Yahoo Patents 'Smart' Drag and Drop

Unequivocal writes "According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Yahoo has filed a patent for 'smart' drag and drop. From the article: 'A computer-implemented method for manipulating objects in a user interface, comprising: providing the user interface including a first interface object operable to be selected and moved within the user interface; and in response to selection and movement of the first interface object in the user interface, presenting at least one additional interface object in the user interface in proximity of the first interface object, each additional interface object representing a drop target with which the first interface object may be associated.' How do these patent claims differ from normal drag and drop? In pretty trivial ways if at all, but it may be hard for a patent examiner to understand that trivial changes in drag and drop user interface are not in fact novel enough to warrant a patent. If Yahoo gets this patent, they'll have a mighty big stick to shake at competitors."

Comments

No they won't

[LiquidCoooled]

If Yahoo gets this patent, they'll have a mighty big stick to shake at competitors."

No they bloody well won't.

I have the patent for shaking a stick at competitors.

Re:No they won't

[phobos13013]

Maybe so, but *I* hold the patent on misdirected links, soooo, as my team of lawyers race after you for my millions... we will just call it even!

Misleading headline

[DustyShadow]

They've applied for this patent. It has not granted yet. Seems like a small point but it isn't.

Prior art

[Have Blue]

How is this different from spring-loaded folders which have been in MacOS since before it was X?

A way to fix all of this

[PJ1216]

Patent Examiners should post ALL technology-related patents onto Slashdot and then just wait to see what WE have to say about it =P

Apple has clear prior art, I'm sure others too

[Maury Markowitz]

People are asking about traditional drag-n-drop or drag-n-menu, but let's try to be specific to the claims made. After reading them I am convinced Apple's "spring loaded folders" match the description. They were released in the 1990s, I believe in OS8.

"A computer-implemented method for manipulating objects in a user interface, comprising: providing the user interface including a first interface object operable to be selected and moved within the user interface;"

Since this is the "drag", this portion of the patent is prior-arted by just about everyone. Next...

"and in response to selection and movement of the first interface object in the user interface, presenting at least one additional interface object in the user interface in proximity of the first interface object, each additional interface object representing a drop target with which the first interface object may be associated.'

This is the key. Although other UIs might meet the first portion of this part of the claim, the second is more narrow. Specifically it has to open something near the first that is a drop target. Menus are not drop targets, so they don't apply. Launchers are not related to the original drop target, so they don't apply.

But spring loaded folders absolutely do. They opened in response to a "hesitant drop" over a folder, creating a new window under the cursor showing the contents folder (as if one had double-clicked it). This window is "at least one additional interface object", it is most definitely "near the first that is a drop target", it is definitely an "object representing a drop target", and finally, it is [related to] "the first interface object may be associated".

Flush.

Maury

Re:SIGCHI slashdotters could help out!

[smilindog2000]

There may be prior art, but after carefully reading the patent, I suspect claim 1 may hold up. It uses the word 'presenting' confusingly, which can invalidate a claim, but the body of the patent makes it clear that 'presenting' means creating new objects on the screen that weren't there before in that location. If you drag an object, they might pop up a recyle bin right next to it, which otherwise wouldn't even be visible. I'm afraid this claim wont infringe any drag-and-drop application I've ever seen.

Two points: First, who cares if Yahoo patents some tiny area? This patent is so specific that few will ever feel the need to violate it. Second, this patent sucks because it's a software patent, not because it's obvious. I have several software patents. You need them in the US to protect your company from your competitor's software patents. However, the EU got it right when they rejected the concept. The world would be better off without them.

Prior LucasArts

[Kirth]

Sounds like the interface of a LucasArts-adventure to me. If you pick up a banana the pointer changes and the environment reacts differently if you click on something.