Multitouch Gesture Patents Could Prevent Standardization 210
ozmanjusri brings us a Wired report on Apple's efforts to patent the multitouch gestures used on their laptops, smartphones, and tablets. The article discusses concerns over how this could affect the standardization of certain gestures in developing multitouch technology. We've previously discussed the patent applications themselves. Quoting Wired:
"If Apple's patent applications are successful, other manufacturers may have no choice but to implement multitouch gestures of their own. The upshot: You might pinch to zoom on your phone, swirl your finger around to zoom on your notebook, and triple-tap to zoom on the web-browsing remote control in your home theater. That's an outcome many in the industry would like to avoid. Synaptics, a company that by most estimates supplies 65 to 70 percent of the notebook industry with its touchpad technology, is working on its own set of universal touch gestures that it hopes will become a standard. These gestures include scrolling by making a circular motion, moving pictures or documents with a flip of the finger, and zooming in or out by making, yes, a pinching gesture."
Middle Finger (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes sense for competitors to collaborate on certain things to move the industry as a whole forward.
Re:Middle Finger (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Middle Finger (Score:5, Informative)
Apple is patenting the method that makes the touchpad functional. In a way, they have a reason to do this as they were innovating the touchpad while everyone else was adding buttons to mice and arguing that the touch pad would never be as good as the mouse. These people lack creativity. It is easy to add buttons to a mouse, or a scroll wheel, or add USB ports to a computer, or other trivia that most firms rely on to imply innovation. But the trackpad is now a competitor to the mouse, and unless one has had issues, I see the mouse and mouselike interfaces going away on anything that is not a desktop machine.
OTOH, one reason that this patent may not cause too much trouble is that the engineering to make gestures happen may be expensive, and therefore we are much more likely to see cheap knockoffs, safe from the patents, rather than infringing duplication. For instance, MS did not go with a iPod style control on the original Zune, but the cheap click pad. Likewise, MS developed an affordable navigation pad on the new zune, rather than moving to a full touch screen model. Most manufacturers who wish to stay below the cost of the Apple product has done the same.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But how is this more than simply a logical extension of computer interaction (and therefore not patentable)?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Middle Finger (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This isn't about apple's 'creativity' in designing a new interface. The interface has been around since the early 90's with various different mechanics. This seems more like them trying to take ownership of the limited number of blatantly obvious hand/finger gestures practical on a small to medium size screen. If grant
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple gets a pattent for something that essentially monkeys can create by doodling then how can anyone NOT see the begging for pattent reform?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It would be nice if Apple could come forward and state that anybody may use their patents for stuff like this free of charge, but their
Call it what it is, please thank you. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they are not. They are patenting gestures. Don't make this more magical than is necessary.
What bothers me is that they prattle on and on about this kind of interaction being "intuitive." If the gestures are "intuitive," doesn't that by definition mean that they are already "inside" every person? That is, the gesture-as-representation-of-information, if it is "natural," is something discovered, and not invented. If this is not the case, then it's not "intuitive." So which is it?
If I develop an interface that interprets "waving goodbye" as "turn off computer," can I patent "waving goodbye?" Can I make it illegal for everyone else to use this very "intuitive" gesture?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, now you can't, because the idea's been published.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Middle Finger (Score:5, Insightful)
Look back at Wang's patent on the SIMM. It only covered 9-bit parity modules. 36-bit SIMMS did not violate the patent. Hardware patents are forced to describe an implementation.
Re: (Score:2)
Prior Art (Score:3, Informative)
Feb 2006 talk. Publicly posted Aug 2006. No "Patent pending" anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Universal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Universal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Microsoft doesn't have any significant marketshare of devices that accept touch input. Outside of tablets, I can't think of any serious product that currently exists that accepts that interface. It's not like new computers come with a Wacom tablet by default, or some other "touch-interface".
The iPhone and the Touch will be popular devices for years to come; I'd be very surprised if they don't significantly oversell tablet laptops, if only because they're cheaper, if they aren't already in t
Apple Is..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Just like the Zune...? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Universal? (Score:4, Interesting)
Pinch to zoom? (Score:2)
Anyone else think we have gone way overboard here and need to return to a much simpler time?
standards which do not make sense (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It will pass. (Score:3, Funny)
Ctrl +, Ctrl - has worked fine for zooming in and out for years.
Various CAD tool vendors tried to get people to use mouse gestures for years, but people stuck with the mouse+keyboard because it is a much more definite form of input.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't consider it to be irrelevant. Mouse gestures in CAD tools are a precursor to the multitouch hand gestures, in that the m
Re: (Score:2)
So... part of me thinks it isn't terrible to patent the gestures, as long as you offer free licensing to free software and reasonable fees for commercial software.
Re:It will pass. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because with the exception of phones and other "toy" devices most people need keyboards to get work done. I have never used a touch screen that I can type as fast and as accurate as I can on a keyboard. Also, most people know how to type on keyboards and the keyboard has been used ever since the typewriter. I don't see the keyboard going away anytime soon for any serious device.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The desktop computer as a separate box is a dead end, and the reason you're seeing ma
Re: (Score:2)
that by far outnumber keyboard-mouse-and-monitor computers, and for large parts of the world will be the only "computers" they'll ever use.
I haven't traveled outside of the US for a while, but here in the US, I have never seen anyone type a major report via a mobile device (iPhone, Blackberry) or an internet tablet (N800, etc.) About the most I have seen anyone do with them is make very minor edits to reports and check their e-mail. However, most people who work on the road use a laptop to do most things rather then thier mobile device or internet tablet.
Besides gaming most tasks done on desktop computers could (and will) easily be done (albeit with better user interfaces - which is what the article discusses) on what is known as "Mobile Internet Devices" (webpads, mobiles, ... ).
Ok, show me how someone types as fast on a "Mobile Internet Device" then a la
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't, but such devices aren't for doing real work on. They're for making phone calls, listening to MP3 or browsing the internet. They are a waste of space if you want to write a few thousand lines of python.
Re: (Score:2)
Send it to me in the mail, I'll see what I can do.
Pinch was in the original multitouch demo. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In sh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm Crushing Your Patent! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
ROFL. It's never ceased to amaze me that someone hasn't yet sat down and determined how it's possible that a joke whose premise is based entirely around the antics and unknowable reality of a delusional psychotic can strike a chord in millions of perfectly normal people.
Come to think of it, that almost sounds like I'm talking about Steve Jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, let's face it. Jobs is not the first leader in history to possess a personal reality distortion field. There have been a number of interesting sci-fi stories about ancient artifacts that allow those who possess them to control men's minds (Martin Caidin's Messiah Stone, for example):
Doug Stavers plays the mercenary game, and every time he plays he wins: in Africa, Central America, Vietnam or in the USA. Now he's on the big
I'm pinching your IP! (Score:2)
up to their old tricks again (Score:5, Insightful)
Multitouch as an input method goes back a long time; it wasn't put to much use because the hardware was expensive and GUI library developers were still coping with bigger issues.
Apple shouldn't be allowed to monopolize multi-touch, in any shape or form: not only would it be bad public policy, Apple simply didn't invent this stuff. Pretty much the only patents that should be valid in this space in 2008 are patents on better multi-touch hardware and low-level firmware.
Re:up to their old tricks again (Score:5, Informative)
Apple didn't sue Atari's TOS, the Commodore Amiga, Berkeley System's GEOS, DRI's GEM/1, Acorn Archimedes or any of the other graphical desktops. It only sued Microsoft and HP, which was selling an add-on for Windows that made it more Mac-like. [1]
The reason Apple sued Microsoft to stop it was because Apple had entered an development contract with MS in 1982, giving MS early access to Mac technology. MS agreed not to release a competing product for IBM's PC until the Mac was delivered, but found a technicality that enabled it to announce Windows 1.0 in 1983. Even though Windows 1.0 was unusable garbage, it cloned enough of the Mac ideas to create a product concept that could make the PC look useful, and create the suggestion that Windows would deliver something similar to the Mac. It didn't even come close until 1995, more than a decade later. Windows was a vaporware distraction based entirely upon theft of ideas Apple released to Microsoft as a trusted partner.
Interestingly, Wikipedia presents this as a revised history where Microsoft invented Windows 1.0 first and suggests Apple copied it for the Mac. Windows Enthusiasts like Rob Enderle have also stated that Microsoft developed the Mac OS for Apple, despite the fact that at the time, Apple was already a huge company turning out blockbuster products and engaging in major R&D, while Microsoft was still a contract developer that simply relicensed Unix and DOS adding very little value, and didn't really develop any of its own original products for another ten years. Microsoft didn't even invent Excel, it only cloned the existing VisiCalc inside Apple's Mac GUI. It bought Word directly from Xerox. That's why those of use who were paying attention find it hard to swallow the idea the Microsoft has some significant history in the original development of the GUI. It did not.
Even MS knew that it infringed enough upon Apple's technology that it could not sell Windows 1.0. Despite showing off an early preview in 1983, MS didn't sell Windows 1.0 until 1985, partly because it had to keep working on it, and partly because it had to force Apple into licensing its Mac technology first. MS used the threat of porting Mac Excel to the PC as leverage to obtain a license from John Sculley's Apple for Mac interface ideas that were unique to Apple (as opposed to GUI ideas that had originated at Xerox PARC or other places). MS then used that 1985 license to copy even more of the Mac UI for Windows 2.0, which served almost entirely as a vehicle for porting Mac Excel to the PC.
No PC makers preinstalled Windows on their machines until Windows 3.0 in 1990. Apple's 1986 suit against MS was limited to copyright ideas about the user interface, because at the time, there was no established concept of software patents. Recall that Bill Gates was also warning the world that software patents would be a bad idea and stifle competition. He believed that at the time (1990) because he wanted full access to Apple's technology without paying for it. After MS began patenting its own software ideas, the company changed its tune. It now threatens to sue open source using its patent pool.
In a world where everyone patents every idea they think might ever have any value, and where companies are all sued by small inventors who have patented ideas that may seem obvious but end up getting millions awarded in claims from the court, the idea of patenting every line of research isn't evil, but necessary.
Open Source developers are at the mercy of lots of patent nonsense, so they critically need to cont
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's because Apple was utterly defeated during the first couple of lawsuits.
Wrong: Apple didn't lose its case until 1992 and appealed for another ruling in 1994. By that time, all of the other small GUIs had been trampled by Microsoft's PC. You have things backwa
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, read that again with your eyes open. Apple didn't sue any of a wide range of companies selling a Mac knock off, including Atari's ST, which was so blatantly patterned after the Mac it was called the Jackintosh after CEO Jack Tramiel. Nor did it sue Amiga or Acorn or GEOS, all of which copied the Mac desktop even closer than Windows. Apple only sued Microsoft and HP (and threatened
Why make a standard? (Score:2, Insightful)
How about customizability? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hitchhiking Gesture Patent (Score:5, Insightful)
The thumb is positioned in an erect manner with the rest of the fingers clenched into a fist. Optionally the forearm can be successively pivoted at the elbow joint.
If any of you want to go hitchhiking you will have to invent gestures of your own that do not violate my patent. Perhaps you could do a sort of Egyptian walk to attract attention instead, although it is possible that the Bangles have a patent on that particular gesture. I will of course licence you to use my hitchhiking gesture at a fee that renders the whole purpose of hitchhiking completely pointless
Re: (Score:2)
That's ok, with the invention of the electronic thumb [hhgproject.org] your patent is superceeded.
What are patents for? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's right - these same laws that are obstructing innovation and progress are intended to have the opposite purpose.
Defensive use? (Score:5, Interesting)
In a sense, the industry uses patent minefield in the same way that France used the Maginot line. When someone blitzkriegs around it with a paradigm shift, everyone is in a hurry to dig new trenches and claim new territories.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps they didn't mention it because they don't know it, or don't believe it? What do you mean by spurious? Which patents? Are all three of those companies prosecuting those patents so far?
seems Apple is just joining the fray
The article directly states that Apple has been filing for gesture patents for years, so ... I'm not sure I could agree that they're "just
Re: (Score:2)
Bound to happen anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bound to happen anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A company with a sense of fair play. By trying to patent their specific gestures, thus locking everyone else out, Apple IS patent trolling, imho.
First, you don't have any idea whether or not Apple tries to lock out anyone. Sure, Apple will ask for license fees, but there is no indication whatsoever that Apple would refuse to license this patent. But second and more important, I think you have a very wrong understanding of what is meant by "patent troll".
There are three main reasons why things get patented: By inventors (individuals and companies) who try to create valuable inventions, which can then be sold to someone who is interested in it. By
"The Pinch" - Intellectual Property? (Score:2)
Yes but is it intellectual property? I mean is "the pinch" to zoom in/out is intellectual property? Or is this just the natural progression of human/machine interface. I would guess most engineers or engineering groups when given a flat surface as a machine input would naturally gravitate towards such gestures within the first day or week.
I see this more like Apple wanti
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but is it intellectual property? I mean is "the pinch" to zoom in/out is intellectual property? Or is this just the natural progression of human/machine interface. I would guess most engineers or engineering groups when given a flat surface as a machine input would naturally gravitate towards such gestures within the first day or week.
The question is: Is it obvious? But not obvious now, when you've read the patent, but obvious before you heard about the patent or saw an implementation by Apple.
Already obsolescent? (Score:4, Interesting)
This is one case where an industry standard is the only thing that makes sense. Make the gesture set standard and allow people to patent specific implementations (physical not software) which offer new features.
Unfortunately, in my experience it's the marketing and sales departments who, because of their competitive mindset, don't understand the benefits of collaboration in growing the overall market. When they do turn up at standards meetings as observers, the results are sometimes laughable but usually cringeworthy for the engineers from their companies. Microsoft XML is a case in point. I confidently expect these people to continue to act as a brake on the wheels of input mechanism progress.
Re: (Score:2)
Another big problem is that they're not very precise - mice and touchpads
Zooming and moving about an image (Score:2)
Besides swirling, the zoom gesture can be done via touching the corner of the display or photo's window edge and dragging towards the opposite corner. If it's done from the top corner that can be shrink, if from the bottom corner that can be zooming in (expanding). Or vice versa (maybe top to bottom can be expand?) Actually this is in some ways better than pinching/unpinching cause your finger has a longer way to move so you can zoom in or out more than what pinch would allow. Also, it probably should dete
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
IT IS TRIVIAL (Score:2)
Given the SAD mess the system is in today I'm surprised Apple didn't try to own
Ok, here's what I don't get (Score:2)
Apple is shooting itself in the foot (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviousness (Score:3, Insightful)
I figure that the better the gestures are for doing specific tasks, the more obvious they should be. I don't have a problem with patents on the technology behind the touch and multi-touch sensors, but I have to say that it would be a bad idea to use patents to prevent people from moving their hands in a particular way. Otherwise, you might get in the situation where you have a multi-touch sensor on a computer, but only the licensee of the software is allowed to use those gestures.
Re: (Score:2)
Why standardization? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first 32 & 64 MB Rio's (with SD slots) were absolutely superb, really fantastic (although shipped wit
Re: (Score:2)
prior art (Score:2)
Prior Art... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
License from a Research Company (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How dare you (Score:5, Funny)
Technical terms (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:MOD PARENT UP (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
multitouch is a logical extension/derivative of the trackpad
Of that I do concur, however if the market was to fragment in such away to hurt adoption, would it really be that bad to use a well designed track pad with some wheels for zooming and/or scrolling? I know gestures have been gaining momentum over the years (I personally don't care much for them) and it saves space and what have you on smaller consumer electronics devices, but I prefer tactical feed back from my hardware when navigating or performing input.
Re:This is good... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://researchoninnovation.org/ [researchoninnovation.org]
I am really struck by the number of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)