Slashdot Mirror
Apple Awarded Patent For iPhone Interface
Toe, The writes "Apple's 358-page patent application for their iPhone interface entitled Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics has been approved after more than two years of review by the US Patent Office. Apple's claims include: 'A computer-implemented method for use in conjunction with a computing device with a touch screen display comprises: detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display, applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device, and processing the command. The one or more heuristics comprise: a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command, a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a two-dimensional screen translation command, and a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items.' As Apple seems eager to defend their intellectual property, what will this mean to other touch developers?"
Right, because Apple's been well-known lately to rest on its laurels.
The whole point of patents is to reward and encourage innovation. I don't recall having seen anything like the iPhone until the iPhone came out; all the companies since are just jumping on the bandwagon, and generally doing so pretty poorly.
The patent seems like it might be pretty broad, but it seems to basically cover touch 'gestures'. Developers should be able to innovate their way around that specific interface - unless, of course, no one else out there is up to the task of innovating.
Considering the rapid movement of the tech industry, doesn't 18 YEARS seem like a fairly significant time to stop anyone else from using your innovation as a foundation for further innovation?
Also "innovate their way around" is one of the craziest phrases I've ever read. We're happy to waste creative energy on getting around artificial restrictions now rather than simply creating?
I don't believe any company has lost as much money as Apple due to not having proper patents and enforcing them. Microsoft alone built a large part of their business courtesy of Apple's prior ineffective enforcement, from Windows to QuickTime and a lot in between.
The fact is, if Apple had not done multitouch first, they would have nothing to patent.
Since they had the vision, did the R&D, bought a few companies and released an actual product incorporating the technology, it would seem they are entitled to a patent on that work. If there is nothing unique or prior art in the patent, it will not stand anyway.
Sometimes a patent is not such a good thing for the public.
I'm curious if a patent ever is a good thing for the public. it really only ever seems to do exactly this.
I mean, look at this. It's clearly Apple's IP. It's clearly a new invention.
It's also clear that Apple has already gained the competitive advantage a patent is supposed to provide, without the patent.
Which means that all the patent does, in this case, is retard progress for twenty years by preventing anyone else from beginning to compete with the iPhone. It's the difference between building new and exciting interfaces that start with the iPhone and expand beyond it, and instead having everyone else have to build ugly hacks to avoid infringing on that patent even when the iPhone is a horribly obsolete product.
Patents should last the amount of time it takes to bring a product to market. That's a year, maybe two or three. Not fifteen or twenty.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Truly.
Where would we be if the creator of the first spider patented the concept of a spider building a searchable index of web sites, and a web form being utilized to query said database?
Google, Yahoo, etc could have never been born, due to the inevitable litigation that would kill those portals before they got started.
If Apple is willing to license the use of the patent for a royalty fee; sure, it can be advanced by other companies.
Apple isn't even willing to allow an interpreted language on the iPhone. What makes you think they would be willing to relinquish control here?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!