founder of FingerWorks, a company that Apple acquired early in 2005, and now an Apple employee: In light of that one might conclude that while multi-touch might not be new technology, the specifics of Apple's patent claims may very well be.
- GHFigs 18y agoWhat criteria are you using to determine what can and cannot be patented?
- sharksandwich 18y agoOn patents in general, Wikipedia says: 'Typically ... a patent application must include one or more claims defining the invention which must be new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable'
- GHFigs 18y agoThat doesn't answer my question, but in the interest of not stifling conversation, I pose the question of which of Apple's patent claims is not new, inventive, useful, or industrially applicable.
- sharksandwich 18y agoI don't quite follow you. Entirely my fault I'm sure - I'm exhausted I can't say what criteria JoelSutherland applied in the parent post, but I think the general guidelines for patents are a good start for a discussion about the worthiness of Apple's claims
- andreyf 18y agoOut of the two examples he gives, you found that one to be more objectionable? How about... According to my source, in addition to multi-touch, the other feature that Apple objected to was using a standard headphone jack. Apple apparently owns a patent on controlling software using buttons connected by a standard 3.5mm headphone jack (at least for music and video playback controls), and would not grant Google a license to the patent. Hence the G1’s use of a proprietary ExtUSB port rather than a standard 3.5mm headphone jack. Oh, really?
- gamble 18y agoThat seems extremely unlikely at best, verging on a conspiracy theory.
- andreyf 18y agoIt seems plausible to me - they're talking about the buttons on the wire going up to the buds communicating back to the device... I'm certainly no expert, but I can't think of any other devices that do that via a standard 3.5mm socket.
- windsurfer 18y agoI had a CD player made by Panasonic around 1997 that used buttons on the wire to pause/play and skip songs.
- briansmith 18y agoI doubt they have a patent on the headphone thing. My Nokia N-series phone has a 3.5" headphone jack and it ships with an inline remote that is similar in functionality to the controls on an iPod shuffle. My Sony and Panasonic portable CD players from 10 years ago also had a similar thing.
- psadauskas 18y agoI have an old MP3 player that has a volume control, play/pause and skip in the earbud wires that go to a 3.5mm jack (but the earbuds have a 4-conductor plug). Also, the 4-conductor 3.5mm doubles as the USB port for uploading songs to it. You can also use normal 3.5mm headphones with it, you just loose the volume control functions.
- jfarmer 18y agoMy understanding is that "multi-touch" can't be patented, but a specific implementation of multi-touch can. Am I wrong? If not, what's so bad about that?