Slashdot Mirror
Will Flash Be Taken Off The Shelf?
bugninja writes "According to an article at News.com, Adobe wins 2.8M from Macromedia today for using some patented interface stuff in Flash. But this isn't the end, further legal battles could require that Flash be removed from Macromedia's list of "products for sale". We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"
Update: 05/03 13:29 GMT by J : Speaking of Flash, yesterday eEye discovered
a very serious security hole
in the version of Flash distributed with most copies of Windows. Go
download
the fixed release.
Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case. The patent is over "tabbed palettes", a type of user interface design. So it's not an invention, just a ludicrous software patent.
Many years ago, Apple tried to sue Microsoft for copyright infringement over their user-interface. Had they (ab)used the patent system instead, they might have won, and there would be no Windows.
Flash is a tool. Many (perhaps all) tools can be abused. Saying that Flash is bad because too many monkeys use it in ways that are totally inappropriate is like saying e-mail is bad because too many monkeys use it for spam (i.e., a way that is totally inappropriate).
No Laughing Allowed!
This is the equivalent of a car company patenting their cup holders and suing any other manufacturer who put them in. Who's the real loser in the end? As Macromedia CEO Rob Burgess points out, "Ultimately, it is our customers, and particularly our mutual customers, that will be harmed." Yup, half of us wind up with burnt, coffee-stained crotches.
So what, now no software developer can include tabbed palettes? Wouldn't it be nice if Adobe said "Hey, Macromedia, you've used one of our ideas, but that's alright, we'll use one of your ideas, and both our products will be the better for it." No more can people stand on the shoulders of giants. Today, you have to stand on your tiptoes. Either that, or knock everyone else down.
Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths. And you know what? I bet a lot of people will feel a lot less bad about pirating your software after this. I hope it was worth it.
c-hack.com |
Maybe I would if a program could produce SVG and JavaScript to do the same stuff as Flash, and as good as Flash. Also a new plug-in would be needed.
Not likely to happen anytime soon, if ever. Plus if it did, Flash would still be better in most ways.
...and this is coming from someone who just spent several hours learning all about the painful ins & outs of cross-platform/cross-browser Flash player plug-in detection...
/. are confusing the abuse of a general purpose tool (with some flaws that are being corrected) with the "dastardly deeds" done with it.
/. usually respond to attacks on general purpose tools that some people are attacking based on a relatively minor domain of applications that they dislike? (hint: CSS, copyable-CDs, PVRs, reverse-engineering tools...) ...Sigh...
For certain applications, Flash works wonderfully _and_ far better than anything else out there. I am thinking in particular of short animations (with or without limited interaction) that can demonstrate ideas/diagrams/or tell a story.
BTW, I work in educational R&D so I see great examples of this stuff used all the time to complement web-based curricula. Sure, it can't be indexed by a search engine, but it's there to _illuminate_ the ideas stated in the text; i.e. to enhance it, not to replace it.
Sure, Flash can be abused (as many advertisers have done, and designers who want to use it as their entire tookit); However, the Flash-haters on
BTW, how does
Yes, most Flash ads suck. And so do 90% of Flash-heavy sites. This problem won't be corrected by removing a particular tool - the crappy designers will just migrate to SVG/Real/WM/etc. Besides, banning/spitting on something disliked is the RIAA/MPAA way of doing things.
If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.
...because it doesn't use tabbed palettes. Those were introduced in Flash 5, and replaced in MX by a windowish-docking system. I would wager that Macromedia's decision to change the interface in MX was based far more on the lawsuit than on user feedback.
Adobe is seeking an injunction preventing Macromedia from selling "the infringing software" - which is, like I just said, Flash 5. Notice that Macromedia released Flash MX within the last month, and are now going to be actively phasing out their Flash 5 product and pushing MX instead. Is this good timing just a coincidence? You tell me. So what I'm wondering is what Adobe could possibly do to further harm the Flash product line (besides the $2.8mil in damages, of course).
The original Legend of Zelda in Flash MX: a prototype
Experts agree: everything is fine.
but were they innovative at the time
Inovative yes, but worthy of a monopoly of 19 years? No.
See the way patents use to work is that a company would disclose a non-obvious method, in return for a temporary monopoly. A tabbed interface is quite obvious, and it's disclosure of it's inner workings does nothing for the public good.
Just by seeing one (tabbed interface), I can duplicate it's effect. I don't need a patent desclosure to figgure it out - so therefore it's a trivial invention, obvious to one skilled in the arts.
I just hope that an OpenSourse/GPL author get a patent on somting vital to the computing field and brings companies like Adobe too it's knees.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable (although I'd like to see a much shorter duration on all software-related patents).
When I was a CS undergraduate, I took the designing user interfaces course. As part of the coursework, I designed a voice activated interface (this was at a time when such things didn't exist). Various other students imagined how other interfaces of the future might work. Some of the ideas we came up with were great.
Now, we could have all patented the ideas we came up with, and since then I'm sure some of our patents would have been infringed, and we could have licenced and sued. But would it make sense to do that? What if all undergraduate students did it? New developments in the software world would grind to a halt.
The argument that interface innovations that appear obvious now weren't at the time they were invented is I believe a poor one. A creative person can sit down with a pencil and paper and come up with lots of ideas for possible user interface designs - it's relatively easy for those people who have an inclination for it. You've only got to look at the web sites of some of the more creative web designers to realise that there are many different creative ideas out there for user interfaces. The world would be a poorer place if all these designers patented their ideas and prevented other people from using them.
The interface that is common today for products like Adobe Photoshop is a cumulation of many different ideas from many different individuals and companies. As a company focused on the creative industy, Adobe should be ashamed of itself for this kind of action.
I take it your country has no traffic? Some countries do, you know. Us Americans sometimes like to sip coffee while we are zooming along at 2mph on the way to work.
I hear some people also like to purchase beverages from restaurants for later consumption.