Home
›
News
›
Patently ridiculous: Apple applies for iOS face unlock patent

Patently ridiculous: Apple applies for iOS face unlock patent

Posted: 29 Dec 2011, 11:54, by Michael H.

Categories: Apple Apple Software Software Bookmark

Discuss 87

Patently ridiculous: Apple applies for iOS face unlock patent

This isn't the first time we've seen it from any tech company, let alone Apple, and it probably won't be the last, but Apple has put in an application to patent a technology which some of us are already using: face unlock. As we all know, face detection is nothing new, and anyone with a Galaxy Nexus knows that unlocking your phone with face detection certainly is nothing new, but luckily the US Patent Office doesn't bother with trivial things like that, so Apple applied to patent it anyway. Yes, Apple applied for this patent in 2010, before Google put out ICS with Face Unlock, but Google's facial recognition software came from the PittPatt acquisition. PittPatt has been working on this since 2004, and was issued a patent for facial recognition (though not for mobile devices) in 2007. This is how the patent system works, even if two identical technologies exist, but one is on mobile devices and one isn't, both get the patent.

Of course is that Google's Face Unlock is not perfect. It can be fooled by a photo, or even a pair of glasses or a beard. Apple's patent is designed to use your mouth, the tip of a nose and eyes, and the distances between your facial features to analyze whether or not you are the owner of the iOS device and unlock the device. Of course, given how the facial recognition in Android can do all of those things in order to morph your face in the new camera app, none of this seems particularly new, or if Apple's way will be any more secure or reliable than how Android does Face Unlock.

Either way, there is no reasonable way that this patent should be granted, but no one ever said the USPTO was a reasonable organization, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time Apple or any other company were granted a patent for something that already exists. We'll try not to get too worked up as this is just an application, but the fact that Apple even applied means it knows there's a chance it could be granted. Of course, there's very little likelihood that the patent would stand up in court, but there would almost certainly be a wasteful lawsuit following this patent around.

Update: We felt it necessary to add this addendum to the article, because as usual the fanboys on both sides of the aisle have missed the point completely. We are not annoyed at Apple applying for this patent, because that is Apple's right within the system. It is merely a symptom of the problem. We are annoyed that the system allows for patent applications like this, and that often these sorts of patents are accepted, regardless of prior examples.

It is the US patent system that is horribly broken, especially in regards to technology patents. Apple didn't come up with this technology, and neither did Google. Intellectual property laws and patents stifle innovation by producing incredibly wasteful lawsuits because the USPTO doesn't know how to deal with technology patents. We don't blame Apple for using the system the way it is designed. We blame the system for being broken.

Ideas cannot and should not be patented, because ideas are all built on what came before. Apple and Google built their mobile platforms on the ideas of Nokia, RIM, Palm and the other companies that came before, and Nokia, RIM, and Palm built on the work done by companies before them, and on and on and on. That's how innovation works. No one owns knowledge or ideas. No one owns innovation. It's just how evolution works, and all patents do is slow down evolution.

source: Patently Apple via BGR

Discuss87

Prev news
Asurion listings point to BlackBerry Torch 10000 29 Dec

Next news
Sprint to get white Samsung Epic 4G Touch on January 8th 29 Dec

87 Comments
Follow Following

Post Comment
View options
Close
Show comments: Display mode:

1. israelian posted on 29 Dec 2011, 12:59 39 9

Apple, stop making s**tty steps! The world'd be fine even if without you.

29. Droid_X_Doug posted on 29 Dec 2011, 14:59 6 1

I seem to recall a similar function being part of Android ICS. I guess Apple doesn't care if their patent is invalid before it has even been awarded.

This comment is hidden because of its low rating. Show

39. ReturningToNokia posted on 29 Dec 2011, 15:56 7 15

Umm...Apple applied/filed the patent in June 2010. ICS was just released a few weeks ago.

Besides, if Google doesn't have a patent on it, why shouldn't another company file for their implementation of the technology?

43. Droid_X_Doug posted on 29 Dec 2011, 16:53 5 1

And I suppose there was zero development time involved with the facial recognition function in ICS? BTW, for Apple's application to not be subject to an invalidity challenge, there must be no publication of algorithms for facial recognition prior to the filing date.... I rather doubt that test will be met.

This comment is posted in response to #39 Show

This comment is posted in response to #39 Hide

46. ReturningToNokia posted on 29 Dec 2011, 17:22 4 7

Then Google should have filed for the patent while this was in development, or once their development was completed. What is so difficult about filing a patent? It's seems others do it quite well; why not Google?

This comment is posted in response to #43 Show

This comment is posted in response to #43 Hide

47. sgogeta4 posted on 29 Dec 2011, 17:26 7 1

You clearly do not understand anything regarding Google's open source stance. While Apple filed the patent a while ago, none of their products currently use it...

This comment is posted in response to #46 Show

This comment is posted in response to #46 Hide

64. ardent1 posted on 29 Dec 2011, 22:02 1 1

> And I suppose there was zero development time involved with the facial recognition function in ICS?

This coming from Droid_x_Doug (the same guy who was beating his chest exclaiming that ATT will engage in a hostile takeover of TMobile USA).

The US patent law has changed -- now, the basic rule is first to file versus the the prior doctrine of first to invent.

This comment is posted in response to #43 Show

This comment is posted in response to #43 Hide

73. Droid_X_Doug posted on 30 Dec 2011, 00:24 0 1

Ah... haven't you requested PA to change your ID to strident1, yet?

BTW, do you know anything about invalidity? Even under first to file, if publication of the underlying principle occurred more than 1 year prior to the filing, the patent's validity is still open to challenge. Facial recognition has been 'out' for way more than a year before 2010.

If you need a referral to competent patent counsel to explain the concept, I can give you one.

This comment is posted in response to #64 Show

This comment is posted in response to #64 Hide

40. quakan posted on 29 Dec 2011, 16:02 4 1

It's the patent office fault. I bet what they do is look through their database and see if something is already patented and if they don't see it, they just award to the first bidder. They should hire some techies in that office so they can actually show them what could actually be patentable. I love apple products but even i agree that these vague patents are ridiculous.

87. Lucas777 posted on 31 Dec 2011, 00:54 0 0

apple applied for this patent in june of 2010.. it only recently became public... how is that in violation of android? which recently only came out a month ago? yes they acquired a company before, but if we are being true and just, did google do any of the work that apple did?

This comment is posted in response to #40 Show

This comment is posted in response to #40 Hide

2. Slammer posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:09 11 0

----"Either way, there is no reasonable way that this patent should be granted, but no one ever said the USPTO was a reasonable organization, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time Apple or any other company were granted a patent for something that already exists."----

I agree totally!

If technology proves anything, it does not like to be stifled. It needs to advance by way of leapfrogging on one great idea and move it forward. It does NOT take kindly to being controlled so no other can capitalize on it.

Touch Gestures, Face recognition etc, are all technological inventions or discoveries that benefit all of society. It should remain open to every single individual regardless what product or company they choose.

Just as Linux has benefit the computer industry. It is imperative that the patent office reviews technological and scientific innovations with care. One controlling entity will provoke a severe slow down, or worse yet, a stale-mate in moving forward.

John B.

This comment has been moderated, because it doesn`t meet the discussion rules. Show

3. bbblader posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:15 8 2

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpxs9uB3071qlascao1_500.png true story

4. mukrenol posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:15 25 5

this proves that apple is not innovative as before
just find competitor's technology and has been using it for a bit then claimed as their own

cheap apple you are just cheap right now

This comment has been moderated, because it doesn`t meet the discussion rules. Show

21. SlimSoulja86 posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:54 14 4

Thats gonna be a new feature on iPhone 5, like Siri on iPhone 4S,

So here are new features on the iPhone 5:
> Face Unlock (This is ground breaking and it changes everything)

I'm begging to hate Apple, they sound more and more ridiculous. Why Apple, why, you also make people like us who loves you look stupid.

5. ZayZay posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:26 21 3

Can't teach an old OS new tricks, unless you sue for those new tricks!

6. SuperAndroidEvo posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:32 20 2

Apple sees a good thing & does 1 of 2 things.

#1) They try to patent the technology.

OR

#2) If the patent doesn't work then they buy the tech or company outright.

Apple to me seems to have lost its edge. They clearly don't innovate like they once did & are now releasing sub-par products like the HUGELY underwhelming iPhone 4S. This is just a sad state of affairs for Apple. Their magic is fizzling away & soon people will notice. If Apple doesn't shape up, this could be the beginning of a RIM like fall for them.

Apple needs to do more than rest on its laurels.

8. ZayZay posted on 29 Dec 2011, 13:37 5 9

Let me be the first to say this before any iphone lovers say it.

NO NO NO NO you suck, android sucks!

So since everyone read that, this closes the need to input opinions right here from iphone lovers.

Have a good day.