MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Doesn't Apple have patents for everything on the iPhone?

It sounds more like profit seekers than someone with an actual rights violation

MDN, this is from THE STREET. They are obviously one of the most biased, anti-apple, low-brow journalistic "papers" on the internet. Come on, there is no threat to Apple here.

I suppose it is to be expected. I cannot imagine patents being issued where an existing patent is already established and is on the market.

A precedent was set by Linux when some millionaire treid to patent it for himself because Mr. torvald had not done so, the Patent Office asked Mr Torvald to patent Linux and then protect it by demanding payment for it. He recieved voluntary payments and was granted the patent in retrospect even though he had not applied for it in the first place.

It is time the American way of conducting business was scrutinised, disected and recompiled to bring it into this century just as Europe is in the process of doing.

extortionists!!!

The Street.com is the worst when it comes to anti-Apple news. I had a nice email exchange with none other than Scott Moritz. You can read it at this link...

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/forum/

How do you patent a keyboard? It's... keys. On a touchscreen. Isn't a patent supposed to be novel somehow?

Next up: Little-known company sues Apple over use of a mouse.

The Newton had both a touch sensitive screen and a screen based keyboard back in 1993... Absolutely _ZERO_ merit to this one.

Hano

Click on "More on Troy Wolverton, the Street, and Apple Scandal"

Interesting...

I've just done a Google search, a Yellow Pages search [of St Petersburg, Fla], a St Petersburg Chamber of Commerce search and a Wikipedia search and none can find a company from St Petersburg, Florida called SP Technologies. The only reference I can find online is in reference to this very 'lawsuit'.

I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just saying that for a tech company to not have an online presence somewhere is unusual in this day and age.

Sounds to me like Apple will have some fun with these idiots. After all, patents are patents and dumb-dumbs are dumb-dumbs!

Charlie

You do realize SP Tech is not really a technology company, don't you? They don't actually create anything either. They're empty suits who have studied Apple's patents and think that by barking really loud, they'll get Apple to cave.

Apple will pursue this aggressively because it could the first of a long string of suits if Apple doesn't whomp on them at the get-go.

Oh, how much I love the idiots working at TheStreet.com. They can always make me laugh.

One day Apple's gonna sue them to dirt for altering the stock based on information. I can't wait.

MW: twenty

Hopefully that means days ;-/

You know, I once drew pictures of a keyboard as well. I new I should have patented it!

Can you imagine how much cheaper these products would be if Apple didn't need to have an Army of lawyers the size of Canada's military?

Anyone read the patent?

The fact that anyone was granted a patent for this "invention" is just...incredibly pathetic.

The patent basically says, "Touch screen computers use on-screen software keyboards. For example, here's just such a keyboard. But they're often done as controls that the user can move, minimize, resize, and there are times that isn't good--so we'll take that keyboard and pull off the minimize and maximize buttons, and the bar and corners that can be used to resize and move it, and hey, now we've got an invention!"

Since when is removing functionality from someone else's invention a new invention? That's like saying, hey, you invented a ten speed bike! I'll invent a nine speed one!

i guess this is another trap that comes from mafiasoft,and that companies should know that they´re putting their jobs in hell...

why on earth is this popping up now? the iPhone's been on the market for over a month now, and people knew about it (and the keyboard) for 6 months before then. in my opinion there should be some sort of time limit in which you have to file a suit.

I should mention to the casual reader that the statements of crabapple, above, in regards to a hypothetical "Linux patent", are not true. There is a trademark on Linux, but patents and trademarks are not similar in any way.

MDN,

I'm surprised you didn't label this "Think before you click"

TheStreet.com = hitmongering whores who wouldn't know the truth if it bit them in the ass.

The entire US legal system was created by corrupt scum lawyers, just like this Edwards bozo, who running for president now.

I patented masturbation. I'm gonna be rich from Windows users who need something to do when they keep having to reboot.

"If a judge or jury rules that a defendant willfully used someone else's intellectual property, then the defendant may have to pay punitive damages equal to three times the economic loss that the plaintiff suffered,"

Which isn't much since the iPhone just appeared on the scene.

"Apple is a big target for patent suits given the technical complexity of its products and its deep financial reserves. Plaintiffs in cases like this often hope that the threat of an injunction and treble damages will compel a defendant to settle without a trial."

Apple has pretty deep pockets, I think it's more like the other side will settle for a morsle than fight for tens of years over this.

Quad Core, I new I should have patented it!

Did you also know how to spell knew?

Or is it too new to patent?

""SP filed the suit in a federal court in the Eastern District of Texas, which is considered to be sympathetic to plaintiffs in patent infringement cases.""

there are times, a lot times in fact, that i think we would be better off without the lone star (millions of nuts) state.

did you know they have a state pledge? school kids have to say it every morning..... what a fricking bunch of nutters.

anyway, just another sign of the broken IP system. sad but true.

"I patented masturbation. I'm gonna be rich from Windows users who need something to do when they keep having to reboot."

Windows Guys spend their time screwing the beautiful women they can get with their real world salaries.

It's Mac fanboys in their mummies basements jerking off over their new iProduct that you'll get rich from.

Can someone please figure out where the actual patent they're referring to is listed? I haven't been able to find it anywhere and the search features on the US Patent office's website are horrible.

Don't be dissing Canada's military or we will come down and burn the White House, again.

It took SP seven months to discover they might have a case??

Going after deep pockets in a "sympathetic" district is blatant gold-digging. With Apple in Cal. and SP in Fla., I'd love to hear how they settled on... Texas.

Hopefully these clowns get laughed right out of court.

Since when is removing functionality from someone else's invention a new invention?

Since the US Patent & Trademark Office became massively overwhelmed with trivial patent requests.

Modern patents are nearly meaningless anyway. Each is only as good as the lawyer defending it, and they're very challenging to enforce internationally. The BEST ideas are those that can't easily be knocked off, and you don't need patents for those anyway.

MacGuy - I think they are all bozo's (all the presidential candidates) because they are all lawyers. I'm almost positive at least 80% of them are. We should try to get a good doctor into office instead. (hint,hint)

The Newton had a touch screen keyboard long before SP Technologies filed its patent application. Their suit is DOA.

BTW the patent # is 6,784,873. Claim 1 is
A method of entering data on a touch screen display, the method comprising: invoking a computer program in which user input is sought; invoking an input area, including a plurality of data input fields; invoking a graphical keyboard area incapable of user termination independent of termination of the input area, the graphical keyboard area having a plurality of keys on the display; selecting keys on the keyboard to provide the desired input; and automatically terminating the graphical keyboard area after the desired input is received in the input area.

The newton keyboard worked just like the claim says.

@MacGuy
I know they don't teach much history in school these days, but please, there is NO connection between John Edwards and those that laid out the basic framework for the U.S. legal system. I don't think today's legal system resembles the law being practiced 200 year's ago. Don't slander and insult our founding fathers by associating them with John Edwards. It's a shame that we all will need the services of attorney at some point in our lives. Wouldn't it be nice if it was different.

@shen-- I didn't know that about Texas having a state pledge, but it probably has something to with Texas being a republic on its own before joining the union. I suspect it is more a reminder of their history than an oath of fealty with expectations.

On topic. It seems that we seeing a daily example of what appears to be predatory lawsuits based on vague technology patents. Definitely need new rules at the patent office; they are obviously unable to cope the complexities of software and technological concepts. What can we do see that action is taken. I am no longer on speaking terms with my Senator, Barbara Boxer.

Shen and Spark-There is no state pledge. I have lived in Texas for 33 years, attended elementary through College here. Never once did I recite a State pledge. The State pledge is a fiction invented by bitter, delusional nut cases trying to appear intelligent.

Can anyone direct me to the SP Tech webpage that has that touchscreen keyboard as one of their products???

Google also finds it hard to locate their point.

The patent specifies:

invoking a graphical keyboard area incapable of user termination independent of termination of the input area,

Since the user of the iPhone CAN terminate the keyboard by pressing the home button. That means their patent does not cover the iPhone's keyboard.

They also would have to demonstrate why they have not diligently pursued infringement claims against every computerized touch screen kiosk (employment application, gift registry, information, etc.), previous PDAs and Smart Phones that use a touch screen keyboard. Can you say "existing art?"

The patent also states, as a primary feature:

The present invention generally comprises an immutable keyboard display.

The iPhone's keyboard changes by user input to present other characters... ergo, it is not "immutable" and is NOT the touch keyboard described in the "invention."

NotLikely

is right, True I have to masterbate when I use windows

AS I am so f off and nothing works i give up and masterbate to porn.


Many pc users do this,

sometimes I try to make a new product on pc and get so anoyed ,

Give up




Any single Girls here?

When I was a kid (over 50 years ago) - and it was friggin" cold outside - I would breath on the window of my bedroom and then draw pictures and write words on the vapour on the glass. I used to do this on the car window, too. So, I am sure my technology pre-dates these bozos claim. They had better cite my claims in their patent or they are in for a lawsuit to end all frivolous lawsuits! (I have maintained and updated my technology over the years, so my claims are not outdated).

I can claim to a stationary system the size of - oh, say a coffee table - and a mobile device of - oh, say a hand held tripple use device - not alluding to any possible actions but I am going to contact some lawsuit hungry schlep in Texass...

I know I have prior claims to all such devices and I use gestures to make them work - no pointers - just my fingers! Adn I am sure I will get a special finger, if I go on with this!

I will speak to an irresponsible and money hungry atorney this week.

MDN = speak

@ wannabe: You Wrote:- I should mention to the casual reader that the statements of crabapple, above, in regards to a hypothetical "Linux patent", are not true. There is a trademark on Linux, but patents and trademarks are not similar in any way.

I reply:- Substitute Patent for Trademark. The facts I mentioned still remain true.

So for clarity's sake here is the extract from "Wiki" not just for you but for anyone else trying to figure out what this is about:-

In the United States, the name Linux is a trademark registered to Linus Torvalds.[17] Initially, nobody registered it, but on August 15, 1994, William R. Della Croce, Jr. filed for the trademark Linux, and then demanded royalties from Linux distributors. In 1996, Torvalds and some affected organizations sued to have the trademark assigned to Torvalds, and in 1997 the case was settled.[18] The licensing of the trademark has since been handled by the Linux Mark Institute. Torvalds has stated that he only trademarked the name to prevent someone else from using it, but was bound in 2005 by United States trademark law to take active measures to enforce the trademark. As a result, the LMI sent out a number of letters to distribution vendors requesting that a fee be paid for the use of the name, and a number of companies have complied.[19]

Don't be so quick to dismiss this. I have been involved in similar cases. There doesn't have to be a company per se and there doesn't have to be a working product. The owner of the patent can spring the lawsuit at anytime. The damages do go back to the moment you released your product. In our case a guy basically had a patent on the concept of using a telephone keypad to interact with a remote computer to transact business or something that vague. So any company that was using a system where by their customers were doing business via a telephone keypad and their computer were violating his patented idea. At the time, our company was making a lot of money using such an idea. We thought it was ridiculous and frivolous and fought it with the best lawyers in the land. Not only did we lose, but so did some other companies such as AT&T;and banks etc. The guy now gets a cut of every transaction and is an EXTREMELY rich man! When he needs some more money, he goes after another company. He never made a product, he was just smart enough to patent the conept. So, you never know!

The biggest con in the whole US patent system is that the company with the patent does not have to have made anything to prove the patent works.

A the US governemt has to do is add 1 clause to the patent rules.

1. The company applying for any patent MUST provide evidence to testing the product AND be able to show a working prototype of the product before the patent can be approved.

That is all they have to do!

If the US governement did this then all these professional scumbags that are out for a quick buck will vanish off the face of the earth.

Apple would never be sued again - period.

Hey people again
Um Apple will pay these guys out of court,

Now who owns OS 9.2 now and is cyber sex a crime
Mac os X will be on PCs in 2 months
Who can recommend a awesome single date sight?

Pledge of Allegiance to the State Flag

(a) The pledge of allegiance to the state flag is, "Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one and indivisible."

(b) The pledge of allegiance to the state flag should be rendered by all present except those in uniform by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Individuals who are not in uniform and who are wearing a headdress that is easily removeable should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, with the hand over the heart. Individuals in uniform should remain silent, face the flag, and render the military salute.

(c) The pledge of allegiance to the state flag may be recited at all public and private meetings at which the pledge of allegiance to the United States flag is recited and at state historical events and celebrations.

(d) The pledge of allegiance to the state flag should be recited after the pledge of allegiance to the United States flag if both are recited.

We should try to get a good doctor into office instead. (hint,hint)

Gil Amelio?

Seriously, I wouldn't vote for any current leading candidate from any party.

Maybe crazy old Ross Perot should jump into the race again. He couldn't possibly win, but it'd be fun to watch. With any luck he'd force everyone else to get their shit together.

As for the Patent Office, someone had better pledge to either reform it or close it. Right now it's a government joke.

...in the '90s was the internet gold rush when lots of extortion punks bought domain names like Coca-cola.com ...then they waited like the great white hunter who hides in a blind ...more like common opportunists than people of skill and performance. hhmmm ...if you keep pursuing the letter of the law instead of common sense then maybe ...maybe, DC and Marvel comics, writers of science fiction ...and me, a simple ass-clown have the whole world to gain.

Hmmmm, how about this idea???
Apple takes the case and wins. Then counter sues that someone for trying to steal their patent and sues for a couple of billion dollars which would be their lost revenue. Promises to do the same to anyone else that tries a friviolous lawsuit.

I wonder if that would work. ???

en
PS, I am really getting tired of these patent trolls who only care about their own pockets

Bogus lawsuit.
BTW, SP Technologies is a lawsuit company representing to other guys in this case.

see http://trolltracker.blogspot.com/

bogus lawsuit lookin' fer a free meal.

"Apple takes the case and wins. Then counter sues that someone for trying to steal their patent and sues for a couple of billion dollars which would be their lost revenue. Promises to do the same to anyone else that tries a friviolous lawsuit.

I wonder if that would work. ???"

Do it wont, you mental midget. Companies can only sue for patent infringement of patents which have legitimate been granted to them. Most of Apple's iPhone patents are pending, not issued, so will be denied if previous patents for the same ideas are found (or if the ideas are obvious, or previously published or implemented but not patented).

So while you might not like patent trolling, it's certainly legal and the lawsuit is not frivolous.

One major of the patent system is to help a small relatively powerless individual who may not have the funds to immediately commercialize an idea protect himself against a corporation who just steals it. Hence all that matters is that the patent issued and is valid, and is being infringed upon by a 3rd party, not that the person it was issued to did anything with it.

I wonder if that would work. ???

It'd work to make the lawyers involved even wealthier. Not sure how everybody else would fare.

One major of the patent system is to help a small relatively powerless individual who may not have the funds to immediately commercialize an idea protect himself against a corporation who just steals it.

It used to be that way.

Today, a patent is only as good as the lawyers and pockets behind it. Not to mention one has to be prepared to aggressively defend their ideas worldwide (blatant Chinese knock-offs come to mind). One had better know the international business waters.