Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Receives Patent For Double-Click
kaluta writes "The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that Microsoft was granted a patent for double-clicking on April 27. The patent in question is 6,727,830 and says, amongst other stuff: 'A default function for an application is launched if the button is pressed for a short, i.e., normal, period of time. An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double click'. So this is what we have to look foward to in the E.U. now?"
Surely it's April Fool's day somewhere in the world for this to happen.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
This is just twice as stupid as Amazon's 1-Click patent...
...I'll get my coat..
Suddenly all those "I'm patenting peanut butter and jelly sandwich" posts are seeming more and more prophetic...
I'm hoping that such insane uses of patents will result in the USPTO and Congress waking the hell up and fixing this mess.
--- It is not the things we do which we regret the most, but the things which we don't do.
I'm breaking patent laws right now...and again...whoops I did again :p
I think Xerox and Apple defintely qualify as prior art.
There are days when I think the USPO really needs to wake up.
Run for it, gotta get the trippelclick patent before microsoft gets it!
.. the trash bin.
seriously, this is really ridicilous, the patent system as it is is really just a giant joke. The system desperatly needs a remake or makeover, making the important patents pass, and the ridicilous ones take a loong vacation in
Doolittle :
Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
Now here we have the powers that be granting patents based on how we move or interact? One more reason Patenting process should be thoroughly revised.
Activists United
Surely there's prior art for this...while I'm not old enough to remember the earliest GUIs, I would think someone other than MS invented this.
Anyone have specific examples?
I guess linux will have to be updated so that everything opens with a triple-click.... that, or suffer the wrath of the $699 licensing fee (or am I mixing stories up now)?
WHO CARES?
They can have so many patents that they have to start holding them in their asscracks. Exhibit 1: IBM, the Little Linux guy's friend on Slashdot.
They problem is not that they GET them. The problem only occurs if they can actually ENFORCE them. Which, in any sane court (yes, I know those are in dwindling numbers these days) won't happen.
By all means, let them run amok and waste money on BS patents. Just make sure that the first time they get challenged they actually go down. If the challenge fails, THEN there's a problem.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Next up:
Microsoft tries to patent the Internet.
Al Gore files suit.
up 12 days, 22:30, 2 users, load averages: 993.20, 994.21, 994.56
*makes note to limit user processes...
There has to be prior art for this!! Or has the world gone totaly mad
Same s**t, different day
Well, double-dumbass on you!
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
It's not April 27, it's April 1st. =)
Hey guys, don't worry... I don't think this patent can be used by Microsoft to destroy Open Source. So, it's better to laugh at it.
Now, we have got one more example to show people how ridiculous software patents are.
Well, before we pull out our tinfoil hats and scream random obscenities at MS, let's RTFA, okay?
TFA states that patent revolves around giving other options when holding the click, and uses the default program when double clicked...Smells like Apple, anyone?
Furthermore, it's not as if they patented the motion of clicking a mouse button twice, as the poster makes it seem....Don't sound the alarm yet people....
If you want to get scared, worry about that last part of the article which states that MS wants to start charging for the FAT file system....How are they going to swing that one? Higher fees on XP (tough sh!t, I use SuSE) ? Online scans for people with FAT and a bill in the mail?
My MythTV HowTo
Now I have to go back and look at my Pong machine to see if it qualifies as Prior Art...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Triple Click...
Quad Click...
Qunice Click...
Are still available!!
They just gave the reform crowd a bright and shining example.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/28/198242
I can't wait to see all the NEW comments on it.
Now when I want my kid to do a chore like wash the dishes, verbally telling him to do it wont work, just like yelling at your monitor wont get the application to run.
So first I'll smack him. He'll still say no, so I'll smack him again, and this time he'll do it. Thus a "double click" will get the job going.
Seeing as he was born in 1986, I think I might have a case.
guess no one @ MS has ever heard of xerox, or apple ...
This was no doubt awarded to avoid crap like Eolas. Microsoft can just sit on the patent, and just in case some little company comes along trying to fleece them of money like Eolas did, they can say, "Sorry, can't do it, we already own it."
I guarantee this won't actually be enforced against competitors. It's an interesting patent, but I'm not worried about it. But it is an illustration of how silly the system is that anybody can be awarded a patent for anything, to the point where companies take out cheesy patents like this one just to keep even cheesier companies like Eolas off their backs.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Hence general-purpose PCs and bigger embedded systems are safe from this, but small devices such as handhelds are vulnerable?
Does this mean that the button on the front of my case that I hold in for 6 seconds to do a hard power reset (as opposed to a soft one/APM call if I just press it) is also subject to this patent? How far can this possibly extend? What kind of interface doesn't use a button with some sort of timing involved?
Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
Look, the patent was filed on July 12, 2002. If we can't come up with a single pre-2002 OS that used double-clicking, then we're really, really bad off. I mean, Microsoft itself has used it since about 1991 in Windows...
My Systems
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Apple have a GUI before Microsoft, and if so, wouldn't one be able to open an application merely by doubleclicking on it? Next thing you know, Microsoft's going to try patenting the Start menu as 'a menu allowing a user to quickly find and launch applications.' or something like that...
Hope be with ye,
Cyan
Are they gonna sue DoubleClick Software? Or the other way around for trademark infringement?
all your pantents are belong to us
The patent doesn't cover *mouse* clicks. It covers a way to get at least 3 different actions from the "application buttons" on your PDA --- short click, long click, and double-click.
I don't know whether this was being done back in 2002, though I know that Palm enhancements used application button chords back in 2002 or 2003.
Hate stupid software on freshmeat? Laugh at
...Apple are granted a patent for keypresses, and IBM are granted a patent for pixels
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
for mouse movements. Any patent on mouse movements will supercede Microsoft's double clicking, and Amazon's 1-click.
:|
Not impressed....
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
when the same story is pushed twice within a short time frame, like this one?
.. because if they continue to give patents on stuff like this like they've done the last few years, the system is bound to fail. Its just a simple matter of time.
(and now for the obligatory:) What next? A patent for interpreting presses on different keys into machine-understandable signals?
My mouse has 8 buttons. One of them is set to double-click. Technically, i'm not double clicking...i'm using a different button. This was fairly common at a company i work at - all of the drafting monkies have the scroll-wheel clicky set to double-click. Is that covered?
CompactFlash cards...
I'm not a patent lawyer, but it mentions multi-clicking only on a "limited resource computing device". I guess as long as you keep your system on the bleeding-edge, you're ok....
I'm starting monday as a summer associate at the Public Patent Foundation. Looks like I know what I'll be doing my summer research on.
Does anyone have any info on when MS claim to have invented the double click? I remember using it on a Mac before I'd even heard of Windows. That may just be a function of my memory though!
Cogito, ergo sig.
We are missing the point a bit here. Of course, you are all totally correct, this isnt anywhere near a new thing, but we are missing the whole patent issue. I know you all understand this as well as cookies, but ill say it anyway. Patents protect an IDEA. They dont protect the end result. Hell, imagine if Hoover could patent clean carpets, no one else is allowed to invent a sucky upy thing, since it's patented!
This is exactly the problem with a load of software patents. They dont patent HOW something is done, that patent WHAT is done. It's like trying to patent staying dry and warm, and therefore preventing anyone else building houses! I do believe there are some valid software patents, but that should NOT stop someone else getting to the same result by doing it differently. Just because some guy invented RSA security, does not stop some other guy inventing a totally differnt way to use the same algorithm.
Microsoft can patent the source they used to time this button, if it uses some cool new timing algorithm that works without needing the internal clock, but no way should they be allowed to patent the actual result, a timed button.
And honestly, i dont blame microsoft, i blame the fucking stupid patent clerks and judges who let things like this through. Microsoft are just using the system, we all would given half a chance. You patent people should wake the fuck up and engage brain!
without having read the article, this doesn't at all seem to be a patent on double-clicking. More like a system where double-clicking on an application icon does one thing, single clicking on it does another, and clicking and holding for awhile does something else. While I still think software patents are a dumb idea (although I don't have the balls to tell that to my boss, who has several filed and pending), this doesn't at all seem to fit the sky-is-falling title. I know I personally have never seen a system like the one described in the blurb.
Operation prohibited due to patent restrictions.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Keyman thread.
I'll leave it to the lawyers to figure out.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
I just notice that the same old jokes are getting modded up again and again. So here is something that will make all following slashdot jokes redundant:
in soviet russia, the mouse double clicks you.
1-double click
2-?
3-profit
I wonder how linux would run on a double click.
I for one, welcome our double click over lords.
I am a double click you insensitive clod!
imagine a beowulf cluster of double clicks.
Now RTFA you PHB before the FUD really hits the fan.
PS. IANAL.
Did I miss any?
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
I am aghast. double clicking gets a patent? WTH? Im sure that the guy following me around will mod me redundent [whats up with that? im being stalked!] Anyways lets cover this-a patent must be: (a) novel - new, never having existed anywhere on Earth. I hardly think that double clicking is new. I mean to me it seems that some prior art must exist-for example some arcade games had you double vlivk a button inthe game for special purposes. (b) useful - it must "work" or accomplish something - the reason for the prototype. OK im game-it makes it on this. (c) non-obvious - if a clothespin exists, your invention of a clothes LINE would be "obvious". To me, the idea of double clicking IS obvious. why wasnt this denied? There must be some guy recently retired from the patent office enjoying some extra retirement funds from ol Bill at the moment. Time to sue apple....and..Oh My! doesnt Linux use double clicking?
The patent isn't on the double-click. It's on using different durations and repetitions of clicks to accomplish different tasks.
This sounds like Microsoft is gearing up to go after OSX, which uses the long click to emulate a two button mouse.
this is a patent on the idea of launching different functions depending on how and the length of time a user presses a button.
Now, of course, the patent is ridiculous, but it cannot be read so broadly.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. ...as opposed, I said stupidly, to an unlimited resource computing device...
...based on the length of time an application button is pressed...
.?
Filed: July 12, 2002
Other References:
Applications Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
(hmmmmmm)
Later in the patent:
So - this doesn't really apply to mice . .
<grrr>
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/28/198242
"Sufferin' succotash."
This does not effect the EU's position on Micorosft in any way.
The EU is the European Union. The patent question is a US patent.
That being said, the patent looks like it was more intended to cover some rudimentary system of mouse gestures than the double-click. Either way, it will never hold up in court; there's just far too much prior art. Not to mention that in the past, MS has not enforced their frivolous patents. Methinks this is just a precautionary measure to prevent some jerk from getting it and suing MS, Apple, Xerox, and the rest of the world.
Now, if Apple got a right-click patent, that would be news
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
it's not actually double clicking
One such palm-type computer is Microsoft's Palm-size PC. The Palm-size PC has a touch screen display. A stylus is used to input data into a user interface displayed on the touch screen display. The user interface is similar in appearance to a Windows user interface displayed on a desktop or laptop PC. A taskbar, used for launching application programs, is displayed at the bottom of the touch screen display. Applications are launched by using the stylus to select the desired application from a taskbar menu. Using a stylus can be cumbersome for users. Therefore, as an alternative to launching applications by using the stylus, the Palm-size PC contains a plurality of buttons (called application buttons) that are used to launch the more common applications installed on a Palm-size PC. Applications can be launched in a variety of states. In the past, the actuation of an application button caused an application to be launched in a particular state, for example a view state. The user was required to take further steps to invoke additional application functionality, such as opening a document. It is desirable to more easily launch applications in various states. The present invention is directed to increasing the functionality of application buttons so as to accomplish this result.
*meep*
The Onion already did it, years ago. (Sorry I couldn't find the actual onion link. Same article though.)
If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank
What about:
Apple
Xerox
et al?
What next you patent scumwads?
**NEWSFLASH!**
Computer Monitor patented by Dell
WTF? WTF? WTF? Is this what the world's come down to?? Gates should now proceed to patent absolute disregard for common sense. Mwaahaahhaa
Go ahead. We're all waiting...
Otherwise we're just posting jokes or complaining about the patent office.
Fuck it, we're going to three clicks.
"click" "click" "click""click""click"... "click" "click"
1: Patent obvious prior art that no one patented before and everyone uses.
2: Defend it with immense legal staff backed by the deepest pockets in the world.
3: Profit!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I refer everyone to the following Nukees strips:
:)
Friday, August 11, 2000
Wednesday, August 16, 2000
and, my favorite,
Monday, September 4, 2000
Quite possibly the best storyline the strip has ever had
Filed: July 12, 2002 Dated: April 27, 2004 This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/226,031, filed Jan. 5, 1999 now abandoned. The entire subject matter of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/226,031 is specifically incorporated herein by reference. It also references material back to 1985, so who the hell is a patent lawyer who can figure out what the hell is going on here (I'm off to try and see what all those references are about).
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
Triple Click...
Quad Click...
Qunice Click...
Are still available!!
Not quite...
"Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time..."
c++;
Slashdot covered this story already. Note that the Aussies are a few months behind in following the USPTO.
Inventors: Lui; Charlton E. (Redmond, WA); Blum; Jeffrey R. (Seattle, WA)
that must be nice, being known as the inventors of a bodily gesture probably known to man as long as man has existed...
It's not the money that matter, it's the stuff they buy.
Doolittle :
Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
But my patent for a process to aquire technology in widespread use via deep pockets and infinite legal resources was turned down.
If Microsoft can get a patent on something as stupid as this maybe I could get a patent on wiping my ass. Just goes to show the patent office is severly broken...
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Working in the industry, I know that a good patent (one that is original) can be a big asset. But failing that, if you go after another company with 50 obvious patents that they may infringe on, it simply gets too expensive to defeat every one of them. Plus, the justice system is somewhat unreliable, so if they fail to defeat one, they are still screwed. Its like the corporate patent folks pride themselves of patenting the obvious. They take pride in patenting what nobody else thought was even patentable!
Having read the patent (yes, I actually read the patent, rather than firing up the usual "I'm gonna patent breathing" posts), I can't claim to be thrilled with it, but it's not quite as obvious as the post makes it appear.
This isn't mouse double-clicking. They're talking about physical buttons on a PDA-type device. Click once to play your voice note; double-click to record.
This is obviously derived pretty trivially from mouse double-clicking (for which I could see no patent cited), but honestly I can't think of any devices except mice that use double-clicks. My cell phone doesn't; my VCR doesn't. They do reference patents on using the same button to scroll through options, but that's different from a double-click.
It's pretty obvious, but if it's so obvious, why didn't Palm do it? (I'm assuming that they didn't. I've never really used a PalmPilot. They do reference the PalmPilot user's manual.)
Before I take my life into my hands and play devil's advocate here:
<disclaimer>I think this is a stupid patent and is not sufficiently original to truly deserve protection</disclaimer>
That being said, those who read the patent application very carefully will notice that this patent isn't for the general idea of double-clicking, but rather covers a much smaller range. Specifically, Microsoft has been granted a patent on a PDA-type device ("limited resource computing device") that has physical buttons on the outside of the device (i.e. "Mail", "Calendar", "Contacts" etc) that cause different actions to occur based on how long or in which sequence they are pressed.
An example of the patented method in action would be if you created a device on which pressing the mail button once would open a list view of recent emails, pressing and holding it for 2 seconds might initiated a POP3 session to the server, "double-clicking" the button might bring you to a "new email" form, and pressing and holding the button longer than 3 secs would be assume to be accidental and would do nothing.
This does NOT appear to be relevant to any non-PDA device, nor does it appear to apply to any kind of buttons that do not physically exist on the outside of the device. I still think it's pretty stupid and obvious, but it's nearly so stupid as it would appear at first glance.
That being said, does anyone have any specific prior art to overturn this with?
I have zero respect for patents....
Patents get issued all the time for nonsense, and things that do not work. A patent that I got, we proved (after filing) that it did not funtion as described. Two years later the patent still issued. Go figure...
If this gets challenged in court it will fall apart. Too much prior art. I would start with Morse Code...
www.effectiveelectrons.com "chips that work" Analog, RF, Mixed Signal
What about OS/2 ?
Flirting is launched if a lady blinks a short, i.e., normal, period of time.
If a lady blinks for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time, she's just moisturing her eyes.
Still another meaning (e.g. hey! help me to lie) can be communicated if a lady blinks multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double blinks
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
I propose owning a patent for middle-clicking in such a way as to extend the middle finger while curling the others.
This "click" does not need to be made on any particular surface. In fact, you could roll down your car window, double-click on your horn, then middle click the air with your arm extended outside said vehicle.
Maybe we should all middle-click Microsoft with both hands as an act of civil disobedience. Needless to say, I don't advice nor advocate doing so while driving.
I was 11 years old and discovered WTF a "double click" was by reading the F'ing manual. Microsoft was not involved...or were they? What is this horseshit?
That's right. Abolishment, not reform. But that's looking farther out, perhaps as part of much larger changes (like a huge meteor hitting).
-I am an elective eunuch.
and the ridicilous ones take a loong vacation in .. the trash bin.
I think that Apple has already patented the trash bin, so I doubt the patent office will infinge on their own ruling.
Well, I may not be popular for saying this, but MS did actually invent the FAT file system (ok, they purchased it, when MS bought rights to the QDOS OS, and renamed it MS-DOS).
So, if they were awarded a patent or copyright or whatever it is on FAT, at least they have a moral leg to stand on.
The patent on various ways of clicking a mouse? I don't care if its for PDAs, or what it selects, or whatever. Every possible way of clicking a mouse as been thought of, and there is no original, patentable work to do.
(how is that for a bold statement :)
Sarcasm and hyperbole are the final refuges for weak minds
Sure, but has anyone patented using a specific rhythm? I've got it! Morse code on a cell phone. I here by declare prior art to the whole idea. Whew.
This just in -- Slashdot Headline Misrepresents Patent Again.
Why does every article regarding a patent here have to have a headline and summary that totally gets it wrong?
Or from their perspective - prevents some small company with a single patent covering the double-click from shaking down as Eolas did. I think we can expect every mundane action being patented by large companies.
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
Stephen Hawking's speech synthesizer, operated by one hardware button clicked for different lengths of time.
Gamers Europe - Gaming News. Reviews.
Love Ebay & Microsoft
The RIAA sued Microsoft today over mouse clicks. Their spokesman said:
"Microsoft may have thought they now own all clicks, long clicks, and double-clicks, however clicks are sounds and we own all sounds."
The RIAA suit for $98 billion is based on the average clicks used per day by all Windows users, but is expected to settle for $3000 and a large Starbucks de-caf latte.
They advise individual users that to be legal, they you should download "click.drm" from iTunes. You are warned against sharing your clicks with anyone beyond your 5 (now 3) permitted computers, or over any P2P network that requires clicks to operate the program.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I'm trying to remember if the Apple Lisa used a double click, if so it clearly pre-dates MS windows.
Oh good, maybe this means my patent for oxygen will come in soon...WHAT?
What a pile of horseshit.
Excellent explanation of the differences between the WHATs and the HOWs.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Elevator companies have been doing this for years. Everyone knows that if you push your floors button multiple times that it gets there faster! It's so obvious even 5 year olds know about it!
Does prior art on one part of a patent invalidate the whole thing? 'Cos I seem to remember the Early Macs having a click'n'hold function for context menus (not to mention the whole double-click thing).
nuff said...
I think is the question of whether they even TRY to enforce them.
Microsoft have an excellent record as far as I know, of never initiating a patent battle. MS' patent portfolio is used purely for defensive purposes.
Sure, they're anti-competitive greedy bastards, and they may decide to start trying patent litigation some day, but I think they're happier making their money by selling products.
Politas
I think it was about 20 years back or so. I had a digital watch, extremely cheap. It had 'buttons' you could press.
/. readers once owned a limited computing device like that, with exactly the same or close to the same functions.
Usually it showed time. Pressing it once made it swap day/month and time. Pressing it twice show the amount of seconds. Pressing it long it got it to 'setup'.
I bet most
This is getting scary... brrrrrr...
Definitely a +1 Funny reference, if I had mod points.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
as if people in the patent office don't double click
We get signal. All your double click are belong to us.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Everyone on the patent office must be on dope.
so if time spent in an action determines 'novel idea', then I claim, officially, the notion that if you mix colors and let one color flow into the mix longer than another, you get a different color.
its the same kind of thing, isn't it? novel idea? no! worth locking-out others who also can see this obvious technique? no!
so users can hold a button down longer to add a 'shift' or 'meta' nature to it. this is NOT patent-worthy. how many brain cycles did it take to come up with this?
sigh.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
More seriously, this is very dangerous. The patent office and the courts need to recalibrate their obviousness-meter. In this particular case, there must be prior art, right?
---------
mobile porn
They are not patenting double clicking, or clicking or something that will infringe on your god given rights to click on whatever you want. They are patenting using specialized buttons on a specialized device to launch applications in a different manner depending on how the button is pressed. It's not exact a wide ranging, world destroying patent folks.
But then again, Microsoft was mentioned, that word alone seems to make the average slashdotters IQ drop about 80 points.
Got Shadowrun? Awakened Worlds
Another great "Slashdot posts ridiculous patent and everyone says `this sucks`" story.
Why doesn't someone get smart? And patent a whole ton of silly and goofy patents (like someone with enough money and time, obviously).
Then, post some website up somewhere, like ridiculouspatents.com And list them all? Including this MS "vague time shifted hardware click" one? Then post *that* on Slashdot. Personally I'm going for "method by which to insert genitalia into a running blender."
FLR
Whoever invented double clicking should be shot in the head--twice!
Doesn't the ipod do these things? If I hold down on the menu button for a while, the screen lights up. Similarly the play button can turn it off.
Hmm.. makes you wonder if doubleclick.com/.net can be considered prior art... the idea being around pre-2000. Perhaps I need to patent drag and drop
meh
MS patented hooking up a telegraph to a computer to launch apps?
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
From the patent (in several places):So, could the patent be sidestepped if you waited for a period of time only in excess of, but not equal to, the threshold time limit?
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
I mean seriously! Fucking double clicks????
I wonder if the asshat at the patent office realized that he had to double click at least once during the process of filing the stupid patent. Clearly, the people at the patent office are so far out of touch with reality that they can no longer be taken seriously.
So, I propose this for the new patent system (it's un-Slashdot of me, but not only am I bitching about something, I have an idea on how to fix it.)
Public peer review. Open source meets patent reform.
As soon as a patent is applied for, it is placed up on a website for public review. Then, it's up to the public as well as the patent office to try to find any prior art.
If prior art is found, the patent is denied. Period. And if the prior art is over 5 years old, it's considered a public domain idea, and no longer patentable. That'll keep idiots like the lawyersquad at MS from patenting other people's ideas. Like double clicks.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
But this is a valid patent.
Its a non obvious use of timed button presses.
If you just hit an application button on a PDA it opens the application.
If you hold it for more than a second it opens a different document based on the length of time the button is held down.
If you read the patent it is actually a very specific application of the technique.
It only applies to "limited resource computing devices" aka PDAs.
link here posted July 2002
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
That's ok, I hardly ever double click on April 27...
Let's stop laying the blame for this kind of atrocious behaviour on corporations. Corporations don't think or act; people act (often without thinking). There is a person at the patent office who granted this patent. They should be held personally accountable for this idiocy. There is a person (probably more than one) at Microsoft who is responsible for this idiocy. They should be held personally accountable.
These are the same people who want to (and do) track minute details of your personal software purchases and useage. But they themselves cower behind the cloak of corporate anonymity.
The world is fucked up. You can go to jail for stealing a watch, but if you steal millions of dollars being a white collar asshole, at worst, you might have to give some of it back, and can only cash out with a few million. Or in Microsoft's case, billions. Boo hoo. Fucking asshole white collar greedy corporate bastards.
Why don't they just get it over with and patent thinking up an idea (new or obvious) and patenting it?
Yep, Microsoft does own this technology, or at least they made it popular. That hardware button is the computer's reset button.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The patent application is two years old, the USPTO approved it less than a week ago.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
The patent holders are an interesting pair. A bit of googling produced the following:
Charlton Lui appears to have been a Microsoft manager turned Canadian Baseball CEO(!) "Mr. Lui co-founded the Tablet PC providing the vision and driving product development while working closely with Bill Gates and top industry leaders." Here is the reference.
There is a Jeffrey R. Blum who includes the following in his resume: "Microsoft Mobile Electronics Group, Redmond, WA: Lead Program Manager (8/1994-3/2000)" Here is his resume.
If I got the right people (no guarantees there), it looks like they're both *managers* who worked on mobile computing appliances. Managers who take out patents???
"I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it." Be's Jean-Louis Gass
...Of the world as we know it And I feel fine...
yeah...but we read about it 2 yrs ago, last week, and again today....laugh. The later of the 2 are definitely dupes.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
Sounds like they've invented the same process as Qlaunch for the Palm OS. I doubt Qlaunch was the first of its type but I've used it for a long time now. Very useful on a Palm as it lets you assign several apps to each hard button based on how long you hold it down.
There should be a penalty for fishing expeditions like this. "Can we get away with patenting this idea? How about this one?" Eventually, you should lose patent credibility in the same way a litiguous citizen can be lawfully "penalized" for repeated stupid lawsuits.
I'm going to patent the CW click. Clicking a button with a different morse code sequence will perform different functions.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/28/198242
Read reviews of shopping cart software
Why don't they file one for "right-click" too?
I have no idea what he's saying but from the exclamation marks it seems the Germans think it's bad too ;)
"Du bist nicht angemeldet! Um Beiträge anderer Mitglieder bewerten und kommentieren zu können, musst du angemeldet sein! Klicke bitte auf "Anmelden" oder melde dich neu an - und schon kann's losgehen! "
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
That leaves plenty of room for lawsuits and stuff. And then, who would want to start a lawsuit against Microsoft (at least in the US) anyway?
It's a good job I'm about to start working on next-gen gestures, that work using vectors, splines &co, not just a moving box like current implementations.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Why don't you show me your statement is little more than blind ignorance and explain to me ONE company that is using or has used this technology in the past other than MS?
The subject line of the article was sensationalized just to stir up people exactly like you and you responded exactly like the puppet you apparently are.
See, a moderator has noticed you are blossoming into a slashbot quite well and rewarded you with a Karma point. Well done, you are almost to the point were Slashdot does all your thinking for you.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
(@#*$& Morons at patent office. Holding the button on most LCD watches for a long time switches them to "set" mode, or "reset" function mode. That is prior art for sure.
Silly laws cause disrespect for the legal system, but the legal system depends on our respect to function. They sow the seeds of their own destruction.
Like so many of the people reading this, I don't want to sit around and let this happen in front of me. What can we do to put an end to this patent madness?
My lame blog.
In Soviet Russia, double-clicking patents Microsoft!
End Communication.
Forget about reading the article. It looks like jackb_guppy and his moderators aren't even reading the submission text. The multiple clicks case is specifically mentioned.
The dubble click behavure was enherited from a number of GUIs that existed before Windows ever hit the market and I believe it wasn't included in the inital release of Windows.
:Left click
The history of it is something like this:
A number of systems hit the market. MacOs is successful with a single button mouse.
Other GUIs hit the PC and Geos for the Commodore, Atari TOS for the ST, Amgia Os for the Amiga.
Most systems had two button mice. However MacOs users had 1 button and Commodore 64 users had 1 button joysticks standing in for mice (two button mouse available).
MacOs started to get the reputation of being limited. The single button wasn't enough. To keep up Apple added the dubble click to permit additional behavure. A software hack for a second button. This is not to say MacOs WAS limited but streat talk vs real world has always been on entirely diffrent plains of existence.
At some point Microsoft addopted the behavure into Windows. There was no preticulare advantage to be gained by this.
You will notice that Microsofts patent is on the default fuction where as MacOs uses the dubble click as the "second button" (if I remember correctly).
This is nothing to be proud of.
However The Commodore 64s Geos used (if memory serves) single click to be "select" for cut and paist and dubble click for default fuction (activate the icon, open file, run the application) before Microsoft included this behaubure into Windows.
Sing with me "Prior art"
The dubble click was created to solve a problem found in systems using a single button for a pointer device. Microsoft Windows had no preticulare reason for addopting the dubble click other than to mimic the behavure of MacOs.
This patent should read.
"The hacks implemented in OTHER operating systems copied into Windows to no advantage to the end user."
Unix Window managers typlicly rely on having 2 to 4 mouse buttons and don't use the dubble click byond mimicing the behavure of Microsoft Windows.
Patent suggestion for RedHat: Dubble click mask:
The software technique where a second click done shortly after the first click is "tossed out" this would continue for a third and forth click as well. That if a user clicks an icon many times (nervous habbit) the Window manager reads only 1 click and ejects the rest.
Tech support horror storys:
Tech: Single left click
User: (Click Click) It openned the app
Tech: Close the app. Don't dubble click. Single left click
User: (Click Click)
With Dubble click mask
Tech:
User: (Click click click click) It worked.
(All the clicks being read as 1 click becouse that is all the user should have done)
I don't actually exist.
what about the memory buttons on a digital car radio? You press it a short time and the radio jumps to the previously stored station. Hold the button and it reprograms the setting. Isn't this the same thing? Don't modern radios qualify as a limited resource computing device?
what the heck, the receiver in my home theatre works the same way. then there's the cell phone keypad. press it once and it's a digit, hold it down and its a speed dial.
They need to patent the kick on theyier asses, so they can make a lot of money.
If you RTFP, they do reference Palm in their prior art section, but all through the patent description they're referring to "palm-sized computers" and similar phrasings that sound annoyingly close to "Palm". Tacky.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
isn't it "so long and thanks for all the shoes?"!!! j/j :)
... despite the dubious foundation for this flood of patents, there are really only three possible outcomes:
1) the patent goes unchallenged, thus Microsoft wins by achieving a license to rape and pillage. (unlikely)
2) the patent is challenged, and Microsoft wins, thus strengthening their license to rape and pillage. (unlikely)
3) the patent is challenged and Microsoft loses the challenge, but still wins by weakening the opposition due to the opposition having to spend a larger fraction of their working capital than Microsoft in this non-productive activity. In areas of the marketplace where there is not a large healthy corporation to oppose them, they drive the competition out via the competitors' inability to afford the Microsoft tax of continuous legal action.
The ability of monopolies to buy into the poker game and use their near-limitless wealth to drive the competition out of the game by raising the stakes beyond their opponents' ability to call is one reason why monopolies used to have strict controls placed on them or be broken up. They are beyond the reach of the checks and balances of the free marketplace.
Check out this link that implies about 1997! Article reproduced shamelessly below.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
So they are patenting morse code then?
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
Phew! This is for a hardware device only.
Thank god my mouse is made of software
Press and hold on your mouse might not do anything but it does on mine, and has done for years. It brings up the context menu on the Mac without you having to use the ctrl key. Not only has this been the case on the Mac for many years but I seem to recall it worked last time I used a Xerox Star system (which was a very long time ago indeed).
If intelligent life is too complex to evolve on its own, who designed God?
...patented.
For reference to prior art, just look to Samuel Morse (as in Morse Code). I mean, he developed an entire alphabet based on patterns of short and long clicks. It had different meanings for multiple clicks of various durations.
Before Microsoft claims license fees on this one, they better get the license from Morse's estate. If, that is, it hasn't gone into public domain.
... by the Dew of Mountains the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning
But I think Apple came out with the mouse first. Doesn't prior art still count? All mice do the same thing.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
When I first read this story that was my very first thought, its using a subset of Morse code to communicate with the device.
Maybe I just need more Coffee.
Be wary of strong drink, it can make you shoot at tax collectors and miss.
I can't be the first to think of this, but here goes.
- Compile a fair amount of evidence showing how the US Patent Office has really messed things up (eg, Amazon, this patent, and many other good ones)
- Present that to the EU signed by thousands of EU citizens
I know that there have been Open Letters and other activites, but why not do their homework for them? Show them why Patent Systems, like the one in the US, suck poopy and abridge the rights of innovators and honest business. Litigation is good for rich lawyers and nothing else. It is NOT good for humanity.
Yeah yeah, I have no legal background so I couldn't do it myself. So I ask others. Hang me. Or better yet, get a patent on not knowing everything and then sue me.
i'm sorry - your sig doesn't sit well with me ...
"to understand recurssion, you must first understand recurssion"
(something like that)
unfortunately, the recurssion you've described is never ending - an infinite loop. for recurssion to be of any use, it must have a terminating condition so that eventually it will cease to call on itself and perhaps instead bubble up a useful result.
i'm sure you know this, and after all, this is the humour of your sig - the recurssion is never ending, and if someone were to truly try and work out how recurssion works using it they would either end up falling asleep out of exhaustion or get bored.
however, the real reason it bugs me is because it isn't true. for one to have to understand recurssion, they would first need to be aware of the concepts of structured programming (sequence, selection, iteration) and then the idea of function calls and then the theory behind run time stacks.
this is incredibly off topic - no offence intended, i'm just sleepy and prattling on. i'm sure you actually knew this and really i'm just being dumb.
let's see me get modded off-topic for my sins anyways.
ciao!
The members of the Slashdot community who vet the article submissions need to be horsewhipped.
Yes, indeed, the Sydney Morning Herald has reported that "Microsoft has been granted a patent on the double-click by the US Patents and Trademark Office". Yes, indeed, anyone who knows how to interpret patents can glance at the patent claims and see that the article was written by a reporter who doesn't have a clue.
Then the fun begins, as the article is posted to Slashdot, and the raving loonies cry havok, and let loose the whining of "it's the end of the world" and "what, us file a request for reexamination?!"
I practice patent law. I like to read the opinions on Slashdot, but I am --->| this close to never reading another patent news item again because both the item and the commentary are almost inevitably content free.
The sad fact is, few people on Slashdot understand patents, trademarks and copyrights, and even fewer people care that they do not. If a submission claimed that SpaceShipOne was going to achieve orbit by burning 100 lbs of pure hydrogen peroxide in some incredibly efficient manner, odds are it wouldn't be posted, and if it were, people would be crawling out of the woodwork to criticize the lack of research, the abomination of chemisty, and the impossibility of the physics. Yet almost nobody takes the time to know what the laws of their own country, the ones that they seemingly criticize daily, actually permit or forbid.
This community needs to stop and reconsider its standards. Lobbiests drive Washington, but it's not all about the money. It's also about people who put the time, effort and research into presenting an informed, coherent, and considered argument for their point of view, EVEN IF IT IS "WRONG".
You will never fix this system if you're the political equivalent of the crazy guy in the subway. The misconceptions destroy your credibility, and it's easier to ignore you than to attempt to separate the wheat from the chaff.
We've seen too many patents where everybody already does X, and the patent is to "do X on the Internet".
Or the recent patent on burning a CD of a concert, the same night as the concert and selling it after the concert. There's prior art on making music CDs -- but I guess you can patent making CDs in a specific situation.
Now double-clicking isn't patented, but double-clicking the hardware buttons on a PDA is patented.
So we can just patent anything if we specify a narrow domain and apply it there?
I suggest we patent double-clicking with a mouse... on an application with a "metal" skin that looks like a PDA. (Meh. Maybe Microsoft's patent would already cover this one!)
How about patenting the idea of recording a DVD of your vacation... while on vacation.
How about patenting the idea of an SQL database... on a PDA.
How about patenting video conferencing... on a PDA.
It's stupid, but the pattern suggests this might be possible. Start filing your applications now!
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
I'm patenting the technique of holding your mouth just right when you move the mouse around in games to score better points. All you hard core gamers out there are gonna owe me big time.
It's time the people looking at these patents realized that there have been limited resource gaming platforms for a while. And, yes, I do have different results on a GameBoy depending on how I click the button.
The more useless trivial patents the merrier. Eventually everyone will sue each other over completely ridiculous claims [e.g. optimized for-loop ;-)] and legislation will be not only demanded but simply required to deal with the mess.
I say go out and grab yourself a useless patent if you can afford it. You're doing your civic duty!
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
which are they patening?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Actually this patent is on an action that is performed depending on the duration of the button click. But then, this is just patenting stuff like the "Fire" button of Metal Gear Solid 2. If you press the button for a short i.e. "Normal" amount of time, the gun will fire. If you press the button for a longer time, your finger will "ease" off the trigger, NOT firing the gun. This gives you the option of cancelling a gun shot, or firing a gunshot. This is exactly what MS has patented. You could also define the PS2 as a limited resource computing device, since you can't upgrade it.
.sig: Open Source, Open Mind
I mean, really! WTF! There was a video of a 1960's video of a professor demonstrating the mouse concept. HTF did they miss that??????????
Lights at certain airports also activate with two or multiple clicks of the radio mic.
And we know that Apple's use of the double click predates this, and I am certain was pre-dated by others.
It never ceases to amaze me how stupid certain government employee can be.
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
Hmmm....
:)
Previous work exists in GemStar's Graphical environment.
Maybe even some of the Amiga Workbenches can predate this.
Gotta give them the credit for trying though...
The front to back motion you use when you wipe you ass
click that shit, mofo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_c
Quick! Prove you're not a complete dipshit! What's the difference between a civil case and a criminal case?
Holy shit! I just drank half a bottle of Whiskey and a bottle of Ale and STILL managed to hand you your ass on a plate!
Well... unless civil lawsuits can now result in death penalties... but I don't think that's the case.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
They can have so many patents that they have to start holding them in their asscracks.
....because I hold the patent for holding stuff in an asscrack. In fact, I'm already holding that very patent in my own asscrack right now.
Hide in plain sight, they say. There was probably prior art sitting on the examiner's wrist.
I think just about every digital watch I've ever owned has had multi-mode pushbuttons that work EXACTLY this way. To set the time on my Timex I've had for ~ ten years, I hold down one button an extended duration. Two pushes sets a different timing mode.
It's definitely resource limited.
It's an application-specific digital computing device.
Seems to meet the patent criteria. Maybe someone should call Timex to dust off their patent portfolio.
Curious about other Slashdot articles about silly patents, I searched, and it turns out we've talked about this patent before.
Wouldn't it be more useful for microsoft to have a patent on people punching the keyboard when windows locks up....Imagine the money at 5c per punch...
is already built into many motherboards, for example. Press the power button, and it will do a soft power down. Hold it for a while, and it will do a hard power down.
Similar concepts have been used in the past, like morse code, binary, the ENIAC (which had ten distinct states!), the visual spectrum of light, and Paul Revere's ride (which actually *was* revolutionary).
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Wait, has anybody pantented the two-button and three-button mouse yet? Or the one button mouse for that matter?
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Since most applications are moving to the web or mobile devices ultimately, where single clicks reign, what's there to be upset about?
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
"Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time..."
Sheesh. As if double click wasn't annoying and contrived enough. How about as many as five clicks, and the duration varies between long and short clicks? Is there a prior art in this, like freaking MORSE CODE?
...to our nightmare.
From the Article:
Microsoft said last year that it would be seeking to improve earnings from technology which it claims it invented and would be using its patent portfolio to do so.
This is just all a horrible scheme to make some extra money, from an idea they have no real claim to.
Oh my, I think Dave just turned into a bear.
1) Ctrl-Alt-Del
2) Rebooting after installing an application
3) Powering the computer on
4) The arrow pointer for the mouse
5) The hourglass
You wish every other app could do it. Firefox sure as hell can't!
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
This looks like copyright, not patent violation.
(I know, it's a *tiny* excerpt, fair use....for now.)
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Triple Click...
Quad Click...
Qunice Click...
And then this shit about doing it with rythm.
How about random click where the user goes stupid and clicks their nuts/tits off out of frustration?
Does anyone have a patent on Parkinson's disease or Epilepsy?
but it doesnt stand a snowballs chance in court. :(.
Whats really disturbing is that Monsanto vs Schmeiser actually has. Patents suck
I think you might be on to something here. Why complicate the human/computer interface with that silly keyboard thing? Let's simplify things by going back to that Apple mouse with one big button. You can indicate to the computer what you want it to do by tapping out various patterns with that one key! Working on a document? Just tap out the patterns for the letters you want. (short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S (long-click)(long-click)(long-click) O (short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S (Sorry, only Morse code I remember.)
that you can get a patent for that. I just developed a long-range frequency hopping spread spectrum DAS that got FCC approval. Our attourneys didn't find anything patentable about it, but you can get a patent for double clicking? Un-real.
based on the term 'hardware', then every keyboard has this feature, key repeat. press once for a single charactor, hold down for multiple characters, or Apple's use of a single key to enable different features based on the number of time the same key is pressed, was in the old accessibilty options.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
I call "Prior art".
I don't know about any other phones, but my 5510 had the facility that I could press '1' and it would enter the #1, but if I held down '1' it would call the speed dial entry for #1.
Clearly this fits into the "limited resource environment", the "hardware button" and everything else. If this isn't a very, very specific example of prior art that is meant to be covered by this patent then I'm screwed if I know what else could be.
Yes Virginia, the patent office is staffed by morons.
Press "A" once, get one "A"
Press-and-hold "A", get lots of "A"s in a row
Press "A" twice in a short period of time, get "AA"
Nope, doesn't sound familiar at all...
Not that the Break key wasn't used for Attention and Break-Disconnnect, nope, didn't do items 1 and 2 on a 1940's era teletype.
Good thing you never clicked, double-clicked or click-and-dragged on the Apple Lisa in 1980-something.
No really... I don't see the problem...
(And welcome all of you nice E.U. folks. Your new corporate overlords from these, the Corporate States of America are beneficent and sublime masters who have only your best interests at heart. And consider carefully... have _you_ joined the Pepsi Revolution?... 8-)
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
The truth about the 'Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet' urban myth.
"You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka
jane doe vs mc donalds over hot coffee
Not bad, two in a row. Want to go for a threepeat?
Sane courts and legal systems... hmmm. hmmm.. since civil cases are handled seperately from criminal cases.....
Can I get an APPLE?
APPLE!
Can I get an ORANGE?
ORANGE!
Hot coffee... hot coffee. You are aware, I assume, that at the time of the lawsuit the training manual for McDonald's coffee required the coffee be maintained at a temperature no less than 180 degrees farenheight which is a mere 32 degrees below the boiling point of water? You are aware, I assume, that on sensitive skin such as that of the elderly and on children (both age groups being members of society which frequent McDonald's, mind you - one of which is a regular customer of coffee), 180 degree water can cause intense damage? I spilled their coffee on myself as a preteen, years before the lawsuit - it left burn marks for several days. I had previously spilled instant coffee on myself and it NEVER left that sort of damage. And, of course, you're conveniently ommitting the fact that the judgement was eventually reduced to less than $700k.
Well, you've offered your ass up twice now, and twice I've handed it back to you on a silver platter. Want to go for three? I'd recommend against it. I don't really have anything against you, I'm just tired of people offering up irrelevant comparisons and BS statements to make a "point", when, in fact, they're not making any point at all as a result of thier meaningless posts.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Well.. I'd say that "created" is pretty much exactly what he said: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
I'm just glad he took that initiative. Where would Slashdot^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^the Internet be without it?
In fact, I'd say that that commentary was entertaining but obviously politically motivated.
Don't believe me? "Last updated: 27 September 2000" Let's see here, that's what, less than one month before the 2000 election?)
Blame the Primary Examiner: Wong; Albert K.
That's the guy you want to blame. Dear media, please, make a feature story on that guy. I want to know where he went to school, whether he is now on Microsoft's payroll, etc...
Alain.
So your "prior art" means jack squat until someone else tries to invalidate the patent. It's not like the PTO says "oops, our bad, the patent is invalid."
If you report an allegedly bogus patent to EFF, it can have the USPTO reexamine the patent and say just that.
If I made a really really small PC, could I patent the "Enter" key? How about the "shift " or "control" keys?
Microsoft has you beat there.
Is it possible to patent the action of "filling out a patent application form"? I could be a millionaire.
If that doesn't pan out, maybe I'll just patent "pissing".
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
If you don't have $2M, then all American hackers put together just might. Support EFF's Patent Busting Project.
unless civil lawsuits can now result in death penalties
Lose your food money to damages in a civil lawsuit, and get all your future wages garnished until the damages are paid off, and you will die of malnutrition.
You mean like this?
we are building a religion
a limited edition
we are now accepting callers
for these pendant key chains
I used lisp machines at MIT in 1979 or 80 that used double click. I'm sure MIT stole it from Xerox.
I have read the many of the previous comments but have not yet found one that makes this point, so forgive me if I am repeating someone elses words.
:p .
:p .
If you read the patent (URL in the post, read the english 2/3 of the way down) you will note that the patent specifically refers to PDA/Handheld devices which (In my interpretation) have hardware buttons specially set aside for launching predefined applications (One per button) in different manners.
I find that quite stupid on the part of the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), as I am Australian, and know that the SMH is a popular Sydney newspaper and am wondering who their sources were, and why they haven't done their research
None the less, I will notify them later when I get the chance, if someone else doesn't beat me to it
Joel.
how about if i say i'm snapping my mouse, or pinching it, instead of clicking. the patent wouldn't cover that. i'm double pinching, or mashing. or like my mom, double smashing or crushing the mouse button.
how about dual pinching the input roller sensor?
that's nothing like double clicking a mouse.
will the a/c
You mean that annoying spyware ad serving company is going to be out of business soon?
Yeah like Xerox wwwaaayyyy back in the day
This is an invalid patent because computers other than ones running windows (namely macs) use this to open programs as well. Its like trying to patent the caps lock key or the @ symbol. What the fuck is going on in this world, is Microsoft going to start suing apple for patent infringement now?
411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
After reading all of this, I've decided to patent nose-picking. I've decided to implement a limited-use policy - it's free, up until the first knuckle; then it costs a dollar.
Pay up!
Think about it for a second: they patent something very general on "limited resource computing devices".
This patent definition is not going to change over the years, but the definition of "limited resource computing" will. In 4 years from now, anything that can't run longhorn may fall under this category!
Now they have a couple of years to create a precedent where a similar patent is protected with success in the courtrooms. Precedent is law. So when the time is right, MS would be able to prevent older non-DRM hardware from selling. As a bonus they'll get people like the RIAA to fight this in court for them, so they won't even have to actually create the precedent themselves.
Have a look at this: Microsoft courts governments in strategy shift
I think there is a clear pattern here. However let's be honest, MS isn't the only one playing this game in recent times.
By all means, let them run amok and waste money on BS patents. Just make sure that the first time they get challenged they actually go down. If the challenge fails, THEN there's a problem.
Wrong, actually - if they take anyone to court at all there is a problem. In the US court system, s/he who has the most gold wins (virtually always), simply because they can afford the most lawyer time, court time and delaying tactics.
What's really going on here is putting all small developers out of business without ever having to prove anything, simply by having the legal system bankrupt them.
Foo
Morse code... my thoughts exactly. That ought to be enough prior art to invalidate the MS patent.
But really it was probably a prehistoric toad-like creature that did the actual innovating. Well done, Mr. Gates, your vast enterpise has the same mental capacity as a prehistoric reptile.
Most young, rapidly growing companies don't gain their marketshare by patent litigation.
They get big by whatever other means, and THEN when the growth stops they being looking for other revenue channels. They also look to protect their marketshare. This usually leads to patent litigation to stymie competitors and bring in settlements.
Of course small (arguably the most innovative) companies can't begin to afford to fight, so they settle (which can mean being absorbed for a paltry sum) by the bigcorp.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
I have a Seiko watch which is a "replica" of the wrist holos used in the Final Fantasy movie (The Spirits Within). (I'm geekier than you! Ha!) To set the watch, we press and hold a button. To move between functions, we simply press a button. These aren't mouse buttons, BTW.
Heh, IE already has a triple-click function built in :)
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
Interesting, as it seems to be getting at the idea of launching different applications based on how long you hold down a hardware button,
My car radio's preset buttons have worked like that for decades. Press briefly, and it changes the station. Press and hold, and it changes the preset. Prior art.
- the patents office staff is not really qualified?
- the computer network of the patents office might be running on windows?
I imagine a windows popup with "Do you alway trust Microsoft" press [OK] or [Abort]. When selecting [OK] all patents applications from Microsoft Corp. are assigned a auto approval. An employee pressing [Abort] however might get into deep trouble, for not getting enough patent tickets passed in a single day.Its time we send real experienced scientists back as staff inside the Patents office. How can this happen?
Robert
The USPTO has been accused of being lazy and ignorant for their inability/unwillingness to find prior art in the past, but this one takes the cake. The stupid moron who approved this probably double clicked something to do it! Where they using stone and chisel there before July 2002?!?!?
Clap Off! (clap clap)
Clap On, Clap Off, the Clapper!!
This has been a test. If this had been an actual Sig, you would have been amused.
If anyone is interested in some real prior art:
When I was working for my old company (Tuxia), I wrote a linux based system called viper. This had the functionality in the program launcher where if you click on an icon a program will start. But, if you click and hold on an icon for longer than 1 second, a context menu would appear. I quit the in January 2002.
It was mentioned in Linux devices when it was first released to the public (it was open source).
It was hosted on www.tuxia.org (but that is now gone). I still have the source available.
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
Microsoft was granted a patent for double-clicking on April 27
So we have to pay MS for double-clicking on April 27. Big deal: there are still 364 free double-clicking days left!
time varying clicks came in with Morse code and the telegraph, patented 1837. MS Numbnuts.
Tripple click is used to highlight a whole line of text. These things are useful, amusingly enough.
What makes me laugh is when someone feels compelled to point out the dupes. There's always someone who has this burning need.
Aaaaah, don't you just love sound of a whip on dead horse flesh? It sounds like me whipping your mom last night.
Actually such prior must be found "before" the patent filing date, not the patent approval date. Filing for a patent is an guarantee way that you get to keep your invention (assuming no prior art) even if someone "invented" the same thing during the patent period and claim it as being a prior art just to screw you over.
But in this specific case... I'm very tempted to go work in the patent office so I can help them review the case before some idiot put their stamp of approval on it...
JEEZE! Double click patents?
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
Haha.
That doesn't surprise me at all. Pretty soon we'll see Microsoft trying to get a copyright on the damn taskbar...
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
wasnt there a patent turned down not long ago for icons because it was deemed to similar to buttons or served the same purpose...
Isnt clicking on a mouse even more like this? If a patent for icons can not be held, how can this be?
Also, how can microsoft get a patent for this when its been in use in Operating system for years... Apple and AmigaOS comes to mind.
Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
sounds like my pc....
How, exactly, do you determine if a device is "resource limited?" Some of the early PC's had less computing power than a current Palm device, but they certainly weren't resource limited in their day.
Don't let them wake up... they'll just approve more of these inane patents faster! They do less damage when they are a sleep and take 15 years to finally approve a patent.
Is it too late to patent a process for heating one or more large planetary objects by using a large ball of hydrogen that is actively engaging in nuclear fusion to produce heat and light?
It is possible to request that the USPTO re-examine a patent. This does not require suing (and technically, I believe, does not even require a lawyer).
I believe that there are some fees, but I could not find the cost of a inter partes or ex parte reexamination on the USPTO web site (and would appreciate anyone that knows posting -- I'm talking about the cost sans any associated legal costs, if someone gets a law firm to do this).
The re-examination usually relies on new prior art being brought to light.
I'd like to see this system modified to impose the fee (perhaps with some multiplier) on the *patent filer* if the reexamination finds that the patent is indeed invalid, rather than on the party requesting the reexamination. If the process of requesting patent reexamination was streamlined and made zero-cost (if you're correct), this would effectively eliminate the problem of bogus patents.
May we never see th
What about the Hayes modem command patent 4,549,302 which uses a pause, three +, and another pause? Close enough to a multiple click with significant pauses?
Bah, screw you Microsoft. Who needs your filthy patented double-clicks anyway?
From now on, I'll be opening my applications and documents by using the free and unrestricted method of triple-clicking! Try to stop me now, dirty oppressers!
Viva la triple-click. Hear my mouse yell "1 click, 2 click......."...er..damn it!!!!
There's a hidden button on women which, if pressed properly, generates various responses. Click once for a slap, twice for a moan, or keep on clicking for more amusing results and sound effects.
And with my dear mother watching The Bachelor religiously, "limited resource computing devices" isn't all that bad a description.
(This is a repost... I was in a hurry before so I think I didn't hit submit after preview...)
While working for a company called Tuxia (www.tuxia.com) I wrote a Linux based system for the iPAQ called viper. The file manager and program launcher had the following functionality:
1. Click on an icon and start the program
2. Click and hold on an icon for over 1 second and a context menu appears.
The software was open source and hosted at www.tuxia.org (since died).
I just did a quick google and announcement dates are from 2001. google +"tuxia" +"viper"
BTW. Viper was the first system for the iPAQ to include an RDP client. Pocket PC 2002 introduced an RDP client.
I think Bill was watching me
If anyone is interested, I still have the source somewhere.
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
Microsoft is really wasting time with these trivial tertiary patents. They could lock up the market pretty fast by patenting the On/Off switch so that only Microsoft Computers(TM) could use one. They shouldn't let their innovation slip away!
and those who feel the compelling need to post anonymously. I'm pointing out it's a THIRD dupe and a week late. It's also the first time I've ever posted about a dupe. So avoid your need to post as AC to first time ppl doing a pet peeve of yours.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
I'm tired of fucking about with this obnoxious shit. Who do we fire, stab, blow up to stop these outrages? I'm bored with lots of free time...
They asked for the wrong patent. The correct one is called:
"Key sequence for setting the system in a sane state: Ctrl+Alt+Del"
So double clicking is patented.
Add a speaker to the mouse then it could make any sound you wanted when the button is pressed. Sure someone will eventually patent the "double boing", but there are more sounds available than anyone would reasonably be able to patent. What if the sound is copyrighted, could it be patented then? I suppose the RIAA would get involved then, and sue for having a mouse "beat it, beat it" Though with Michael Jackson in jail, maybe it wouldn't have enough value to pursue.
i am not going to get into details since last time when i told people SHOULD IGNORE patents like this i got modded down like hell ...
... ...
....
... mod me down if you want ...
anyway, I have to tell it again, that whoever accepts and enforces patents like that is a MORON
any application that uses a "whel like" patent should be reverse engineered, decompiled and rewritten open source with a distribution source that cannot be shut down by authorities that enforce/approve crap like that
common knowledge methods, filesystems, and document formats should not be copyrighted and accepted copyright for
had to say this sorry
From now on, I'll only tab my touchpad twice. That isn't a button, right?
42 + 1 = 42
This will last until there is nothing left to patent. Then they will decide the RIAA had the right idea all along and everyone from Microsoft to Walmart will turn to suing their customers as their main revenue stream.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act!" -- George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair)
I see the Ministry of Silly Walks has taken over the patent process.
KDE uses double click. Hopefully Bill won't notice.
Damn, its gonna be a pain in the ass to type out "Small A with a Diaeresis" every time I need one of these stupid things: ä
I cannot believe it has not been brought up, but actually, I think, the Amiga had double-clicking before Microsoft. Sure, the Apple GUI and the Amiga GUI were very close in releases (Apple was a bit earlier), but the Apple was only single-click at that time. The Amiga was always double click from the get-go.
Not sure when the Atari 800 came out, but if memory serves me correct, the same guy (Jay Minor) who built the Amiga designed the Atari 800 as well. Amiga History
quickly, i'm now filing a patent for moving the mouse over mouse pad or any surface for that matter!!
This is what we get when you have a "Cotton Gin" mindset trying to comprehend modern technology.
M$ is banking on those at the PTO not having the slightest knowledge of the technology. Pair this with the PTO specific jargon and it is a pretty safe bet that those making the decision as to who gets what in terms of a pertinent technologies will not make the connection, and you can forget about any inkling of "prior" art being put into the equation - that is until someone else does it for them (that is point the PTO to pre-existing patents/technologies).
What carries more authority than a biblical precedent? Moses struck the stone twice to summon water
If you mean "this" as in your own post, then yes. It does. Triple-clicking in Firefox only selects a line, not a paragraph.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
this will will get shot down if it's ever 'enforced' legally. I recall using the Apple IIgs and certain applications had a rather Macintosh OS Finder like interface. And one had to double click things to make 'things' happen. IE: Launch an application etc. So prior art will shoot them in the face... then again, Microsoft invented the internet, the GUI, and viruses... so might as well say the invented religion, politics and the world as well. Stupid patent office, somebody seriously needs to beat down whoever runs that joint.
No, Windows Firefox selects a line when you triple-click, not a paragraph. I'm using it right now, so I can post a screenshot if you really want proof. Although you appear to use it yourself, so you could perhaps try it before mouthing off next time. :-)
Oh, this is also version 0.8. Perhaps the feature existed in an earlier version and you are on the earlier one still. I won't rule out that possibility.
Anyway it would be really nice if it did select the whole paragraph...
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
...Which is an idea they took from the many varied X-windows iconbox utilities.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Stick your finger up your nose once, and it comes out green. That's "launching an application." See claim 69, thirty-fifth line. If you stick it in twice for more than ten seconds, and do that within five seconds of the time it turned green, it comes out red, which is "opening a new note." See claim 69, line 108.
this is going to impair my UT rocket skillz.
The power button on my Palm m500 can either be pressed quickly to turn on or off or held down for the backlight to come on.
I picked up my m500 in 2001.
like I said. P.S. This is a test of the emergency broadcast system.
Heh, IE already has a triple-click function built in :)
So does Mozilla Firefox. And Word. And SciTE.
It's a common feature wherever there are large amounts of selectable text:
- single click positions caret
- double click selects word
- triple click selects line/paragraph
If it is they are probably going after Apple for the transparent window patent.
Problem is that if challenged they will lose. Apple had it first.
Oh, wait...
Hey, if Microsoft can file for double clicks - I can certainly file triple clicks.
The cost of filing an inter partes reexamination is $8,800. However, it requires a full request, including prior art references, written in proper format. The prior art references must *address the claims* unlike most of the ranting on Slashdot. And the "real party of interest" must also be named.
Actual cost, if you use a lawyer will probably be in the range of $20K.
Thalia
Lots of precedents for sequence changing meaning. Casio FC-451 electronic calculator from circa 1980 is one. Almost every key has at several meanings. Hit the 4 key and you get 4 decimal. Hit the shift key first and you get the value of the speed of light in meters per second instead. Hit the mode button first and it swithes the calculator to degrees entry mode rather than radians entry mode.
None of them exactly the same thing. Every one a little bit different.
But No, that doesn't mean the idea was hard to see, and easy to miss.
Why in 1998 I was writing to one of my slashdot pals, saying "Hey, what if a second click within a second threshold of time launches a new note or some previous state of the application window goes transparent in an exponential way, with a user-settable time constant?" Solid prior art there.
I used to have a little car that worked according to a handheld 'clicker.' You pressed the (rather relecutant to be clicked) button on the side of the control, which was shaped like a rather natty police radio and the car did different things. For example, two clicks really quickly put it in reverse.
This was in the very early eighties. I can barely remember it. Did anyone else have one of these, or did I dream it? If anyone can confirm it then this could even beat the airport lights.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
The Mac variant of that that I always used to see supported but I believe has been supported less and less lately - let me test it now, yep, Safari doesn't do it in this text box, nor does TextEdit- is that the triple-click would select that LINE, and quadruple-click would select a paragraph.
I just checked and BBEdit seems to flaw in the other direction - triple-click selects lines now, but no matter of clicks will select the paragraph. I used to think of this as a Mac vs Win difference but apparently it's not standard on the Mac anymore.
While I'm at it, I'd like to bitch about MS's stupid behavior that hitting "down" on the bottom line of a text (produced a beep, rather than going to the end of the line. I just verified that THAT at least still works in OSX standard text-handling apps (this box in Safari, TextEdit, BBEdit), but not in Word, and I'm fairly sure it doesn't work anywhere in Window. Pisses me off to no end when forced to use Wintel boxen.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
take that as an excuse to eliminate the use of double clicks in all free software applications. Those were a crappy UI idea from the start.
YES! I had one of these. It was black, shaped a bit like an Indy 500 car. The car had a little microphone and responded to sound. You were supposed to use the clicking device, but you also could just clap. (Although clapping would quickly hurt your hands, because you had to do it pretty loud.)
Several applications on my Palm do something different if I "tap and hold" instead of just tap. Seems like pretty much the same thing.
IAAAL - I am actually a lawyer
panasonic manufactured a tuner that made use of this technology in the 90's. I'm sorry microshaft, but in my opinion, you'll have to JUSTY YOURSELVES on this one... panasonic did this one in hard ware as far as I can tell. Also I did the same thing in the same time period, in my AMX progamming stint...
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a thumb.
It covers a way to get at least 3 different actions from the "application buttons"
I had a digital watch about 20 years ago that would use the different buttons in a different way. Press once to show the time, press twice to show the date and press longer to change the time.
For me that is the same as a short click, a long click and a double-click.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
what's that game? where you tap out rythyms on a mat?
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a thumb.
Where in the story text did Slashdot misrepresent information?
HAND.
I think YOU are the prior "art"... :)
The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
And then there's those with the compelling need to bitch about people who don't want to register and the assumption that they have a need to bemoan the fact that there are those who use a feature of /. that's there for a reason.
I mean really, who gives a flying fuck on horseback whether (a) the story is a dupe, or (b) if some people prefer to post anonymously? Do you? Why?
No, don't bother answering that. I'm 50,000 times more intelligent than you and even I don't know the answer. It gives me a headache just trying to think down to your level.
Any computing device running the Microsoft (r)(tm) Windows (r)(tm) operating system will be classified as a "limited resource computing device".
The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
I don't have the time to read all the 27 claims in detail, but the way I read this (especially claim 18) is that this is about the time the button being pressed. It never mentions the length of the pause between the button presses.
The way I understand a "double click" is that it is is two clicks with only a short time inbetween - it does not matter how long the individual clicks are.
And the thing is only about launching applications on a "limited resource computing device" (whatever that really is).
harald
Finding prior art should be absolutely trivial for this one.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Are they going to sue doubleclick.com now?
_________________________
Spelling and grammar mistakes left as an exercise for the reader.
Ooh this makes me ANGRY! SMASH! GREY SMASH!
Ahem. As a punishment both Bill Gates and the examiner who rubber stampped this patent should both be forced to eat 1000 printed copies of it.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
- that's what I say. The more the merrier; when the world of patents has become large and stupid enough, it will break down because it is too unworkable, and then we can hopefully talk about a more sensible way to go about these things.
The gist of my complaint was that anyone who has ever owned a digital watch would know that these techniques have been in widespread use for many years.
Every bloody emperor has his hand up history's skirt [Peter Hammill/VdGG]
I don't think it's fair to generalize.
SOME American businesses, but many more DO NOT.
Why do you* think Linus Torvalds is working in America? Why does Richard Stallman continue to live in the United States rather than emigrating to Europe? Why does Tim Berners-Lee work at MIT, in Massachussetts, USA, and not in England?
*Not necesarily YOU per se, but "You folks whose past-time is bashing America"
If this is the way the USPTO is being run, I'm going to go patent sex tomorrow and then sue all the pr0n companies for infringing on my IP.
If patents are supposed to be a fair exchange (the owner gets the right to commercialize on the idea, the public get the workings explained in the patent) I feel like I've got a bad return. They get to hinder others from device development, while we get an idea that everybody would (already have actually in lots of prior art, different areas possibly) think of..
There might be prior art in, of all things, amateur radio handhelds. Amateur Radio VHF/UHF handhelds have, for several years, typically carried enough functionality that getting to it all given the limited number of buttons on the radio requires the time-based hardware button tricks Microsoft is describing. For example, on my Yaesu FT-51R (purchased in 1998, 4 years before Microsoft's patent filing, and in fact available before then (actually the even earlier FT-530 uses the same tricks)), saving to a memory requires holding down a button for a second, changing to the memory you want to save to, and then pressing the same button within a particular time. That same button, if merely pressed rather than held, causes other buttons of the radio to perform different functions then if it had not been pressed (but only for a limited amount of time). Hence, different functionality depending the length of time the button is pressed.
Note that these radios are controlled by internal microprocessors, and thus might be considered a 'limited resource computing device'. In any case, the idea of having the functionality of a button change depending on how long the button is pressed preceeds Microsoft's patent filing enough that Microsoft's idea should be seen an an obvious transfer of the idea to an only slightly different device.
A privately held, publically funded corporation whose sole mission statement is to challenge any and all patents granted by the corrupt and decrepit Patent System.
This is outrageous! Our civilization has produced too many lawyers... Rule of Law leads to oppression!
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
If you read the full text, you will see that it applies to limited resources devices. I don't think it even applies to laptops.
So things like Pocket PC, or a handheld eBook reader.
Maybe Microsoft was upset that they lag behind IBM in patents so they are trying to catch up!
Karma, We don't need no stinkin' karma!
Apple used the double click way before Microsoft in the Lisa OS and the Mac OS. Maybe even Xerox used the double click in their GUI. Does Microsoft really think that it can get away with that?
Greetings, Andreas.
Interestingly, one of their references (by Jones, 1991) cites the following in the abstract: The keyboard includes menu keys corresponding to menu labels displayable on the display and a multi-function key having a primary function and a secondary function. Which of the key functions is selected depends on the duration of the key press. The calculating device executes the primary function if the key is pressed for a short time. However, if the key is pressed for longer than a given time period, the calculating device displays a set of menu labels and assigns a function associated with a displayed menu label to a menu key. If the key continues to be pressed, the display scrolls to show additional sets of menu labels.
Saying all that, IANAL, so any opinion of mine is likely to be worth less than the two cents offered.
-- Intelligence is soluble in alcohol
Prior art for communication via tapping was invented by death watch beetles.
" Reboot, damn you Windows %&^*@^%"!!!!! "
...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
...I feel like I'm becoming a criminal without even trying.
Prior art is well-documented, e.g. in http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/rob/movies/b lit.mpg
The video shows a mouse cursor clicking, then dragging up a terminal emulation program, and then clicking again, for setting the terminal's size. So, we have prior art from 1983, and it's extremely well documented.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
On the other hand, this MS patent looks remarkably like an idea, rather than an implementation of an idea.
Slashdot has been granted patent number #154-353235 for the double-post, a "system which allows the same news to be posted repeatedly in succession".
2 42
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/28/198
For some time now devices have been available to aid disabled drivers. These often involve clicking once, twice up to nine or ten times for a given function (indicators, lights etc.). Sometimes the click invloves a short puff of breath down a tube. Sometimes the clck and hold is used to cancel the function. These devices are certainly short on resources, and many pre-date Windoze and almost certainly PDAs.
> (short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S
;)
> (long-click)(long-click)(long-click) O
> (short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S
> (Sorry, only Morse code I remember.)
Since this is slashdot, just rearrange the letters and you get:
(long-click)(long-click)(long-click) O
(short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S
(short-click)(short-click)(short-click) S
it's not that hard
Errr... Any half decent fighting game on a GB?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
At last, someone talking sense. The GPL is a workaround for a bad situation. The problem is that -- under the law as it stands today -- copyright is sacrosanct, whereas the Public Domain is unprotected from pilfering. Anybody can legally take a Public Domain work, make a tiny change, claim copyright on it, and start throwing their weight around in the courts. It should be the other way around: the Public Domain {which belongs to the majority} should be protected from abuse by copyright holders {the minority}. The GPL is a way to use existing copyright laws -- which ordinarily would benefit the minority -- in a way which benefits the majority. Copyright law gives authors {too much, some would say} control over distribution of their works -- the GPL is a way to use that control for good {ensuring that the majority of people have access to works in a fashion similar to the "Enhanced Public Domain" described below} rather than for evil {ensuring that a minority profit from works}.
If the Public Domain were as well protected from what some call "theft" as copyright material, -- i.e. you could make "fair use" of a PD work but not attempt to call it your own -- then there would be no need for the GPL, as all Free software could be dedicated to the Public Domain and then could not be "stolen" by Closed Source authors.
You would be automatically permitted to use up to X% of a PD work in a work on which you claim copyright, but any more than that and the work would belong in the Public Domain; just as you are allowed to use up to X% of someone else's copyrighted work in a work in a work on which you claim copyright, but any more than that and the work is still copyright of the original author. Additionally, any person would have to have the right to investigate any copyrighted work for evidence of misappropriation of Public Domain material {which would have to be made a criminal, rather than civil, offence; and falsely copyrighted works would pass automatically into the Public Domain}.
The important difference is that, unlike a copyrighted work, nobody would be able to give permission to use nore than X% of a Public Domain work in a copyrighted work {unless the would-be pilferer wishes to organise, at their own expense and to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, a nationwide referendum on the issue}. This way, the Public Domain would be guaranteed to grow and grow.
In case anybody forgets, the original purpose of copyright law was to enhance the Public Domain by encouraging authors to contribute to it -- you were given a limited-term monopoly over your own work, in return for releasing it to the Public Domain for the benefit of everyone.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
there is another application that did that in the 1970s and earlier:
man-portable radio communications
as far as i know from my radio license we`ve been
using the technique to open radio relays for a long time:
tone one short opens one relais,
tone one long or twice another,
tone two long / short another again.
using this technique you can open and close
relais over a few hops to transmit radio signals.
i know, my telefunken FuG7 has the relais stuff in.
Worked like Magic :)
I think it was used to tweak the looks as well, but I may be wrong. I used so many tweaking utils on my Amiga, it was sheer fun.
But I forget to tell that the Defragmenter shouldn't use virtual memory. Dang.
Anyway, those were the days... 7.14 flying Mhz! *no irony, no lag at all*
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
tone dialling.
I don't kow how it works in the US, but over here in good old England et al, we can dial any phone number with a single button. Four taps in quick sucession for a 4, ten for a 0. Furthermore, if you want to call someone else within the call, you tap once to put the first on hold, and once you've finished, press and hold to be reconnected. Easy.
Anyone know for how many decades phones have been around?
NCR Patents the Internet (Wed Feb 12, 2003)
Didn't you have to hold down a button for a few seconds on your old Casio watches to enable the "time edit", "alarm edit" or "date edit" function?
a
When a passenger of the foot, hooves in sight, tootel the horn trumpet melodiously
I think you need someone to fund such a project, someone who likes to fund weird stuff like George Soros.
;-)
You could make it a normal company which would licence out the patents to its contributors for free, but you could add a rule to give away licenses for open source projects too.
The reason is you really need to create more than one such patent, is that you are working with borderline acceptable patents which have a high chance of being rejected and requiring attention(fees) in court, and also one patent is not enough to be annoying. (cf. EOLAS vs M$)
EMail me or reply if you ever found such a patent hunting venture
I even have found the right web site name for it its "geniusideas", I think the domain is for sale.
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
Dance dance revolution!
If you read the description, this only refers to the buttons on a PocketPC, not a desktop mouse...
Sgt. Pepper told the Mac to play.
And on the Macintosh (in 1984) a single-click selected an application. A double-click launched the app.
Isn't that "prior use"?
Microsoft, at the time, and for several years afterwards, said that "point-and-click" was only for toys; they and their "real" systems eschewed the entire interface.
Maybe it's time we brought back lynching for idiots like this :)
Do you have some sort of proximity detector on your mouse for clicks or something? Or a breath controller?
>Microsoft was granted a patent for double-clicking on April 27
:-))))))))))))))
Just restrain yourself from double-clicking on April 27, is all.
Make it a day off.
I WANT BADLY to see the names of those who have tested, validated, and granted this patent. Well, the suggession applies to all patents... So that the person who has considered a double-click something new in 2004 would carry the shame through the history. (At least the /. history...)
So... Is patent office responsible for what they consider novel and what not? What if someone patents "kernel"?
P.S. Didn't read the whole patent, but I tried my best to. So TMBT RTFA.
WYSIWIG, but what you see might not be what you need
Mac OS system V1.0
n es
From: http://www.nd.edu/~jvanderk/sysone/
Next off is the desktop background. You can draw on the little square on the left, and you double click on the tiny screen to set the pattern. If you click on the left or right on the menu bar, you cycle through the built-in patterns. This existed with almost no changes in the General controls all the way up to system 7.1. It was then replaced by the Desktop Patterns control panel in 7.5, and the Desktop Pictures control panel in 8.0.
Finally, there's the double click speed. This control is almost identical to the one that is currently used in the Mouse control panel, giving it the honor of being one of the few things that has never been changed.
AND..... For the times
http://www.aci.com.pl/mwichary/guidebook/timeli
System 1........... 24th Jan 1984
Windows 1....... 20th Oct 1985
QED.
I'm sure others have said this as well, but patent and copyright are not the same thing, and different processes and laws apply to them
But... is it
:)
left double click or right????
Microsoft invented the patent office.
Back in the 1981/1982 timeframe, I was in the U.S. Air Force and was stationed at Gunter AFS in Montgomery, AL. We used a system called NLS/DNLS. This system emplyed special terminals with a mechanical 3-button mouse and a five key keyset attached to a terminal. The keyset could synthesize any printable ASCII character. Anyway, we used the mouse and keyset to manipulate doumentation and traverse help trees. The mouse and the keyset could both be chorded and I believe the mouse could be double-clicked to perorm a different function.
Does anyone else out there have better recollections regarding the use of the mouse NLS/DNLS?
Arf!
The short/long click stuff is used throughout OpenOffice.org on its icons. I wonder if this isn't a way to try to break one of the functionality features of OOo by hitting it with patent violations if they get too much market share.
Visceral Psyche Films
My limited functionality, microprocessor-
controlled personal java engine (Mr. Coffee)
has been using single-click, multi-click, and
time domain click buttons since I first
purchased it SEVEN YEARS AGO. The buttons
are used to program time-of-day, and time-to-
brew functions. In what way is this NOT prior
art, stupid, stupid PTO?
Next, they patent "a system and apparatus to indicate malfunction of a computational device using white glyphs showing artistic hexadecimal displays on marine blue background"... (blue screen)
(And me my good karma; as usual when I comment on patents !)
Get a life. And I'm getting tired of those 'wrong' messages. Not only that I have to endure them; worse, with those misleading 'news' we make ourselves / slashdot the laughing bunch of our 'ennemies'.
Do it again, Sam. Okay, I'll do it again:
Seen with professional eyes, this patent might have to be granted or not. It is surely no great invention.
But once and for all: There is nothing in it that warrants the notion of 'Patent for double-click'. Over. Read the claims correctly, even in the light of the description as mandated by patent law. There is a lot of repetion and crap; but nowhere a patent for 'double-click'. It is ridiculous and childish (see above) to shorten the patent to *that*.
And 'we' do us and everyone else in the 'Anti-patent liga' a disservice by such false claims.
Bash that crap of patent application; but bash it correctly. *Then* you'll be taken serious. Not just with a foolish attitude and childish arguments.
Better: give me a decent income to comb all those half-brew emotional 'patent news' before ever they are accepted. (Anybody ??)
The patent - for those too lazy too read - is about one thing: selection through activation time of clickable widgets; nothing else. That is: *length* of continuously pressing it. Here on my Debian Sid I haven't found this feature, yet. The Double-Click only comes in in the Patent in combination and *added* to this checking of duration of uninterrupted 'pressing' the widget. Also this, I have never seen. Or read. But chances are, it *has* been published (or experienced, sold) before the *Filing Date*.
And I encourage everyone who is aware of such, to step forward and make herself known ! *This* would help 'our' course; contrary to those stupid remarks of where the Double-Click itself was noticed before that date. Lost time, wasted time. Simply because neither claimed nor granted !
One day I see such a crap submitted as story from RedMond; and some Cowboy might accept it; and they'll ROTFL; in RedMond. Would be a pity. Let's do much better !
Thanks !
Maybe this has been pointed out before, but the title of this story is grossly misleading IMHO - I dont know about others but it made me stop and wonder if MS got a patent for "double-click" in the real sense - that only MS and its platforms could use double click!!
http://efil.blogspot.com/
But maybe there should be. Take Disney's handling of folk tales and out-of-copyright stories.
In the case of Snow White, everyone now calls the Dwarves by the names in the film -- Disney owns a copyright in those names.
Pinocchio -- Disney added the stupid little cricket, and consequently have copyright on it. Many of the Italians hate what has been done to their classic children's book.
The Little Princess -- Hans Christian Andersen's classic tale of "Can't always get what you want" -- characters renamed, happy ending added, and (a lesson learned from previous releases) the name changed to The Little Mermaid to stop other kids video companies releasing a competing product.
...and now children worldwide refuse the original versions of each of these tales because they're convinced that the Disney way is "the right way," and Disney thus has appropriated the rights to some of the most enduring Public Domain works known to man.
A similar thing happens with folk/public domain music. Do a popular arrangement, and suddenly people will refuse to listen to the original way -- the new way is the "right way". Then anyone wanting to sing it has to buy it off the arranger.
Public domain work misappropriated. Not technically theft, but I contest that it should be.
HAL.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
patenting a method for rapidly filing piles of junk patent applications (possibly on a limited resource computing device)?
A lot of car stereos work like that. Press the station button once and it goes to it. Press and hold the station button and it sets the station. Usually have similar things to set the clock and so on.
Definatly a limited input device.
It's starting to seem like the patent office just likes all the traffic they get from slashdot.
Before the deluge... (well, actually after the deluge), may I suggest that the average SlashDotter take a moment to learn how to read a patent.
The key things to look at are the claims. These are generally read in the context of the rest of the patent, but it's the claims that are the most important bit, since it's on these that the patentee claims a monopoly. Let's examine the claims of US6,727,830 (read along here).
Start with claim 1. It has four elements, a, b, c and d. A claim applies in whole, not in part, so for something to infringe, it would have to do all of a, b, c and d. Just doing a, b and c would not infringe. Take a look at the difference between c and d; the key point is that if the button is released after the time limit, the behaviour is different (the previous state is displayed). That's important and (as far as I know) novel. In particular, it's not the same as a double-click.
Similarly, claim 2 is like claim 1, only if the button is released after the time limit, the application starts with a new blank document. Claim 3 is a further variant, etc, etc.
I haven't proceeded to look at every single one of the other claims, but the key point to remember is to read them carefully and exactly, rather than jump to ludicrous conclusions such as "Microsoft Patent Doubleclick". You have eyes to read, and brains to think. Use them.
ben_ the technologist and platform agnostic
Even the dashboard button on the old Ford Model-A had the double function. If you pressed the button for a short time it made a noise. If you pressed it for a long time the engine started. How many of you worked with teletypes and typewriters that had the short long keyboard functions?
There's an article in on of The Onion's books:
Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeros
it was really funny until now
Press the "A" (font color) icon for enough time and a color palette comes up.
Hear me out for a minute.
In the game WarCraft 3, for a Hero unit, doesn't some of the trick of its item use fall under what this Patent talked about? If you click one way, you use the item on the button, if you click another way you drop said item. (I know it is left click right click on this, still though...).
I remember double clicking on the Atari ST back in 1985.
AFAIK US patents are valid for 17 years.
To be valid the patent must have been applied for prior to GEM being released.
Thus if valid, the patent must already be expired.
The first digital watch I ever had had buttons that functioned like in this patent, also the station presets on car radios use it.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r =1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=6,727,830&OS=6,727,8 30&RS=6,727,830
IANAL, but this patent seems to describe only various click modes for handheld devices, differentiating methods of launching applications.
In other words, this is not about stealing past revenue, but setting up to steal future revenue.
This has been in Palms forever (since at least PalmOS 3.5). Press the address book hard button and the palm turns on (if off) and launches the address book. Hold it down, and it automatically starts beaming the address card you've marked as being your business card. Hold down the power button and things to do with the screen lighting happen (backlight on old B/W palms, bright control on IIIc's, etc.).
Also, there's a hack (several years old) from TealPoint called "TealLaunch" that allows you to add the same functionality to all the hard buttons. So I have, for instance, hold down on the ToDo list configured to bring up TealLock (security prog), while hold down on MemoPad brings up TealMaster (hack manager).
BTW, this is not an ad for TealPoint, I just love their apps.
Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
-kfg
Ok.. reading the patent application is a tough one. Talking about a time interval between successive mouse clicks activating a 2nd application.. woooooo..
...One such palm-type computer is Microsoft's Palm-size PC. The Palm-size PC has a touch screen display... (exact quote)
I see the application seems to be an extension of something started in 1999.. still I was double clicking before that..
Most interesting though is their choice of capitalization in the application. Look at this:
When you see 'palm-type', fine.. an adjective modifying the word computer to define the type. But reading on you see '.. Microsoft's Palm-size PC'. That looks like a product name. But wait, isn't Palm a trademark of someone we all know and love
July 2002 is the filing date. To be a little more fair, there was something in the patent about it being a continuation of an abandonded patent, filed back in '99, but who knows...govt. agency... peak of the dotcom boom, 15 years after the first Mac, what 20 years after the first GUI?.. was still too early for them to adopt these neat inventions called "Com-puuu-tors?!?"
Look at the patent itself. It says:
Time based hardware button for application launch
Abstract
A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. Alternative application functions are launched based on the length of time an application button is pressed.
First of all, it speaks of a HARDWARE button ! This has NOTHING to do with Windows, mice or an operating system !!
Second, it mentions a limited resource computing device again NOT a PC with Windows !
So get your facts straight and stop pretending this is about Windows or the Mac !
Even more specifically than that: it talks about "application buttons" -- buttons that are dedi
The claim of this patent is on pressing buttons that exist solely for the purpose of launching applications. (Why do they insist on the term "clicking"? I've been pressing buttons for years.) This means that they can't sue you for using multiple key/button-presses on any general use keyboard/device.It does mean, though, that they can sue you if you write a freeware patch for an "internet keyboard" or the like to added double-click or hold functionality to the browser button....
This ties in with the sentence further on which pertains to it being relevant to devices with limited resources, i.e. not very many buttons.
Their term "limited resource computer" is meaningless -- all computers have finite resources. In fact, further into the patent it expands the grounds thus:
Note: generally to computer systems. They did the old "pretend it relates to those new-fangled pocket thingies to confuse the judge whilst it does in fact relate to all computers" ruse.Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Can I please have an "unlimited resource" device?
Heh, you're right. Learn something new every day.
Thanks.
Someone should patent patents.
MacOs started to get the reputation of being limited. The single button wasn't enough. To keep up Apple added the dubble click to permit additional behavure. A software hack for a second button.
I've been using Macs virtually since introduction, and to the best of my knowledge the double-click feature was always there. Or are you referring to pre-release versions of the MacOS. I don't know if Apple invented it, or merely borrowed it from some other system. Back then, such features were generally assumed not to be subject to patent or copyright protection. I don't think the MacOS ever used triple-click, although an early Mac version of MSWord did.
First, please take five minutes to go and read the patent. It covers "A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device."
A game console is a limited resource computing device.
"The longer you hold down the fire button, the stronger your shot will be." R-Type, 1987.
"double-tapping the joystick right or left will cause the player to charge and smash into opponents.", Golden Axe, 1989.
All done now?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
So, I propose this for the new patent system
I propose this for a new Slashdot system: before posting, you are forced to read the original article/patent/etc, then take a quiz to see if you understand it.
Hopefully this will rid us of the "OMG! How can MS patent the double-click, prior-art, prior-art, prior-art!" type of comments.
Seriously, do the editors include these misleading writeups only to get everybody to jump on its "All IP is bad" bandwagon?
I suffer from a degree of RSI.
This is seriously aggravated by multiple small movements - for example double-clicking a mouse button.
Microsoft claim they are solely responsible for the concept of double clicking.
I guess they are just dying to contribute to my medical bills....
We just need to find a workaround. What if we reprogram mouses on Linux so that pressing the left button and then the right button does the same function as a double click, or did they patent that too? If they patented that, then we can replace double clicks with some obscure movement of the mouse or maybe a keyboard shortcut and then laugh at Micro$oft! Ha ha ha(Unless they patent keyboard shortcuts too)!
Scott Simontis
Morse code used exactly short and long clicks to determine the alphabetic letters. The pulse phones later on used similar technology to automatically determine the destination of a call.
The clicks where thus actually triggered different events.
Now look back on what the patent was for - it does not specify a mouse but any application button - hardware or software...
And even if they were they'd probably have to at least "double-click" the chisel with the mallet to get proper letters onto the stone. And as for resources, how much more limited can you get?
Hooolllass
Macintoshes used double-clicks before Windows was a gleam in Bill's eye. I suspect Xerox used them as well
- Single click
- Double click
- Click and hold
- Click and move
Yawn. Microsoft at it again.-- Jim Crigler In 1937, I began, like Lazarus, the impossible return. -- Whittaker Chambers
What happens if I am drunk and forget to take my finger off the mouse button, and it becomes a looooong click. Can M$ sue me?
Multiple times, yes. But a plurality of times?
That really ticked me off, I eat crimped edge sandwiches all the time, the kind made with white bread and sold in convenience stores in Japan. I decided to ask some people in Japan where I am about prior art. So far I have posted on the Lunchpak Research Lab homepage such a request.
There you can see a list with photos of 39 such sandwiches. These are the LunchPak series by Yamazaki Pan Co. (Yamazaki Bread) and Funwari Sando (Fluffy Sandwich) by Kimuraya. I can tell you the "The Peanuts", tuna onion, teriyaki chicken, and croquette crimped sandwiches definitely rock. The latest few (as of 5/13/2004) are from top to bottom, Yubari Melon, Meatloaf and Mayonnaise, Mandarin Orange and Milk, Chocolate Bar and Chocolate Creme (93 points!), etc. 100 points were given to Cookies and Chocolate Creme of 2003-05-22. Anyway I asked them if there was prior art and am thinking about emailing Yamazaki or others. Almost positive they (single filling ones) existed before Dec. 1999.
I believe I have attempted the triple layer to seal in the jelly myself long ago but failed to take a picture, anyway it sticks to the roof of your mouth and does not in fact produce a good seal anyway because the water based jelly and oil based peanut butter in fact do not mix, so the act of eating, bending the sandwich (unless of course crimped) can create jelly/air vacuoles that promote leakage in my opinion. Also peanut butter keeps better on its own.
Matt
I wonder when they will patent butt wiping. Will we have to pay royalties everytime we wipe our butt?
Unfortunately I lost what I typed when I back buttoned anyway, have found a post seemingly in 1998, also one about them having been around for about 10 years, etc. But no obviously dated picture so really have to get company to answer this one. But I am pretty sure that patent is TOAST! (yes I just had to).
Just curious, but I wonder what the speed (words/minute) is of an average Morse-code user. This could be fairly practical for text-messaging.
It would be kind of ironic, for we all know that the only intuitive interface is clitoris After that it's all learned.
What I am personally more concerned about is the very fact that Microsoft seems to have infringed on Amazon patent--twice.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Microsoft currently has no reason to pursue any of the more lame patents they hold. As long as business is good, it would be a waste of resources. However, when things start cooling down a little as more and more people opt for the open source route, revenue starts falling, what was once a well-fed, reasonably friendly lap dog, now becomes a snarling pit bull.
I'm pretty sure the "average" Morse code user today is actually typing into a computer using a keyboard. It's much like internet chat, only using a radio rather than the internet.
Doing it the old-fashioned way, I believe highly competent operators can do about 30WPM. The average would probably be closer to 15WPM.
doesn't that patent invalidate any use to the mouse?
Heh. Playing Madden NFL 2002 on my Gamecube. One button for passing the ball. Press it quickly, lob pass. Press it long, and you get a hard, fast pass. One button, two different behaviors dependent upon the length of the press.
As far as I know, this feature was around before the 2002 version of the game.
Surely, this predates the patent, and the Gamecube would seem to fit the definition of a limited resource computing device as well as a PDA does (which was the target of the patent).
I was talking with my SA and he said: "MS should patent the reboot button, they definately invented that."
I don't know if anyone else noticed it, but the Slashdot post regarding this the first time said that the patent was in regards to handhelds...
The patent application has two references listed. Two manuals from PALM! They have been in handhelds longer than MS! Microsoft gets granted the patent though!
Another thing Microsoft should be patenting...
-- The blue screen of death.
Sorry. It's a Microsoft product, remember??
That means before you could get the third character entered, you'd have to reboot.
Besides, if you hold down a meta-key (perhaps located where you put your thumb on the mouse) it might actually reflash your HDD's firmware!
A PC and a PDA are both "computing devices". Or even "eletcronic devices".
There are no earlier versions of Firefox.
Why is anything anything?
Let's say a short period of time can be represented by a dot like ".".
And a long period of time could be represented by a dash, like "-".
And a double click could be represented by two dots: "..".
Do you see where this could end up?
My father is a blogger.
ahh...but what about double, triple, etc. clicks over a LONG period of time? :-) (or an intermediate period of time...) for that matter, what is a 'short' time? Years, months, days, hours, minutes, seconds, milliseconds, microseconds, nanoseconds...get the drift? (in time, that is...:-))
;-)
It's all relative, you know
IE Users Click Here.
I knew it! It wasn't just False Memory Syndrome.
People, if this goes to court then we just have to bring one of these along. If a piece of plastic with a snap-button on the side isn't "limited hardware" then I don't know what is.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
http://sloan.stanford.edu/mousesite/Archive/Resear chCenter1968/ResearchCenter1968.html
m l
_ co mputer_mouse_patent.htm
In this segment Doug distinguishes between the Service System and the User System. The ARC team distinguishes overall man-computer system into a dichotomy between two systems, the service system and user system.The Service System is what appears at the terminal, the organization of software and hardware the system gives to me, the set of tools and capabilities available when I click on the screen. The user system is what is beyond that. Given these tools, how do we use the links, what are the conventions for leaving messages? How do we use the NLS capabilities to do work? The procedures, skills, methods, procedures, skills, and specific concepts people use are all developed in coordination with the kind of tools they have available.
http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/1968Demo.ht
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl
Priceless.
~hylas
I got a reply from the owner of the Japanese Lunchpack Research Lab site (http://metro.fw.cx/lunch/lindex.html) which has 39 recent examples with photos of similar stuffed crimped sandwiches sold by Yamazaki Bread Co. in Japanese convenience stores. They are massively popular. The reply confirmed that Yamazaki has been selling these since around the early 1980s, though more information can be gotten from the company itself.
I wondered if I should tell the USPO or Yamazaki about this lousy patent and get rid of it. It doesn't sound like it was intentionally made frivolously, and it seems to me the less dumb patents the better.
No, I do not think so. I don't think the EPO will change its granting policy just because the EU (totally different organisation) changes its policy.
Furthermore, Microsoft only filed an application in the US, not in Europe. Perhaps they're smart after all.
the sharp zaurus shortcut buttons already do this exactly, as any user will verify.
Eg. Pressing the address book button brings up the address book. Holding it down beams your contact details over IR.
Surely this means that the exact idea is already in the public domain and therefore unpatentable. It is supported by OpenZaurus which is GPL, does that make my case stronger?
Please can somebody do something about the American Patent model! It's the most destructive around.
I'm not sure of the point here. Double-clicking is too established a technique to be patentable on its own.
You would have to be desperate for screen real-estate (embedded systems?) to have three actions applied to one control/widget, depending on how long or how often a user clicks a pointing device on it. It's bad enough telling users how to get at a right-click menu...
--==--E
Is Palm applications that perform different actions depending upon how long a hardware button is pressed.
Example: Short press = launch app 1. Longer press = launch app 2. Longest press = turn off and lock palm. Apps that do this go all the way back when Hackmaster was first released.
Example 2: Security apps that turn the Palm off if you don't double-press the hardware button within a certain amount of time.
I think people are overlooking the fact that this patent emphasizes different TIME BASED actions invokes by pressing a SINGLE HARDWARE button. Double clicking is just an example that was mentioned in the context of a time-based operation with a single button. This is NOT A PATENT FOR DOUBLE CLICKING!
If the invention has been described in a printed publication anywhere in the world, or if it has been in public use or on sale in this country before the date that the applicant made his/her invention, a patent cannot be obtained. If the invention has been described in a printed publication anywhere, or has been in public use or on sale in this country more than one year before the date on which an application for patent is filed in this country, a patent cannot be obtained. In this connection it is immaterial when the invention was made, or whether the printed publication or public use was by the inventor himself/herself or by someone else. If the inventor describes the invention in a printed publication or uses the invention publicly, or places it on sale, he/she must apply for a patent before one year has gone by, otherwise any right to a patent will be lost. The inventor must file on the date of public use or disclosure, however, in order to preserve patent rights in many foreign countries.
It's more like everyone get a nuke to defend himself. Perhaps it's just ok, but it's another story then.