Apple Mines App Store Submissions For Patent Ideas 307
Posted
by
timothy
from the or-at-least-it's-fair-to-suspect dept.
from the or-at-least-it's-fair-to-suspect dept.
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Apple has started filing a bunch of patents on mobile applications. That might not be so interesting in and of itself, but if you look closely at the figures in one of the patents, you can see that it's a copy of the third-party Where To? application, which has been on the App Store since at least 2008. There's also a side-by-side comparison which should make it clear that the diagram was copied directly from their app. Even though it's true that the figures are just illustrations of a possible UI and not a part of the claimed invention, it's hard to see how they didn't get some of their ideas from Where To? It might also be the case that Apple isn't looking through the App Store submissions in order to patent other people's ideas, but it's difficult to explain some of these patents if they're not. And with the other patents listed, it's hard to see how old ideas where 'on the internet' has been replaced with the phrase 'on a mobile device' can promote the progress of science and useful arts. This seems like a good time to use Peer to Patent."
If you read the agreement... (Score:0, Informative)
...you'll see that you gave Apple all the rights to your IP
RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
Even the original article has been updated to say the initial knee jerk reaction was wrong.
And apparently Slashdot's editors, probably for more ad impressions, decided to overlook it and post this anyway.
Re:It'll be fun seeing (Score:4, Informative)
Okay: The app and the patent application have nothing in common. The app is for finding local points of interest. As I read it, the patent is for a method of a phone knowing when you get on an airplane (and then offering services specific to the flight) and get off the airplane (so it can tell your contacts you've landed). The image on the patent is definitely a gaffe, but it's not an example of Apple stealing someone's idea.
And to be fair, I've seen plenty of weird stuff in patent diagrams.
Re:RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
http://venomousporridge.com/post/909651311/whereto-patent-followup
jamesdood slashdot fan boy: nice try!
Got to read the claims... (Score:5, Informative)
Claim 1:
A method comprising:
Does this apply to me? (Score:2, Informative)
I'm sexually aroused by kittens and children. Does this mean that apple products are the right choice for me?
UPDATE: FutureTap Responds (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry to hijack the FP, but I wanted to direct everyone's attention to the response from FutureTap [futuretap.com], the makers of "Where To?"
Here are the relevant parts:
Re:It'll be fun seeing (Score:2, Informative)
The image on the patent is definitely a gaffe, but it's not an example of Apple stealing someone's idea.
But you can't patent an idea, you can only patent an implementation. What Apple has stolen is someone's implementation of a UI.
Apple. Love their hardware (and their GUI sucks less than Gnome, KDE and that other one), but hate their business model.
Re:UPDATE: FutureTap Responds (Score:5, Informative)
I don't have an iPhone, and therefore I don't have first hand experience with "Where To?" However, I have read the claims of the Apple patent, and the description of the "Where To?" software, and there is no overlap. The Apple patent is explicitly about notifying a third party of your arrival at some destination after detecting that you have been traveling. "Where To?" doesn't seem to do anything like this. The screen illustration is simply used as an example for what kind of UI the relevant application might have. So with this it is clear that "Where To?" is not prior art to the Apple patent, and Apple didn't steal an idea from FutureTrap.
That leaves the question of whether Apple is guilty of copyright infringement by using an illustration showing a screenshot of an app from another company. This gets pretty technical, but my educated guess is: probably not. The "screenshot" has obviously been redrawn with different fonts and slightly different icons, so it is not a verbatim copy of the original.
That said, using the image without asking for explicit permission from FutureTrap was a pretty stupid move on Apple's part, if only for the negative PR they'll be getting over this.
Re:New Art (Score:2, Informative)
If the ideas are already in published applications, then the patents are junk.
FIG. 6 of the application exists in published apps, but the claims of the patent application aren't "I claim the design in FIG. 6". You have to go to the claims, and the claims don't have anything to do with the Where To? app.
It may be copyright infringement, and may have some problems if the app isn't disclosed to the USPTO, but it doesn't seem to anticipate the claims. Furthermore, it might not be copyright infringement if (as is likely) the app store contract gives Apple a non-exclusive license to use the images in the app. You'd agree to that anyway for marketing purposes (the App Store shows screenshots of the app), but may not realize that they can then use the images anywhere. But this is mere supposition without looking at the contracts involved.
Disclaimer: I am a patent agent. I'm not your agent, nor am I Apple's agent, nor am I involved in any part of this. These are pure speculative opinions, for (my) entertainment purposes only and should not be relied upon.
Re:It'll be fun seeing (Score:5, Informative)
It used to be you could never find anybody who could find anything bad to say about Apple.
I guess you weren't around for the 1988-1994 "Look and Feel" suit initiated by Apple against Microsoft - with the potential of a clone directed against any project, open source or not, that looked too much like Apple's graphical interface. (Brace yourself NeWS, X. Don't bother trying, KDE, Gnome, ...)
In retaliation the GCC compiler project (for starters) refused to release Macintosh versions. (An independent group of Mac users ported each new gcc release to Macs and handled Mac-related bug fixes, resulting in a several-month delay of feature enhancements and bug fixes for that platform.) Meanwhile, John Gilmore was passing out a lapel button with a really ugly worm coming out of an apple and eating a computer, with a slogan about how Apple should keep its crummy lawyers out of MY computer.
Re:UPDATE: FutureTap Responds (Score:5, Informative)
That leaves the question of whether Apple is guilty of copyright infringement by using an illustration showing a screenshot of an app from another company. This gets pretty technical, but my educated guess is: probably not. The "screenshot" has obviously been redrawn with different fonts and slightly different icons, so it is not a verbatim copy of the original.
It's not technical. Just read the agreement that you signed when you put the app in the app store. See the part where it says Apple has rights to use images of your app for any purpose? There you go.
SUBMISSION IS WRONG: Link here (Score:5, Informative)
The patent has nothing to do with the application. Did anyone read the damn thing? Hell, did anyone read the submission which flat-out states that the illustration is just an example of a possible use of the technology?
Here's an update saying the initial knee-jerk reaction is wrong. [venomousporridge.com]
It's amazing how easy it is to emotionally rile up Slashdot regardless of any facts. Just mention one of the following:
1.) Patents
2.) GPL theft
3.) MPAA/RIAA
Boom, 500 angry comments from people who didn't RTFA. How many ignorant people aren't going to read the update or the patent and subsequently go on thinking Apple is "mining app store submissions for patent ideas" because they saw it in a Slashdot headline?
Shameful.
Re:Yup. (Score:1, Informative)
I guess Apple drew inspiration from Google and hung a little sign above the door to their offices: "By all means, be really fucking evil."
Re:It'll be fun seeing (Score:2, Informative)
Look, a typical steve job dick sucker.
Re:You're welcome! (Score:2, Informative)
So that's a "yes" then.
Re:SUBMISSION IS WRONG: Link here (Score:2, Informative)
You Mac fags will defend just about anything Apple can come up with.
Apple does this for other things too... (Score:3, Informative)
iControlPad [icontrolpad.com] is one of the more innovative hardware addons I've come across. They too are talking to a lawyer because of Apple blatantly patented their design.
It was also on slashdot few months ago. [slashdot.org]
One more reason for me to not touch Apple products.
Re:Where the money is. (Score:3, Informative)
Web stats are very unreliable. We know that Symbian, RIM and now Android are outselling the Iphone platform, but they show up less on web stats. They're not even included at all on your reference!
And well - I like Linux and don't mean any insult by this - but saying "Less popular than Linux" isn't exactly making a compelling argument for saying one should commercially develop for a platform. Whilst there is commercial development on Linux, it's far less than Windows or even "Mac" OS X.
Anyhow, even if you do trust those jokey web stats, Java ME still comes out ahead as 0.78%. And that's got a market of billions; almost all phones support Java (only a few can't even do Java, like dumb phones and Iphones).