Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 4th Oct 2010 22:05 UTC
Legal So, Apple has to pay boatloads of money to some patent troll over cover flow and Time Machine-related patents.
Thread beginning with comment 443761
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
JPowers27
Member since:
2008-07-30

The patent is on an In-Box (like you have on your desk) where all new documents are placed on the bottom of the stack and you can see top document and part of several documents under it.

Please note that the documents are always sorted by time...

iTunes sorts by: Album Title, Artist, Song Title (never by added date).

Time Machine: sorts directory snap-shots by time. It doesn't present documents in a stack.

Isn't this patent a algorithm and describes an abstract process? If it is, then it shouldn't be patentable.

Reply Score: 1

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

The patent is on an In-Box (like you have on your desk) where all new documents are placed on the bottom of the stack and you can see top document and part of several documents under it.

Please note that the documents are always sorted by time...

iTunes sorts by: Album Title, Artist, Song Title (never by added date).

Time Machine: sorts directory snap-shots by time. It doesn't present documents in a stack.

Isn't this patent a algorithm and describes an abstract process? If it is, then it shouldn't be patentable.



Hence, Apple is appealing the ruling on all 3 counts.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22


iTunes sorts by: Album Title, Artist, Song Title (never by added date).


Actually iTunes can do that and I use it all the time such as when I import a bunch of mp3 files and want to enter corrected metadata, so if the artist or album name is screwed up I just sort to show by date imported where I can see the files at the top that need the editing.

Reply Parent Score: 2