MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Jan 27, 09 - 01:04 am Comment from: GmanMac

Fire up the IP violation letters!

Jan 27, 09 - 01:31 am Comment from: Tiger Leopard

Take that Palm! Take you're ripped off POS phone up to Redmond if you're still looking for buyers.

Jan 27, 09 - 01:34 am Comment from: Roger Knights

This will give AAPL a boost tomorrow.

Jan 27, 09 - 01:44 am Comment from: Crabs

What, no thanks for tipping you off? That's just unkind.

I remember a while back, Apple was awarded a patent for touch input using the bezel of a handheld device. Is Palm violating that IP as well?

A description of the patent can be found here:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/06/10/26/special_report_apples_touch_sensitive_ipod_ambitions_disclosed_in_filing.html

This is the juiciest part:

"Apple mentions a touchpad for activating or deactivating functions. The patent describes it as a 'touch-sensitive area of the device that, unlike the touch screen, does not display visual output. The touchpad may be a touch-sensitive surface that is separate from the touch screen or an extension of the touch-sensitive surface formed by the touch screen.'

Interestingly, this is a feature Palm is already touting about its upcoming Pre handset. According to Palm's press release: '[The Pre has a] gesture area, which enables simple, intuitive gestures for navigation.' The gesture area is separate from the touch screen."

Since this was submitted in September 2007, Apple was already working on the idea of a gesture area long before the Pre.

Also,

"[Jon] Rubinstein left his position as senior vice president of Apple's iPod division on April 14, 2006."

It stands to reason that Rubinstein, architect of the Pre, might have been well aware of the iPhone and Apple's multi-touch development before he left Apple.

Think you'll get it bad messing with Apple's IP?
Try screwing with their MAC address!

So does anybody know when Palm's viewing is going to be held?

MDN word = 'short' as in, "I hope that the service is SHORT and sweet."

looks like PALM, RIMM, NOK, LG, Samsung, and maybe MSFT may be in for some disabled devices. These companies of course could ally themselves against AAPL.

In the end, this Patent will protect them from permanent threats to the iPhone/iPod platform.

Looking at some PALM puts already...

You Mac zealots truly think that your silly and vague patents will stop Microsoft from releasing their plainly superior touch screen technology? Ha! I just doubled my investment in Palm to prove how scared I am. The stocks may dip for a while, but once everyone realizes how useless and weak the iPhone truly is, they will leave Apple in droves. Weep you fools!

"Your Potential. Our Passion."

Jan 27, 09 - 02:44 am Comment from: Jack

Does this mean that Microsoft's touchscreen PC is in violation? I have been seeing that in use a bit I believe by some TV stations.

this will probably not hold up, as there is a lot of prior art for multi-touch: just google jeff han (http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html). Way more impressive than the iphone...

Jan 27, 09 - 03:43 am Comment from: Crabs

@ako

Except Jeff Han never patented any of what he did. Also, there's reason to believe Han did some consulting for the iPhone. Did you see his website after the iPhone was unveiled? Hmmm...

Would be really stupid if this would hold up. If jeff han did some consulting for them, it should be apple's intellectual property. This shouldn't be patentable, it's too obvious (minority report?). Would be like only one car company should be allowed to use a steering wheel, or only one computer company would be allowed to sell mice with their computers.

A whole mouthful of teeth for the dogs of Law.

Every patent is 'too obvious' after it's been submitted.

Why my friend didn't you run immediately to the patent office yourself when you became so enlightened with the idea? I guess you could have been the one in the driver's seat. What an huge opportunity that you let slip away!

Truly foolish of you..... (not sure if I'm referring to your post, or to the fact that you missed a great opportunity... either way you are a fool)

I say sue the hell out of anyone and everyone that infringes in the least way...after they have about 250,000 units on the market, that is.

Jan 27, 09 - 08:45 am Comment from: rahrens

Did anybody notice the "Optical Sensor" at the top center of the schematic?

Is that an indication that Apple has plans to add a camera to the front of the iPhone for video chat purposes?

One can hope!

Jan 27, 09 - 09:14 am Comment from: Fred Mertz

rahrens,

The optical sensor is already there for brightness control.

(There's also a proximity sensor which shuts off the iPhone's display when it nears your face)

Jan 27, 09 - 10:05 am Comment from: Zune Tang®

Ooooooohh, Multi-freakin'-touch!

As if anybody cares. The guys in IT where I work are really excited to see Microsoft's fresh new input and human interface innovations built into Windows Mobile 7. The rumors are astounding and blow the doors off whatever cumbersome and counter-intuitive junk MAC uses in their dumpy I-Phone. Keep lapping it up, MAC fangirls. You think they don't have lawyers in Redmond too?

Your potential. Our passion.™

Jan 27, 09 - 10:06 am Comment from: Lerxst

Look at the claims of the patent -- not the description. The claims set the metes and bounds of what Apple is claiming as their invention.

Take a look at the claims of that patent--that's all Apple can prevent others from doing. The claims pertain, essentially and exclusively, to the heuristics they use to determine whether a user wants to scroll up and down or to pan around in two dimensions. That's all. Sorry folks.

I just ordered a case of Vaseline and sent it to the Palm headquarters. They're gonna need it.

Remember that scene in Predator when Jesse the Body takes out that acre of rainforest with the BFG?

The executive suite at Palm just experienced a collective sense of "fecal urgency". Win or lose, you guys are fscked.

Does anyone know the logistics of a (potential) suit by Apple? The patent was granted AFTER these other devices hit the market. Would that matter?

Jan 27, 09 - 11:50 am Comment from: Predrag

Jdoc:

The patent application was submitted over two years ago. Whoever delivered anything since then will effectively be in violation. Those who delivered same technology BEFORE the patent application was submitted could claim prior art and have a shot at invalidating the patent.

As we all know, there isn't any prior art that was developed independently of Apple and/or its consultants.

Jan 27, 09 - 12:24 pm Comment from: Jubei

Finally. Its time to take action, since most of these guys are copying the iPhone UI left and right.

@jdoc

i don't think it matters, because the patent process was started. you hear on tv about some products being "patent pending". that is a warning to others, that its pretty much a done deal.

but i am no pro.

Jan 27, 09 - 02:14 pm Comment from: KingMel

"[Jon] Rubinstein left his position as senior vice president of Apple's iPod division on April 14, 2006."

Not a very smart move. That highly questionable decision makes me wonder if Apple was actually better off after he left.