Slashdot Mirror
Touchpad Patent Holder Tsera Sues Just About Everyone
eldavojohn writes "Okay, well, maybe not everyone but more than twenty companies (including Apple, Qualcomm, Motorola and Microsoft) are being sued for a generic patent that reads: 'Apparatus and methods for controlling a portable electronic device, such as an MP3 player; portable radio, voice recorder, or portable CD player are disclosed. A touchpad is mounted on the housing of the device, and a user enters commands by tracing patterns with his finger on a surface of the touchpad. No immediate visual feedback is provided as a command pattern is traced, and the user does not need to view the device to enter commands.' Sounds like their may be a few companies using that technology. The suit was filed on July 15th in the favoritest place ever to file patent claim lawsuits: Texas Eastern District Court. It's a pretty classic patent troll; they've been holding this patent since 2003 and they just noticed now that everyone and his dog are using touchpads to control portable electronic devices."
I haven't used an iPhone or iPod Touch for more than a few seconds, but are there touch commands that don't provide feedback? I mean, if you're scrolling, or zooming an image or whatnot immediate visual feedback is provided and ongoing while you're performing the command, which would seem to contradict the patents claim: "No immediate visual feedback is provided as a command pattern is traced"
1. A portable electronic device comprising: a housing; and a touch-sensitive surface mounted on the housing, the portable electronic device controlled by a user tracing a command pattern on the touch-sensitive surface with a finger, the command pattern matching one of a plurality of preset patterns, each of the plurality of the present patterns corresponding to a predefined function of the portable electronic device, the command pattern being traced without requiring the user to view the portable electronic device, wherein at least one of the plurality of patterns corresponds to a predefined function that is performed only for so long as contact is maintained with the touch-sensitive surface, wherein the command pattern is composed of one of more motions of the finger on the touch-sensitive surface, the one or more motions selected from a group of motions consisting of a left-to-right motion, a right-to-left motion, an upward motion, a downward motion, a clockwise circular motion, a counterclockwise circular motion, a diagonal motion, a tapping motion, and holding the pointing device against the touch-sensitive surface.
Wouldn't work. This is east Texas we're talking about.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Oops, perhaps a patent to automatically detect if users meant to set the format to Plain Old Text is in order...
-------------
Maybe someone should patent the touchpad interface used by iPods - because Tsera sure hasn't done so here. The patent is for an invention that allows the user to issue commands to a portable electronic device by making gestures with their finger over a touch sensitive surface (just like patent application 20060026535) in order to perform some function which doesn't require visual feedback.
Sure, I'm paraphrasing - and the wording is so vague in some places that maybe they could twist it to apply to scroll wheel on the iPod - but this is really all there is to the patent. It's weak. The really crappy part is that if you decided you wanted to build this into your device (it's an obvious combination of a gesture based interface with a touch screen), then reading this patent would give you no help whatsoever in implementing it. Utter drivel! Can someone explain why is it acceptable to:
1. Have a cool idea
2. Patent idea
Instead of:
1. Have a cool idea
2. Design it
3. Build a prototype
4. Patent novelties in your prototype
Anyone??
Doesn't Palm's Graffiti or even the Newton constitute prior art for this thing??
Remember the good old days, when you had to actually build a working model of something to patent it. You couldn't just have an idea...
Pure democracy has proven itself time and time again to be one of the most consistantly tyrannical forms of government in existance. Even Tyrannical Despotisms have a hard time topping pure democracy in that regard. It turns the entire country into a mob, and when the mob rules, everyone who is not the majority cowers in fear.
Monarchies are unpredictable, will it be 50 years of tyranny or 50 years of prosperity? An Oligarchy is just a monarchy with a board of directors, just as unpredictable as a monarchy but with a better chance of being tyrannical. Theocracies are as bad as monarchies, but have the added element of the religion dictating things. Depending on the religion it may or may not be difficult for the theocratic leader to twist it to his will.
A democratic republic is the most consistantly beneficial to the greatest number of citizens of a country. Democracy is good in small numbers, but very quickly it breaks down and becomes unwieldy. In a democratic republic we break democracy down into manageable chunks, and it works. We have a sort of oligarchy with a high accountability to the public, therefor they have a very great incentive to do the will of the public. However, the will of the public is balanced by individual representatives who, because they are separated from the public they represent, are generally not caught up in the mass hysteria that the public can sometimes generate. Nothing is perfect, but a democratic republic is as close as we have come. You can look at all of the most successful countries in the world - the safest, richest, farest countries - and they are all heavily into various incarnations of the democratic republic. Some still have trappings of old styles of government, but they still be have as a democratic republic.
Think about that the next time someone pushes to have all issues that Congress or your local legislature address voted on by the people. It is really easy to swing from the best system ever concieved to the worst system to have ever existed.
The only reason Capitalism is any good is, if it is kept in check properly and not overly imposed upon (it requires both), it naturally adjusts itself to provide the most benefit possible to the economy it is used in. No other system can touch the flexibility and efficiency of capitalism, but obviously it is easy for it to go astray with poor oversight. The recent economic troubles are a wonderful example of poor management of capitalism. The government was imposing far too many demands in some areas, and putting in too few restrictions in others.
But if you want to change it out with Communism or Fascism, go ahead. Why you'd want to replace Capitalism, which has shown itself to work better than anything else, with a system that has failed spectacularly every time it has been tried is beyond me. Other forms of socialism don't count, they're all just hybrid bastardizations of capitalism. Bartering is out of the question, it is far too inflexible for any kind of large economy.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
. Why you'd want to replace Capitalism, which has shown itself to work better than anything else, with a system that has failed spectacularly every time it has been tried is beyond me.
I think when people talk of "replacing capitalism" they mean "capitalism" in the libertarian or "free market trumps all" sense, not in the semi-regulated you speak of. When the greed of a select few is capable of causing huge amounts of harm to all of society then there is a problem (economy exists for people, not visa versa), as is when wealth equals political power directly, with no reguard for the the people whatsoever. This is what a lot of people (mostly zealots) mean when they talk of "capitalism", not "any market in which good are exchanged".
Good points. Btw,
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey