Newly revealed Apple patent application looks suspiciously tablet-like
(Credit:
USPTO.gov)
The sharp-eyed bloggers at AppleInsider have noted a newly revealed patent application related to multitouch surfaces--leading to further speculation about Apple's purported tablet PC project.
As per usual, the application came through law firm Morrison and Foerster, and was originally filed in June of this year. According to the paperwork on file at USPTO.gov, this is:
A method of performing operations on a computing system having a touch-sensitive surface, the method comprising; tracking the paths of multiple distinguishable contacts, the contacts corresponding to touch devices as they move on or near the surface at the same time, wherein tracking is based on at least shape and position data corresponding to the contacts; determining scaling motion information corresponding to two or more of the multiple contacts based on the tracked paths of the contacts; generating a scaling gesture control signal based on the scaling motion information.
This reminds us of an earlier Apple touch technology patent application we looked at more than two years ago, for a wide laptop touchpad that could distinguish between intentional and unintentional input. The new application also takes current tablet and touchscreen technology to task, saying:
Touch screens and touchpads often distinguish pointing motions from emulated button clicks or keypresses by assuming very little lateral fingertip motion will occur during taps on the touch surface which are intended as clicks. Inherent in these methods is the assumption that tapping will usually be straight down from the suspended finger position, minimizing those components of finger motion tangential to the surface.
(Credit:
USPTO.gov)
There's little else to tie this documentation directly to an Apple tablet, a project long-rumored, and currently thought to be coming sometime early next year, and some commentators even think this patent refers to mouse technology, not a tablet screen.
Interestingly, this comes on the heels of the recent rumors about an imminent refresh of the MacBook laptop line, keeping Steve Jobs and company in the public eye as we head into the all-important holiday shopping season.
New York native Dan Ackerman, a former radio DJ turned journalist, has written about technology and music for publications including Spin, Blender, The Hollywood Reporter, and USA Today. He hosts the weekly Digital City podcast and the New York edition of Editors' Office Hours. Dan's new album, Tales Out of Night School, is available now. E-mail Dan. 

I'm surprised they have not tried to patent the "double click" on a mouse. Oh wait, they stole the idea of a mouse from Xerox.
From New York Times, December 15, 1989 (http://bit.ly/18kGmg):
"The Xerox Corporation filed suit here today against Apple Computer Inc., accusing it of unlawfully using Xerox copyrights in its Macintosh and Lisa computers...
Xerox contends that Apple 'intentionally and purposefully concealed' the derivation of the Lisa and Macintosh software from Xerox software. It said that Apple's copyrights on Lisa and Macintosh software were invalid and that the company had unjustly received benefits that rightfully belong to Xerox...
The origins of the Macintosh at Xerox are well known. A visit by Steven P. Jobs, Apple's co-founder, to Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center in November 1979, is widely recounted in Silicon Valley chronicles as the inspiration for the Lisa and the Macintosh. It was then that he was shown Smalltalk, the first computer language using a mouse, the hand-held device used to instruct the computer. Several former Xerox employees worked on the Lisa and the Macintosh".
The case was decided on a technicality but was a severe blow to Apple's own suit against Microsoft at the time (Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, 35 F.3d 1435). Apple lost all claims against Microsoft and the courts decided that Apple could not receive neither patent nor copyright protection for its GUI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fingerworks
So, whenever anyone uses time, they'll have to pay me for it.
How much does a patent like that cost?
(Google-ing now)
$10,000?!? (8^O)
Forget that idea!!!
The suit was dismissed in 1990.
Apple stole nothing, as recounted in many responsible sources-- Jobs negotiated a stock swap in exchange for PARC "opening the kimono" as he put it.
[The GUI and mouse were litigated but the context in which they were presented to Apple and the difference in the actual product released by Apple seem to have been rightly determined in Apples favor.]
Precisely for the reasons given here.
[My dad worked at PARC during that time and confirmed that the ideas were "stolen"]
I completely understand the sentiment of this statement by a PARC employee, but ideas under law cannot be protected-- as stated above, only *embodiments* of ideas can be protected as IP. Apple's embodiments of great ideas from PARC were original expressions (and huge improvements on the originals, for that matter), and totally worthy of copyright and patent. They also paid for the right to view these ideas, while developing their "computer of the future." The intention was clear and the result original. That's why Xerox's case claiming copyright damages was thrown out. That's not a technicality. That's *stare decisis*
Apple showed it respected IP, unlike Microsoft, whose co-founder Gates reportedly said to Walker of Priceline, "We don't let little things like patents get in our way." When Walker decided not to sell his fledgeling bid-your-own-price service, MS set up their wannabe, Expedia. Again, perfectly legal to adopt ideas.
But of the two situations, I prefer Apple's stock swap to Microsoft's free ride. And I think Apple should have won that case for the original work it did on GUI.
- by jlvivian October 5, 2009 9:58 AM PDT
- Not all the time the patents are reference to a future products, the reason is because a patent is the correct way to protect the investigations and research from the companies, Universities or individuals in that way nobody can stole their ideas; and many times they use the patents to negociate, it's an excellent tool.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)I know this because I was working in the Intellectual Property Area of a Corp.
I will excellent to have a iTable in my hands but sometimes this is just a dream.....