Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Patents the Design of Search Results Page

Posted by kdawson on from the look-and-feel dept.

prostoalex writes "ZDNet is reporting that USPTO issued a patent to Google, Inc. for 'ornamental design for a graphical user interface'. This is not, as ZDNet points out, a software patent (which is usually issued as a utility patent), but a design patent, which governs the look and feel of the product and prevents others from directly copying it." Ironic, given Google's recent slip-up of copying a Yahoo page. In news on the flipside, Google has launched a patent search service (in beta).

7 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Look and feel patents, like software patents... by jimstapleton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    should not exist.

    that's what's copyright is for!

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    1. Re:Look and feel patents, like software patents... by dsaraujo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, if you're talking hypothetically, in a better world, copyright shouldn't exist either. Go ahead, mod me troll, but the world would be better. :)

      --
      Visit the RPG Search Engine
    2. Re:Look and feel patents, like software patents... by jimstapleton · · Score: 4, Insightful

      then how can people make a living out of creating things for the public to enjoy? How can we encourage those to do it, and do it well when otherwise they wouldn't have the time and resources? Copyright protection is important in the regards, abusable, yes, but the advantages are worth more than the contrary. Additionally, I'm speaking of this within limits, not the draconian rules that some with to apply to copyrights...

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    3. Re:Look and feel patents, like software patents... by GigsVT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wrong, Copyright does not cover look and feel of a software interface. Apple v Microsoft, and others.

      Design patents have existed forever. They are really no big deal. An item has to be almost exactly the same to infringe on them.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  2. padding the patent portfolio by sreekotay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh Oh... too bad

    In theory a problem for all the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em (*ahem* confuse 'em?)" school of search destinations, but.. Google will never enforce the patent, so its probably moot...
    ----
    graphically speaking

    --
    graphically speaking
    1. Re:padding the patent portfolio by finkployd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google will never enforce the patent, so its probably moot...

      That is some scary thinking. Of course it would be silly for them not to enforce the patent now, they don't need to. What happens down the road though when google is not doing so well and stockholders and calling for blood? They will leverage any assets they have to turn a profit, they have little other choice. Then we will see just how damaging these "patent portfolios" can be.

      We will never see IBM, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon, or any other company with a huge patent portfolio go out of business under the current patent system. If all else fails, they will turn into the ultimate leech, a patent holding company bleeding off of everyone else. They stockholders will demand it, to not leverage an advantage they have when other people's money is at stake is criminal in the eyes of business.

      Finkployd

  3. But Carbon Copy (of Lotus) was OK? by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't believe this.

    Years ago, there were Lotus 1-2-3 clones, which copied not only the general visual appearance but the actual menu layout, sequences, names, and functionality.

    One of the more famous was literally named "Carbon Copy." That was the product name. Really.

    Lotus took the company to court and lost. IIRC The court ruled that it was OK to copy the look, feel, and details of the Lotus product's menus, because there was no other way to produce a competitive product.

    How the heck can a perfect functional duplicate of a complete menu tree be OK, but a vague organization of elements on a web screen be copyrightable?

    This is not a case of Google being evil (although they are), this is a case of a sea change in what the United States is willing to grant IP protection to.

    But at least it was the Google News screen. I was afraid maybe they'd gotten a patent on the spare, lean, mean Google Search screen and that it would now be compulsory for everyone else to have a cluttered web page.

    --

    "How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!