Apple Receives Patent For Accessing Sets of Apps With Different Passcodes

wabrandsma writes, quoting Apple Insider "The technology, detailed in a patent awarded to Apple on Tuesday by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, deals with so-called 'access inputs' that determine what apps, device services, and functions can be accessed by a user. Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,528,072 for a 'Method, apparatus and system for access mode control of a device,' describes a system that creates user access modes guarded by predetermined gesture inputs." Reading the patent, it appears Apple managed to patent allowing access to some programs without a passcode from the lock screen of a device while protecting others, so e.g. you can quickly swipe to make a phone call or control your music, but have to enter a code to read your email or access your word processor documents.

Comments

Some day ..

[ackthpt]

I'll get a patent for posting on an Apple story.

then y'all will be screwed!

Re:Some day ..

[slashmydots]

Only the top left corner of each slashdot story is round though. Don't forget to specify that.

Re:Some day ..

[ackthpt]

Only the top left corner of each slashdot story is round though. Don't forget to specify that.

Whoa! You posted to a slashdot story! East Texas here I come!

Re:Some day ..

[ackthpt]

So you don't think there is enough prior art ?

Prior art never stopped a suit being filed by a shi^H^H^Hgood lawyer.

Re:Some day ..

[h4rr4r]

That is not how first to file works.

First to file only comes into play when more than one entity files for the same patent. At that point the first one to get to the patent office wins. My preference would have been if two folks try to patent the same thing it is considered obvious enough to not get patent protection.

Prior art still applies as it always had.

Prior art

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another trivial and redundant patent...

Re:Prior art

[halfEvilTech]

no kidding my current HTC Rezound has the ability to put apps on the lock screen to view without unlocking the phone. Otherwise unlock for full access.

Prior Art indeed.

Re:Prior Art

[MrManny]

While I agree about the.. questionable nature of the patent, it was filed in 2010 -- i.e. before that functionality became part of Android. (Though if you could access the camera from the lockscreen with third-party apps, feel free to disregard my silly comment.)

Re:Prior art

[Anonymous Coward]

Prior Art indeed.

Which is completely unrelated to the patent in question so it is in no way prior art.

Re:Prior art

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish I would get a dollar every time someone shouts "trivial" in forums regarding patents.
I would have enough money to buy me a McLaren 12C Spider in a jiffy.

Listen up. If everything is trivial I have I real good advice for you : patent it yourself and become rich.

Everyone shouting "trivial" is victim of hindsight bias.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

Re:Prior art

[meerling]

The only thing I see different from various pre-existing things is the input method, and that's not new either, so the whole thing falls under the pre-existing and bloody freaking obvious category. Again the patent system fails to follow it's own rules.

like different users?

[ragefan]

So basically they re-invented having different accounts having access to different apps. Only its on a mobile device, and it deserves a patent?!

Re:like different users?

[girlintraining]

So basically they re-invented having different accounts having access to different apps. Only its on a mobile device, and it deserves a patent?!

Well, yeah. Maybe you haven't noticed the furious nerd rage over the past, I don't know... FIFTEEN YEARS about stupid patent law? Anyway... a patent was recently awarded because someone figured out how to use the speaker/mic combo on a mobile phone to transmit data acoustically. You know, like... through the air and stuff. For credit card transactions. You might well guess... they got a patent.

Nevermind that this technology debuted in the 1960s, pretty much right after the second computer was built and someone got the idea that they should be able to exchange data... and look, here's this phone thingie...

Re:like different users?

[Kumiorava]

I think the novel idea here is that if you enter different passwords into same account you get different functionality. Especially useful on shared home iPad or computer or tv where you don't have need for separate accounts. Don't know if there is any prior art to this, but it sounds like a clearly different compared to user accounts in traditional sense.

Re:like different users?

[spire3661]

Its a permission list, nothing more. Walk up to a machine on my network, and as a guest you have limited access to my network. Enter some credentials and you get full access to my network. Please explain how this patent is different from that process.

Re:like different users?

[gstoddart]

This ability has existed since the 1960s. What is a bit novel is that Apple is using gestures for entering passcodes

Of course, my problem with that is we're treating gestures like they're different from a password or any authentication token.

I'm of the opinion that password, fingerprint, security token, gesture are all substantively reduced to "sequence of bits which can be used to verify access".

So if the USPTO gave a patent to do this with each of these approaches as a separate patent, we'd end up with a bunch of identical patents in which the "authentication token" becomes the patentable part of the 'invention'. I don't think the specific authentication token is relevant to the patent.

To me, it's the functionality of granting granular access, which we've had for a very long time. It doesn't become a different mechanism because you use a fingerprint, a picture of your face, a gesture or whatever.

To me if I could already do this with a password, WTF difference does it make if it's suddenly using a gesture?

Thank God for patents!

[Laxori666]

Constantly protecting and promoting innovation! Why, without patents, there's no way Apple would be going out on a limb to develop such advanced technology as needing one type of access method for some functionality and another type of access method for others! And if anyone should dare to steal this brilliant idea, or to develop the same exact one by accident because it is bleeding obvious, then let them be sued into oblivion for unfair whatevery. This will surely help us consumers by giving us less choice and higher prices.

P.A.T.E.N.T

[RedHackTea]

Prevent Any Tangible Evidence of New Thought
or maybe
Penetrate Anally To Ensure No Talent

I don't know, just spitballing here. Any takers?

Re:P.A.T.E.N.T

[jeti]

Prevent Any Truly Empowering New Technologies

Prior Art

[Hardhead_7]

On Android, I have a lockscreen widget and the camera app is accessible without unlocking.

Crappy patent overview

[sootman]

1990s: "... on a computer!"

2000s: "... on the Internet!"

2010s: "... on a mobile device!"