Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd Jan 2009 12:04 UTC
Legal Remember when Steve Jobs launched the iPhone, and held it up in the air, proudly proclaiming "Boy, have we patented it", followed by a massive applause of the adoring audience? It may seem like this wasn't just an empty claim, either. During the earnings conference call yesterday, the company hinted at possible legal action against Palm were the Pre to infringe on iPhone patents.
Thread beginning with comment 344958
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: This just goes to show
by Adurbe on Thu 22nd Jan 2009 15:05 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: This just goes to show"
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

"the manner in which you pinch (or un-pinch?) on the screen for example, as far as im aware, that was not used in the same way before. Do you have an example where it has been?
So... If pinching can be patented... Does that mean I can patent moving my mouse to the "left" to move my "pointer" to the "left" of the "screen"? I don't see a difference really. "


the mouse has become ubiquitous BUT dont forget someone DID invent the 'move mouse right, pointer moves right' functionality. The inventor (in my opinion) should have the right to protect that invention and the r+d invested into its creation (this is primarily served by patents and copyright)

Remember that with all patents, if you can prove prior art then that patent becomes void

if you can find an example where "apple's pinch" was used before (as described in the patent) please publish it

Macworld previously had a feature on apple taking advantage of this patent 'way back' in 2007
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=18340

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[6]: This just goes to show
by spiderman on Thu 22nd Jan 2009 15:22 in reply to "RE[5]: This just goes to show"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

It is not only prio art that invalidates a patent. Obviousness does also invalidate a patent.
Let say I get an effective way to track eye movements with a webcam. I could patent the idea to use this eye tracker as a pointing device, but this would quickly be invalidated. Not because of prior art (I'm the first to track eye, so I'm the first who can use that as a pointing device), but because it is obvious.

Reply Parent Score: 3

lurch_mojoff Member since:
2007-05-12

How is "pinching", or even a camera tracking your eye movements, obvious? Especially "pinching" - give me one example of an object that you can you can increase in size or scale through the pinching motion.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: This just goes to show
by Adurbe on Thu 22nd Jan 2009 15:52 in reply to "RE[6]: This just goes to show"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

your statment is correct that in the US a patent must be "non-obvious"

your example however was a poor one as it is not 'obvious' to track your eyes to move a pointer

a better example would be along the lines of a patent 'for using a pencil to write'

Reply Parent Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I could patent the idea to use this eye tracker as a pointing device


No you couldn't. Ideas are not patentable, implementations are.

Reply Parent Score: 2