Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sued For Using Tabs In OS X Tiger
rizzo320 writes "AppleInsider is reporting that an Illinois-based company and its Nevada partner have filed a lawsuit against Apple Inc., alleging that Mac OS X 10.4 'Tiger' infringes an interface patent relating to the OS's nearly universal use of tabs. The suit was filed in the patent troll's and forum shopper's favorite venue: Marshall, TX. The patent in question is 5072412, which was originally issued to Xerox in 1987, but is now owned or licensed to IP Innovation LLC and its parent Technology Licensing Corporation. 'Category dividers triggered by Spotlight searches, as well as page tabs in the Safari web browser, bear the closest similarity to the now 20-year-old description' of the patent, according to the article. IP Innovation is requesting damages in excess of $20 million and an injunction against future sales and distribution of Mac OS X 10.4. Software patent reform can't come soon enough!"
So... Why did they suddenly decide to go after Apple now when Mozilla has been in, urm, flagrant violation of this supposed patent for much longer than Apple?
Still #1 -- Lonely Gay Geek
Seriously, I tried to read the patent text, but I didn't even get halfway through and my head is still spinning. Can anyone give an English translation of it?
Thats useful timing.
When is 10.5 coming out?
liqbase
So why is Marshall, Texas such a great venue for patent extortion? The city's web pages don't seem to have an answer, but it does seem to be a nice place.
One wonders if this boils down to a single judge, who might appreciate a free MacBook.
#!
What a joke. Maybe they should go and get the manilla folder people in on this too, because of their ingenious system of tabbed browsing.
It's gotta be said that Xerox is responsible for most of the GUI's we see nowadays, and if anyone has a right to tabs or anything else in that area, they do, they did a hell of a lot of innovation. But the terms for patents in IT are far too long, and it is kinda unfair that Apple is singled out as well.
Tabbed UI, Apple Lisa, circa 1980. Screenshots, story.
Im as much for patent reform as the next guy, but can we please have story summaries that state the NEWS ONLY?
Leave the comments ("patent troll", etc) for the, uh, comments.
i think all software patents should be banned, whos next? Opera or mozilla/firefox web browser? fluxbox?
maybe even closed source software should be outlawed and make ALL software mandatory opensource...
this is getting ridiculous...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Gotta love those screenshots!
That only applies to trademarks
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This patent issued in 10 Dec 1991. At that time in the US, a patent was in force 17 years after issue - so that patent becomes public domain in Dec 2008 giving it another 20 months. Since then, when the US changed its rules a few years ago to get closer to the practice in the rest of the world, new patents are now in force for 20 years from the date of application.
This approach has numerous benefits. It reduces your cash outlay (lawyer' fees) and risk. Secondly, once you have a judgement in your favour then it is easier to pick off the others with less court costs etc. It is probably easier to chase Apple than MS, so wait until you have more strength to chase them. Opera is too hard to chase (Offshore)
Engineering is the art of compromise.
IANAL, so let me rephrase that in layman's terms.
The patent basically looks like it covers anthing resembling a modern user interface.
The patent more specifically stresses mechanics like the Opera/IE/Mozilla browser tabs, spreadsheet "workbooks", the Windows taskbar, you name it.
So, in other words, just about any software on the market today.
Well, that's what I seemed to gather from the passing glance I gate the patent text. So I might be wrong. Please correct me if that's the case.
Assuming I'm right, this is a "blanket patent" that can be sicced on anybody they chose to.
One would expect them to go after several small companies at once, with several lesser damage claims, companies that might not afford to pay a lawyer.
Instead, they go after a rather large company (again, correct me if I'm wrong, but Apple is a pretty big company), and claim a relatively unimpressive sum (20+ mil).
I could only suppose again that damage claims must be related to number of users that the product was sold to (or somesuch).
Still, going after Microsoft and claiming damage for... heh... EVERYTHING Windows and Windows-based Microsoft ever made and sold, now that would be a huge sum we're talking about.
Claiming Apple wouldn't have the money to go into court for this is pretty ridiculous... well, unless, maybe they're counting on Apple settling out of court for such a paltry sum ?
I can only hope they get smashed in court, and smashed good.
By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
Hi, my ID is lower than 2^16. Oddly I never changed my email address from that time, so it's invalid for a long time now.
Oh wait, I guess it took them 2 years to learn how to write a letter.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
It seems to me that venue shopping is the thing that needs to go here. The idea that it is possible to pick and choose who gets to decide on the lawsuit based upon how easy it will be to win simply boggles the mind.
IP Innovation sues for a 20 years old patent they bought from Xerox... good thing those software patents things. It's a pitty the rest of patents don't go the same way, patenting the "four wheeled vehicle with engine" would have been a smart move.
DON'T PANIC
It will not be until
a) Big companies are hurt badly by ludicrous patent claims.
b) They buy, I mean, lobby politicians to kill software patents in the US
that we will have something resembling sanity.
Companies can use copyright to protect what is theirs and shoulder the fact that other people will copy their good ideas, that would benefit everybody.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
CmdrTaco where are you when we need you!
There you have it. Apple, the cake, and eating it, etc.
Anyway, I hope that DRM will fall through as horribly as this will. Fucking hypocrites.
Pfft, the way Jobsie robs us all blind, I'm sure its just Karmas way of getting back at him..
Mac OS System 8 (IIRC) had tabs too, for spring-loaded folders.
I mean come on, their name is IP Innovation LLC ffs.
Why, yes! I AM new here.
Probably, that's around the time I actually got off my arse (figuratively of course) and applied for one.
GPL: Free as in will
As per that Jon Katz guy: he seemed to drop off the earth (well, at least slashdot) all of a sudden. I didn't have him blocked, cause I kinda liked his subjects, and still he disappeared without trace. If I were paranoidically inclined, I'd suspect a slashdot editor cover-up, they probably buried the body in the backyard under sheets of unused VA Linux call options, but really I can't be arsed to care.
I say I liked his stuff, but that'd be except for the "post-columbine world" and "the Net" nonsense. Oh, and his seemingly endless "quest to install linux" which was perhaps the worst tech writing/whining since Jerry Pournelle's monthly never-ending-stories on installing windows mouse drivers and shit like that in (the now defunct?) Byte magazine. Oh, and his movie reviews, which always had to tie in to columbine again and the net.
Anyhow, I googled for Katz once, and it seems now he is writing about dogs.
Opera could be a good second target. Not too much money, but not too small a company.
These patent lawsuits are getting ridiculous.
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
(I know I'm feeding but this is getting tiresome)
Aren't you getting tired in that lonely, xenophobic corner of yours?
IF YOU DON'T ALREADY KNOW SOMETHING, DON'T MAKE ANY EFFORT TO LEARN IT!.
Jeez.
They are suing them because of the universal tabs bnot just the use in the web browser.
Thanks for your response. It is exactly the kind of thing I was hoping for, although I'll forgive you your 700,000+ Slashdot ID :)
...
Just curious, when did you get your ID? When was Slashdot in the 700,000s? It looks like it must be over 1,000,000 now because I've seen quite a few people with 980,000+ so there must be some 1,000,000s out there
Also I think your comment about Slashdot needing more posts to stimulate the mind and fewer to stimulate the post counts, is spot on.
Microsoft has money too, and they put in tabs in the new version.
And to think how all the browser folks have been squabbling about who had them first...
Patent coverage is effective on date of filing; but only actionable after the patent is issued. That is, if you file in 1987, you have to wait until the patent is issued (1991) until you can start enforcing it---even against those who started using the patented idea in 1990. But, the patent coverage runs for 20 years from filing date (even then).[1] The patent was filed in March, 1987, which means the patent should have expired by now.
What we appear to have here is a patent troll who waited until the last minute to file, hoping to grab as much infringing money as possible. However, the doctrine of laches prevents this sort of behavior. Laches means that you cannot sit on your rights and constructively encourage infringement only to later sue. Think of it as entrapment or inducement.
More importantly, this idea has been mainstream for years. Visual Basic (et al.) allow for this sort of tabbing behavior. The question is whether M$ is licensed, or whether the troll has been sitting on his rights. Beyond that, we can't know all of the ins and outs of the case at this point.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
Patents do expire in 20 years. You can sue for past enfringement after it expires, but not on-going infringement.
My guess is, this is one last attempt to make something from a vanishing asset, before it disappears completely later this year.
I guess that 6025 counts as pretty low then. Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear!
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/176/471137550_26b80 88a8e_o.jpg
Windows has tabs everywhere too.
I can't see how prior art could be difficult. Paper filing systems have had "tab" technology for something like 150 years or longer. In fact, the courthouse will probably be full of examples.
Like when you buy a house you get title insurance just in case all the lawyers missed some old title to your house somewhere. Is there a patent insurance that protects the company from the person who patented the idea?
Can I bum a sig?
Also, as the previous poster noted, the term of United States patents changed after this patent was granted. For patents in force before 1995, the patent lasts the greater of 20 years after filing or 17 years after grant. Thus, this patent is in force until 2008.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
NeXTstep had an optional pop-up main menu which was mapped to the secondary mouse button when it was enabled --- its handiness varies on the intricacy of the motion required --- ``Punch'' in Altsys Virtuoso is nearly a gestural command for me (esp. on my Wacom ArtZ tablet --- click, down, over to the right through two menus).
I believe there's a kext which makes this happen for Cocoa apps in Mac OS X, but it's of limited utility for those of us who have to spend a lot of time in Carbon apps.
I'd liefer not waste space on simultaneous multiple menus myself --- just crank up the mouse acceleration factor (I use MouseZoom on my dual 17" display setup at work) to get to them quickly.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
If only I'd patented my 'cure for disease' when I had the chance.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world: those who understand binary, and nine other kinds of people.
These two "companies" are obviously in the business of acquiring intellectual property patents in order to file lawsuits. This is hardly a business.
Isn't there a time limit on filing patent suits? If the patent is over 20 years old then isn't this way out of date?
Now, if there is a patent system, then I can file a patent for my better mousetrap, and receive legal protection for the exclusive right to market it, for a limited time, and in exchange for disclosing the details of how my better mousetrap works to the general public. So now it's a win-win situation - I as the inventor get rewarded, and the general public gets the benefits of my invention.
There are, of course, many problems w/ our current patent system, and I would definitely like to see major reform; but I don't think patents are ridiculous.
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
that's your competition.
Your peers are those working in your area. Since the only legitimate business of "Murderer" is actually "Soldier", your peers would be "other soldiers". I would call that trial by soldier court a court in a martial theme. Or, simply a court martial.
Maybe I should patent that idea..?
What really matters is those who submit interesting stuff whether they heard about this site a long time ago or last week, and the people who actually run the site.
Back to what got me interested in the first place - ePlus was very cool but good luck tracking down the old dependancies now, it's all out there but would require a bit of mucking about - multiple instances of gkrellm fill the role now but do not look anywhere near as good.
As a side note, pre-filing damages weren't available in this case anyway because the patent was never published prior to issuance (it wasn't even available at that time). Also, you can only get damages going back six years from the date of the filing of a complaint in patent suits anyways.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
My ID is way way way lower than yours, sadly though I never actually log in and use it, in fact it took me 3 attempts to remember what password I used for it so I could write this reply.
Here's one company, essentially not inventing or producing anything, but they're sitting on a patent. This alone gives them the right to milk anyone who dares to invent something that their patent (which is worded in a way that it would include pretty much everything from egg cookers to gas power plant control panels) allegedly covers, to bully the inventor into paying them whatever sum of money they deem right.
They serve no purpose, produce nothing, don't add to the amount of goods and services circulating and are generally harmful to invention and commerce in general. In a working free market model, those companies would cease to exist immediately.
Unfortunately, we're far from a free market.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
We don't need a Software Patent reform, we need it to have a quite sudden early retirement.
If you have a nice glass broken in two halves, you can consider glueing it together again.
If it's broken in thousands of miniscule pieces... you simple throw it away.
Software Patents are like glass broken in thousands of dangerous miniscule shards that if ingested only hurt the industry by the inside.
Retire it. Now!
Shouldn't have it expired by now?
Thanks,
Mike
Patents provide the low-hanging fruit in this area, but the actual problem goes much deeper.
As we all know here, software patents are wholly inappropriate in software, as they undermine the very basis of computing. But as long as companies are free to engage lawyers to litigate as a business plan, no amount of patent reform will fix this issue, because lawyers can literally create a case out of nothing. And they do so regularly, as we've seen in hundreds of examples recently.
The problem lies in part with lawyers (basically for being pricks without any moral standing, and happily taking money for their services regardless of purpose), and in part with judges and the judicial system as a whole, for not applying massive penalties to lawyers who use law merely to underpin a company business plan. Judges need to see through the purpose of a suit, and stomp heavily on lawsuits being used purely as a means of financial gain. The reason we've got into this mess is largely because lawyers benefit from all litigation, and judges have no interest in stopping that.
A complete ban on software patents would at least place that low-hanging fruit out of reach, but it won't solve the greater problem faced by corporate America, which is that it is at the mercy of a huge tier of parasites wearing suits, whose whole idea of worthwhile activity is to prevent worthwhile activity by others. Lawsuits are being used as an anti-competitive weapon by every man and his dog now, and that's the key problem here.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
"Mac OS X 10.4 'Tiger' infringes an interface patent relating to the OS's nearly universal use of tabs."
What the heck? I sit here on a Mac mini running Tiger. Only Safari has tabs, and that only occured after a LOT of bitching from users. Where is the universal use of tabs at? I had to install Path Finder to get a tabbed finder interface.
Not one of the iLife applications uses tabs. iTunes, no tabs. Mail, no tabs. iCal, Address Book, no tabs. Even XCode, no tabs.
Some of us have old accounts, but mostly read not-logged in anyway. I haven't logged in except to submit a story in....
ages.
It might even be since 2001 that I haven't bothered to log in.
Oh! Tabs. I was thought I ws going to get into trouble.. I allready removed the tab key from my keyboard. I programm in Visual Studio and have occasionally used the tab control in my programs without notifiying this company. Is all my software in violation?
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit!
How can someone get a patent for tabbed page navigation, is what beats me. Its really the only way to offer that particular functionality. Ring-binders and pocket phone books have had them for eons. Heck, the navbar on the left of this page could be considered a tabbed-index, from a functionality stand-point. When you think of it like that, what does that leave for 'originality', the mere appearance of the tab resembling a real-world example? Hardly a patentable innovation.
Can someone in the know explain haw patent expiry works in US law? Here in Britain, patents last for 17 years, but can somesimes be extended to 20, so this patent filed March 25, 1987 wouldn't be valid - unless it's the date the patent is granted not the filing date that counts?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
As many have pointed out, the patent was applied for in 1987, but only granted in 1991... thus, its in effect for 17 years from the date it was granted... that's the system prior to 1995.
However, it should be painfully obvious this is the illegal sort of submarine patent. Usually, companies used to attempt the legal sort -- they'd apply, they'd try to drag the process along as slowly as possible, counting on the 17 years they'd get once the patent was granted, the extra time before the patent is granted would hopefully get that patent into common use... particularly when the patent, such as this one, was so frickin' obvious that people re-created it continuously. The 1995 changes were designed to stop this as much as possible.
But tabbed interfaces have been around for quite some time. There were tabbed interfaces in AmigaOS programs... I can't swear they showed up before 1987 (AmigaOS 1.x), but this was the latest thing in the early 1990s. I know I've seen computer Rolodex-type programs using a tabbed interface (since that's basically the metaphore), very likely before 1987, though I can't think of the specific example. But obviously, this has been used in Windows and many other programs since then. They ought to lose enforcement rights on this patent due to the fact it hasn't been enforced for the last 15+ years.
-Dave Haynie
So that why they haven't implemented this yet. I knew there must be a reason.
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
Took so long to file becuase they had to check on prior art on filing software patent suits...
UID of 1? Heck, I want to know who got 1000000.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
I'm pretty sure that Alan Kay invented the tabs concept at Xerox PARC when he invented Smalltalk (and the GUI) sometime in the 1970's.
...but this makes me think of how Mac OS 8 allowed you to stick directory windows at the bottom of the screen and have a tab button that popped up when you clicked on it. Could this be an example of prior art?
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
What is your citation for the implication that estoppel by laches applies only to trademarks?
- conception - the day someone came up with the invention
- reduction to pracice - the day someone figured out how to fully make the invention (after functional testing, etc)
- filing date - the actual day the patent application was filed
- publication date - the day the patent application is published (usually about 1 and 1/2 years after filing)
- grant date - the day when the patent comes into effect
Damages are only available back until the publication date at the earliest, and that is only if the patent claims didn't change during the time between publication and grant. Prior art has to be known either more than one year before filing, or before conception.Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
I know this will probably kill karma, but here goes.
"IP Innovation is requesting damages in excess of $20 million and an injunction against future sales and distribution of Mac OS X 10.4. Software patent reform can't come soon enough!"
I really have to wonder if the article summary would have just cheered wildly and forgotten about patent reform for a few minutes if it had been MS they were suing, or if all the fans of Apple and MS bashers would have taken a break to still support the bigger issue on this one.
Any form of exclusive protection for software should require full disclosure. Source code and makefiles that build to the shipped object code, or the copyright/patent is void.
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
Queue the Vince McMahon Music ....
... these are APPLE lawers ... impecably dressed, chi-centered, zen-bhuddist, miso soup sipping legal ass kicking machines. They also tote the coolest damn industrial-designed breifcases you've ever seen.
... no chance in hell.
Apple beat the Beatles after like a 20 year court battle over the name "Apple".
Apple's lawyers are fueled by an enormous never ending supply of hipster money from it's iPod sales. These are no ordinary lawyers
no chance
...But I see a point to the other poster's argument. I switched to Mac OS X from windows for about a week, and all the while I was using it, aside from mouse issues, it took me a while to get used to the single menu bar. It felt like something was missing from all of my apps, but seeing as how M$ is trying to do that anyway (see Office 2k7, WMP, and IE7 with default settings), it was easy to accept.
Nonetheless, as time wore on, I found myself clicking the menu very infrequently. I moved almost completely over to keyboard shortcuts and had to use the objectdock to determine what apps were open (because that damn X doesn't close anything, so I almost never used it) and I had to look at the menu bar to see what was in focus. I never even thought of what a nightmare multiple monitors might be with relation to that menu. Still, WinXP doesn't scale the taskbar to multiple monitors elegantly (or at all), but then again, it doesn't rely on the taskbar like OS X does on its menu.
While I don't forsee anyone switching to 18 monitors anytime soon, I always like to keep in mind that the only implementations that survive in the IT field are those that meet one demand: Scalability.
Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
Am I missing something here? The patent was filed on March 25, 1987. The motion was filed April 18th, 2007. Patents last 20 years. These asshats lost their case by a few weeks. (OK, sure, Apple's OS was probably infringing before the patent expired, too bad they didn't file then)
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
2007 - 1987 = 20 years. Utility patents last 14 years from date of filing, utility patents last 20.
How's this patent even still...well, patented?
Look at all the tabs in this screenshot.
Apple was a pioneer of these sort of bullshit "look and feel" suits.
It's nice to see corporations hoist by their own petard.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Your IP law provides for some the best soap opera in town. It just keeps getting better every day. The idea of "reform" is a complete fantasy, and it nothing but a vain attempt to keep the whole system afloat and to make sure the public doesn't wake from its slumber and demand a real fix in the form of complete abolition. That would be the only reason the biggies are behind it. And they need it fast! If it isn't fixed before the campaign season gets seriously underway, it could very well become an issue if we can make enough noise about it and rile up the natives. I can always hope, right? Abolitionists unite!
What?
I think there's a fallacy buried in here. You are implicitly assuming that one and only one person is capable of that particular "a-ha!" moment. The reality is that while the billions of humans on the whole may not have come up with your particular idea at the exact same moment as you did, the chances are very high that someone else will +/- a few years. Or in the software world, within a few months. When it's time to railroad, people railroad.
Bringing it back to software, sit a hundred good developers in front of a dev environment, and ask them to solve a problem, you will get 90% of them developing any solution at all, and there will be three or four different solutions. That means that on average, 25 or 30 people will have come up with the same idea.
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.
Slashdot summary said it was issued in 1987. :-)
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
According to wikipedia, patents expire something like 17-20 years after being issued in the US. A 1987 patent should expire this year, shouldn't it?
Tiger Toes. You know the old game rhyme, 'catch a tiger by it's toe, if he hollers let him go, my mama told me to pick the very best one and you are IT!'
See IT is in that rhyme and the 'buttons' that get clicked are simply graphical representations of Tiger Toes... you pick one and then it's the one you picked. Simple really and it has nothing to do with tabs.. which BTW are taken from paper organization products, which doesn't make any sense on a computer.
Furthermore: Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit!
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Apple System 7.5 had tabs. Remember the Launcher control panel? There may have been earlier instances, but that's the first that came to mind.
System 7.5 came out in 1994. Thirteen years is a long time to wait to sue someone over patent infringement. Any lawyers care to comment?
http://www.bynarystudio.com
and in exchange for disclosing the details
It is my opinion that modern-day patents, particularly software patents, go out of their way to reveal a generalized and overly-broad description of what's being patented. They cover the what but avoid discussing as much of the how as possible, and the reason they do this is obvious - more detail offers more opportunity for innovation when people can make incremental improvements. More incremental improvements means more competition- but why endure competitive forces if you can simply scare anyone away from even trying?
or is that abuse tabs?
anyway, how can they now sue apple after everyone has used tabs for at least a decade?
hell, OS/2 had tabs. and it's been dead as longer than windows and of course, BSD.
Not more of this "look and feel" B.S.
He who laughs last...probably didn't get the joke.
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. ...
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."
I think this text is interesting in conjunction with the current patent situation...
(If you want to know who wrote what I quoted, I recommend googling it, you might learn something:) )
But, the patent coverage runs for 20 years from filing date (even then).[1] The patent was filed in March, 1987, which means the patent should have expired by now.
No. Not even if Wikipedia says so, since, of course, Wikipedia also says otherwise.[2]
"In the United States, under current patent law, for patents filed on or after June 8, 1995, the term of the patent is 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date. For patents filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term of patent is either 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date or 17 years from the issue date, whichever is longer. Extensions may also be had for various administrative delays. (See: Term of patent in the United States)."
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_of_patent
This entry is far more accurate, but still contains errors. If the applicant filed a provisional application, and subsequently filed a regular application claiming priority from the provisional application, then the normal term of the patent might expire 21 years after the "earliest claimed filing date." Also, there are patent term extensions that have nothing to do with administrative delays. More to the point, Wikipedia is wrong, and the patent likely has not expired.
What we appear to have here is a patent troll who waited until the last minute to file, hoping to grab as much infringing money as possible.
Patent owners are not required to sue while the patent is still in force, although most do. There is a six year statute of limitations on patent damages, so that in theory the patent owner could still file suits over this patent in 2014.
*sigh*
I'm pretty ready to see the justice system get an upgrade to 21 century standards.
Lawsuits cost money and they seem to be a loss a majority of the time. It's costly to tax payers and to companies alike. I think it's about time for suits such as this to be paid in full by the losing side.
Doing so would deter frivolous lawsuits such as this one and force companies to strongly consider the losing consequences of going after the big money, such as Apple.
In addition to the legal system needing reformation, so does the patent system. I have no issue with inventions being safeguarded, but what the hell? Tabs?!
Generalizations such as universal tabs are ridiculous and should be thrown out of the patent office.
I'm ready for patent reform!
http://www.allometry.com
There are very clear problems with the patent system, but it is a misconception to think that it helps to outlaw software patents. Were things any better when software patents were disguised as device patents? Any piece of software is ultimately implemented in a physical device.
Suppose, for example, that advancing the timing on a car engine reduces emission of some pollutant. Can this be covered by a patent as long as you use mechanical devices to advance the timing, but not if you use a computer chip? What if you use digital logic rather than software?
The abstraction of method from implementation is exactly the difference between patents and copyright. If you want to fix the patent system, you need to fix the whole patent system. Outlawing software patents doesn't fix anything.
Slashdot uses tabs!
What?! Prevent Apple from selling 10.4? No worries... just stall this lawsuit long enough and they'll have Leopard out! Crafty, eh?
This is really laughable.
I think I'm going to patent this one: "method to evacuate digested matter".
I'm going to be rich!
When did it start and when does it expire (17 yrs later presumably)? I seem to remember tabs in products in software programs going back before 1990. How about HyperCard? http://weather-dimensions.com/tedkaehler/us/ted/re sume/hypercard_help.gif
I can see it now - "Your Honor, I'd like to request a jury made up of my fellow serial killers." "Is that a guilty plea I hear?"
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
Isn't there some limitation that if you fail to enforce a patent in a timely fashion from knowing something infringes your patent is rendered invalid? Or am I thinking of copyright or trademarks or something?
And if there isn't, there should be.
[The Universe] has gone offline.
Now why don't you go play with HyperCard for a while? You know that always calms you down.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
same here
If Microsoft couldn't squash the problem in a business-friendly government, Apple isn't going to have any better luck.
And the year was 1980.
...
In fact, I wrote the whole thing myself, back when I was a game designer.
Sounds like someone owes me a lot of money
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
This has been tried and tested by (non-Apple) research labs, with people who are used to repeated movements. No matter how fast you think you are at 'precision' mouse movements, you will be faster aiming at the edge of the screen.
Sources please. Without a reference your claim is worse than useless. What was their testing methodology, what screen sizes were used, multiple monitors, what window sizes for apps? There are many variables that can be played with to get the result you want. If you had ever done any user testing you would know that you almost never get a hard and fast result that can be generalized to all users.
My biggest problem with the window on top is that even if it is faster to access, does that actually help me? If I'm experienced enough to be very fast with the mouse, I really don't use the menu very often at all. All the common actions are either in the toolbar or have a keyboard shortcut. The menu is the least used part of a program for me. So why would I care that it takes 1/2 second less time to access something that I access only once an hour? However I do use the close and minimize buttons a lot, and in OS X these are tiny and hard to click. In KDE I have it set up so they are at the top right and top left corner in a maximized window. This lets me toss the mouse there without even thinking about it to close/minimize an application. Much more useful to me than fast access to a menu which I almost never need.
93414 is lower than 893? What kind of math is that?
Moof!
"In 1981, a tabbed visual interface would have been groundbreaking."
In 1981, the HP 2621 smart terminal had a visual interface for configuring the terminal in which a set of tabs across the bottom of the screen, selected by function keys, displayed views of related configuration pages that retained their state and settings and you could jump back and forth between them.
"So now it's a win-win situation - I as the inventor get rewarded, and the general public gets the benefits of my invention."
I'm not terribly familiar with all this, but how about the case where a company buys the rights to your patent for the sole purpose of profit? Sure it's legal and acceptable use of the patent system. But is it fair or right? I don't know, I see your point, but I also despise the side effects such as this one. I forget the company's name in this story but their only interest in the patent is as a means of income. That provides no benefit to the general public, only to the company's shareholders etc..
Blaming capitalism is just blaming human nature and the failure of government to define the ideal battle field on which the barbaric "survival of the fittest" game is waged. Hey, humans are a pack of almost-rabid animals and that is why capitalism works so well.
The reason corporatism (where the USA is headed) is so evil is because it corrupts the government's job to define and referee the game. Then you have wars for commerce for example... Or you kill foreign leaders who are bad for business..
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Will they go after Lotus/IBM for having tabs in the old Lotus Notes (say, back to 1996/1997)? Or, will they go after Lotus' and others' organizers? Will the suit be limited to browsers? Or expanded to anything on a computer display that organizes or differentiates document access portals?
Sheesh. Seems they waited to long to demonstrate due diligence. IP litigation is way, WAY out of hand.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
The person who owns the copyright for tabs is the guy who put tabs on the paper folders in our filing cabinets. Software is emulating the physical world. How can we forget that!?
Which should mean it's expired.
The part I don't understand is that the patent has expired. Software pattents expire 14 years after they are granted http://www.clemson.edu/research/ottSite/ottStart_I ntelectPatents.htm#Duration. That is in 1991 according to the link that was provided in the summary. So I guess that they can sue for any infrigement before 2005. After that there is no protection on the idea. Going after the current version of OSX seems dumb because it is not covered by the patent.
I have no idea, I think it must have been 2 or 3 years ago now, since I remember at least 3 (maybe 3) april fools days. If you're a subscriber you could check the crap I've posted from back at the very start, which might help.
:(
You'd think with Digg around Slashdot would attempt to aim at us geeks instead of being a catch all Zonk-whorefest wannabe news outlet that it is
I like muppets.
You're wrong. And my ID is lower than yours so I'm right by default.
FC Closer
Not really ;-)
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
In the early 1980's, Tom Rolander showed me a terminal (text) based office interface he was working on where you clicked on a file cabinet, clicked on a file folder, and displayed the contents of the file. I am pretty sure the folder was a form of tab. I was in the basement with Gary Kildall and Tom Rolander and their Vax on Lighthouse Ave in Pacific Grove, CA. That was back when I worked in OEM Systems at Digital Research.
How could tabbing have been granted a patent anyway? It's just a virtual representation of a mechanical system used in card files - pryor art by any definition. J. H. Christey, there is some angrifying twaddle pedalled in the US courts.
"I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
ID's ? yours is lower than mine
Must be the redefinition of "size-queen"
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..