Apple awarded iPhone patent
Tim Cook must have known.
One day before Apple's acting CEO told Wall Street analysts that his company would not stand for having its intellectual property "ripped off" — a remark clearly aimed at certain iPhone-like features of the Palm Pre — the U.S. Patent Office awarded Apple Patent No. No. 7479949.
This 358-page document, originally filed on Sept. 5, 2007, is the mother of all iPhone patents. Signed by 21 Apple (AAPL) employees — starting with Jobs, Steven P. and Forestall, Scott — it covers everything from the way a finger or fingers touch the screen to the heuristics that turn those touches into commands.
Other smartphones introduced since the iPhone came out have avoided using the multi-touch technology covered by this patent. The Palm Pre may have crossed the line. See Apple vs. Palm: Geeks with grudges.
Patents in the United States are enforced through civil lawsuits in Federal court. The patent holder will typically ask for monetary compensation and an injunction prohibiting further violations.
In order to prove infringement, the patent owner must establish that the accused infringer practices all of the requirements of at least one of the claims of the patent. The accused infringer has the right to challenge the validity of that patent, something Palm has already suggested it plans to do.
“If faced with legal action,” a Palm spokesperson said last week, “we are confident that we have the tools necessary to defend ourselves.”
Palm (PALM) shares were down more than 10% in mid-morning trading, but had made back half those losses by mid-afternoon.
Kudos to Alex Brooks of World of Apple for spotting the news.
"Cynix should go live inside the hollow of a tree, living off the land, so he doesn’t have to deal with the ills of this world."
Heh. You're the puppy whose kids are going to be paying to retain the banking class in the US, buddy roo.
Andrew, i said "communism at it was practiced".
Which is, as you note, the opposite of the theory.
A bit like America capitalism, nicht whar?
Es geht gut mit mir. Und sie?
Funny the Patent sheet or sheets is as long as the itemized bill. This is good for Apple as it is good for the Tech world. This prevents copyright infringement while making other companies come up with similar technology.. it is good I believe
The Patent office is clearly unable to judge submissions that are in the technical arena and should go.
How can a patent with so many "inventors" and so many pages (mostly drawings) be "well written?" Under the patent laws, the specification must be not only full and clear, but in clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same. Just the task of deposing 21 "inventors" is daunting. sfreptile
"Patents are privatized communism … concentrating economic power in the hands of the few"
How the heck is that communism?
From Wikipedia: Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general.
In other words, the opposite of what you said.
FIrstly Xerox got paid in shares for "showing" Apple's Mac dev team what they were working on. Andy Hertzfeld describes this meeting in his book and on folklore.org but basically they actually improved on several things that XEROX were doing because they THOUGHT they saw it doing something that it wasn't doing. (Window updating in the background I believe amongst other things)
Secondly Microsoft won the case based on the fact that the contract they drew up with the Apple legal team at the time had an option to allow Microsoft to "make use of things discovered while developing software for the Mac" I think it was that clause that LOST the look and feel case. This was when the company was run by a soda salesman – not very smart cookies.
Thirdly the Microsoft case that caused them to pay Apple 150 million in dollars was part of the settlement on the quicktime / windows media player case. This was just when Steve returned. Basically Microsoft ripped off Apple's codecs (including comments) for Quicktime and were caught very much with their hands in the cookie Jar. Worked out well for Microsoft though – the 150 Million "investment" netted them almost a billion dollars in profit further down the line.
SSSNNNNNXXX (snoring sounds heard after reading cynix's post.)
Patents are there to protect hard-working people from lazy people that try and rip off their ideas.
Cynix should go live inside the hollow of a tree, living off the land, so he doesn't have to deal with the ills of this world.
Patents are privatized communism. They stop the free spread of knowledge and technology for the sake of concentrating economic power in the hands of the few.
Has there ever been a more succinct definition of communism, as it is practiced? A few good men, using capital to secure the monopoly on ideas for the rest?
The worst thing about patents is the selfishness and the fraud of this idea that people "invent" things only because they want financial reward. I am fascinated by the development of open source software, and freeware, because it seems to totally disprove this idea that people create knowledge for profit.
The marxist and the corporate executive with a lobbyist in his pocket grow to resemble each other with uncanny accuracy in the modern world. Both demand a share of unrestricted economic power in the world. Both treat their tribal members with draconian, authoritarian contempt. Both believe they are born to power, both expect their children to inherit power, though not via immediate rank within the tribe. Both send their children off to universities to study doctrine before they can take rank within the tribe.
Freedom is drying up fast in the modern corporate world. I know lawyers who are so scared to lose their jobs that they twitch when a superior makes a joke, not knowing when to laugh, when not to laugh. So they almost never laugh. These guys make vast amounts of money, and yet they take the shame and degradation of their subservience out on their families, or anyone lower in the authoritarian chain than themselves.
I think history needs to repeat itself. Just as when America was first made into a great nation, the lawyers and the thinkers have got to take on the bankers and the aristocrats, and breath life into tired old principles that have been hollowed out by generations of weak judges and insipid, servile politicians.
Lord Acton didn't just say that power corrupts. He said a lot of stuff, and one of the things he said was that, sooner or later, there is going to be an almighty conflict between the people and the banks.
The more I see of the corporate financial culture, and the pitiful and mean spirited greed that drives it, the more I believe that the danger of communism has been reborn in a corporate form.
And Apple seem no better than anyone else. They are consumed by share price, share price, share price. Only share price.
Steve Jobs sells himself as a visionary, but that was always Woz. Steve is going to leave behind nothing except a bony skull, set in a permanent leering, grasping smile of avarice.
Check your historical facts before simply claiming that Apple "ripped off" Xerox. Apple made clear to Xerox at the time and made a deal with them (stock or money, I forgot) so Apple could visit and see the technology. Xerox knew Apple was working on a GUI *and* it is debatable if Apple really did use only Xerox because the GUI was already in the works before the visits. Look up the court case history before simply repeating something mass media produces.
As for Palm and the current case, Palm will lose, simple as that. Palm must decide whether to waste its resources in a long legal battle or settle and I will bet that Palm will put up a fake-fight and then settle quietly with Apple.
Patent has been granted to Apple and it is well written and covers a lot of specifics. There is no way Palm can walk away from this like Microsoft did.
@ jim from Radnor.
Are you suggesting that there be no protection for intellectual property?
These protections are exactly what has driven the huge innovation in the western economies. Individuals may invest years of their lives, and companies such as Apple invest millions of dollars in developing some product or software interface. Do yyou think it is fair that someone else be able to copy it for free? Should I be able to print my own copies of Harry Potter and sell them?
As for "APPL’s “innovations” were Ripped off from XRX’s PARC" This is not the case. Apple paid Xerox to go and see what they had and had an agreement on the use of their technology. If history shows that what they paid was a pittance for the value, that was Xerox's error. But they did NOT rip it off.
Funny – the World of Apple article say:
"The patent which was filed on April 11, 2008"
But you say Sept 2007. Which is it?
ex ped: It's Sept. 2007, but there were several provisional filings that preceded it. From the text of the patent:
"This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/850,635, "Touch Screen Device, Method, and Graphical User Interface for Determining Commands by Applying Heuristics," filed Sep. 5, 2007, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Nos. 60/937,991, "Touch Screen Device, Method, and Graphical User Interface for Determining Commands by Applying Heuristics," filed Jun. 29, 2007; 60/937,993, "Portable Multifunction Device," filed Jun. 29, 2007; 60/879,469, "Portable Multifunction Device," filed Jan. 8, 2007; 60/879,253, "Portable Multifunction Device," filed Jan. 7, 2007; and 60/824,769, "Portable Multifunction Device," filed Sep. 6, 2006. All of these applications are incorporated by referenced herein in their entirety. "
This may well be the coup of the decade in the computer hardware arena. And with 28 billion in cash and years of daylight between Apple's developments and any remote competition, expect even more important patents in the pipeline.
Apple's about to kick some serious fanny.
Look, the Palm team, many from Apple were WELL aware of APPL's claims and that the patent office will essential let anyone patent anything. So I am confident that they were VERY careful not to violate APPL's claims or that the claims could be easily deemed unenforceable in court. Keep in mind that APPL's "innovations" were Ripped off from XRX's PARC, and shamelessly I must say, but that was in a different patent environment. It just makes me sick that this country is losing its edge with this lawyer "Full employment Act."
What's interesting about this patent is that it doesn't just cover "multitouch" (i.e., tracking multiple fingers touching the screen simultaneously): It also covers gestures to scroll through long lists (a kind of "throwing" movement) and to move from screen to screen (as done e.g. in the Photos iPhone app).
That may mean that not only Palm is infringing with its WebOS, but also Google with Android and RIM with its latest OS (I think they all emulate iPhone's "throw with friction" algorithm for traversing long lists).
The difference is the patent. They did their homework this time. Last time they just let microsoft into the door to write software for them. This time they filed all the patents before the product was even announced. Apple has a much better case this time around.
To Mike O.,
Apple did sue Microsoft and Microsoft bought Apple stocks and Apple dropped the suit.
Palm doesn't have money to fight a law suit.
Change:
The Palm Pre may have to have crossed the line.
To read:
The Palm Pre may have crossed the line.
ex ped: Thanks.
Microsoft made a fortune ripping off Apple and lawsuits did nothing to stop it. I'm not sure if Apple would have better luck vs Palm. If it goes to court I'd like to see an article on the juxtaposition between the Microsoft and Palm cases.
The iPhone is great and this is a excellent job on AAPL's part!To get one of your own visit: http://www.seeksomething.com