Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patent Suit Targets Every Touch-based Apple Product

Posted by Soulskill on from the trollin'-trollin'-trollin' dept.

suraj.sun writes with news that a new patent suit has been filed against Apple over all of the company's touch-based products. From the article: "According to the complaint (PDF), Professor Slavoljub Milekic conceived a system that used a touchscreen that allowed children to move virtual objects around the screen, which he used to build interactive displays for the Speed Art Museum in Louisville, KY, in 1997, and filed for a patent on his design that same year. The patent in the suit, U.S. Patent #6,920,619 named 'User interface for removing an object from a display,' was issued by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office in 2005. According to the lawsuit, Milekic formed FlatWorld Interactives in 2007 to 'promote and commercialize' his invention. Curiously, FlatWorld was incorporated on January 2007, just weeks after Apple announced the original iPhone at Macworld Expo. In July 2007, just after Apple shipped the original iPhone, FlatWorld filed a reissue request for the patent, which appears to have been done in order to modify some of the patent's dependent claims."

10 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. Even More Curiously by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Curiously, FlatWorld was incorporated on January 2007, just weeks after Apple announced the original iPhone at Macworld Expo.

    Why is that curious? What's curious to me is that this patent was issued in 2005 and Apple began releasing infringing devices with massive publicity and advertising in 2007. Now five years later he finally gets around to filing suit? Just after Apple experiences the most profitable quarter in history of any tech company and the news outlets proclaim that Apple has too much money?

    Either this lawsuit was timed perfectly or Slavoljub Milekic has been living without human contact for five or more years until recently arbitrarily realizing that Apple has been infringing on his "intellectual property."

    Patents wouldn't be so bad if everyone who had them cleared their throat from the beginning and got all this out of the way and agreed upon ... right now the patent ecosystem is this mentality of having a huge patent war chest because if you're producing a lot of anything, you're infringing on someone's rights and the odds are you'll pay for it at the time you're making the most money. This is unfair that Apple priced out these devices and sold millions of them with the possibility that they may be paying a hindsight licensing fee for each device.

    On the other hand, it's nice to see Apple getting a taste of its own medicine.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Even More Curiously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, Apple had its most profitable quarter, a good indicator that a lot more people have been recently exposed to infringing apple products. Maybe one of them was Slavoljub?

    2. Re:Even More Curiously by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Or it takes 5 years to assemble the paperwork, funding, and lawyers.

      I'm sure attorneys are just lining up to deal with the overwhelming defense Apple will surely have on hand, the sleepless nights before their work is torn apart in court, and the media circus if the case actually develops. There must also be rich folks out there just itching to donate money to a case against Apple, where a chunk of their other money is likely invested. Of course, everyone documents their ideas fully, with timestamps and complete lists of influences, too...

      All legal matters take time. Big legal matters take more time.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Even More Curiously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's 'curious' to me is the following:

      In July 2007, just after Apple shipped the original iPhone, FlatWorld filed a reissue request for the patent, which appears to have been done in order to modify some of the patent's dependent claims.

      The phrasing there makes it sound a *lot* like the old classic submarine-patent tactic of applying for/getting a vague patent, and continuing to modify it to track the current state of the art in order to catch as many 'infringers' as possible.

    4. Re:Even More Curiously by HaeMaker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or they have been negotiating with Apple for 5 years to take out a license. Most of those negotiations are in secret since most end with an NDA.

    5. Re:Even More Curiously by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Are we meant to believe that somebody who is a professor at a school right in the middle of the fifth-largest city in the United States has never once heard of the iPhone or an iPad or an iPod Touch, or seen them in action, until this last quarter?

      Is there a legal requirement that suit be brought immediately after infringement is noticed? I have no idea, but I guess it's one possibility.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. Apple and Professor Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This worked out so well for Apple the last time a Professor claimed patent infringement:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/05/us/david-gelernter-discusses-patent-claim-against-apple.html

  3. Re:Seems to me... by gr8_phk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...that this would affect a lot more than just Apple if upheld.

    Yep, it would affect an industrial PC I used circa 1996 with a touch-screen to emulate a mouse. Yep, some things could be dragged around in a standard windows app with that setup. Hmmm I guess touch screens have been infringing this for a while now.

  4. Re:Even though it's against Apple . . . by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know what you mean... I'm close to releasing an app; it's for a niche market and probably small enough to fly under the radar, but I hate the thought of some random asshat coming along to levy a tax on my work, or for some corporation with a competing product to crush me in court. Just because the patent office saw fit to grant a patent for being somewhere first (rather than for hard work leading to a genuine invention), and because I have a 1-click buy button with rounded corners in my app. And yes, as a programmer in someone's employ, this can hurt you too, if the trolls decide to go after the cool startup or struggling innovator you work for.

    Way to foster innovation (which was one of the purposes of modern patents).

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  5. Re:pretty lame UI patent by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    windows did all of that in WFW3.11 for pen computing.

    ": is there video or discussion of someone using a touchscreen for manipulating objects on a screen prior to 1997? It seems the answer must be yes, but I can't find a smoking gun"

    Look up any of the early tablets. There are several that pre date 1997.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_for_Pen_Computing

    1991-1995 That pretty much is a giant smoking gun of "prior art"

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.