USPTO gets one right! Rejects Apple's pinch-to-zoom patent claim
0. phoneArena 29 Jul 2013, 11:48 posted on
We don't often say many good things about the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), because we don't think the office does much good in the world of software patents. Frankly, we're not sure software patents should exist at all, because they don't seem to lead to much other than wasted court fees. Still, as much as we criticize, we do need to point out when the USPTO gets one right, and the USPTO has rejected Apple's pinch-to-zoom patent claim...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3584; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
Tsk tsk...Apple can't pinch exclusively anymore.
Had it coming!!!
2. Diego! (Posts: 547; Member since: 15 Jun 2009)
About time! You suck that punch, Apple! Sammy, your move!
3. Bootutu (Posts: 226; Member since: 11 Jul 2013)
Wonderful news! a lot more to follow, most notably the notification center
4. ZeroCide (Posts: 762; Member since: 09 Jan 2013)
WOW!!! There are people at the USPTO not being paid off by Apple!
11. ZeroCide (Posts: 762; Member since: 09 Jan 2013)
It doesn't have to be a vaild claim for it to be true. There are quite a few total BS patents that Apple filed that were approved. Seems like someone at the USPTO was getting paid off.
26. SellPhones82 (Posts: 569; Member since: 11 Dec 2008)
Like the invention of the round-cornered rectangle? Where would we be today if Apple had not graced us with that wonderful shape?! Someones kids are getting a real good College education somewhere.
18. donfem (Posts: 633; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
If it was never valid, why was it filed? Why was it apprved initially?
40. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)
YES. now hopefully they would DROP OTHER LAW SUITS from Apple so we can get back making good technology
5. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 10007; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
So is taking away something apple did unique a pity gesture from the uspto?
8. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3584; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
Are you for real?
The only unique thing Apple did was turn a fruit into a machine.
9. tedkord (Posts: 9684; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
No, it's the correct conclusion, as pinch to zoom is not only obvious, it was demonstrated by others before the iPhone launched our the patent application was submitted.
37. OnlyiPhone (unregistered)
No it wasn't pinch to zoom is only capable on capacitive touch screens and its mo secret apple made capacitive screens popular and was the first to have pinch to zoom... I don't agree patenting a shape but different processes of your phone if you do it first patent it google should've patented the notification tray they pretty much invented that
42. tedkord (Posts: 9684; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
First, Apple was not the first to have a capacitive screen. The Prada had one before it. Second, pinch to zoom was absolutely demonstrated before the iPhone. Microsoft was using it on their Surface table computer well before the iPhone.
45. OnlyiPhone (unregistered)
If you read what I said I said iPhone made capacitive screens popular I never said they were first.... And they were the first smartphone with pinch to zoom.....what sells more a table computer or an iPhone I believe an iPhone
43. Just.Me (Posts: 23; Member since: 24 Apr 2013)
Didn't samsung make the screens for apple. So, If im correct, apple only made pinch to zoom popular thanks to samsungs screen technology. Then again, I could be wrong
44. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1503; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)
There were previous implementations of zooming using two points in screens using visual input instead of capactity screens.
That makes the pinch to zoom in a capacity screen nothing more than a logical evolution of the pinch to zoom using visual recognition.
12. Zeus.k (unregistered)
Now if they could look into some of more pathetic patents by Apple and could get them all rights. Anyway good job done by uspto.
13. PhoneCritic (Posts: 629; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)
Is it correct to say Samsung Just won its appeal and Judge Lucy will have no recourse but to throw out the 1 billion dollar verdict and consider the case closed as no patent is being violated? Or were there any other claims that Apple had against Samsung/Google?
20. stealthd (unregistered)
No. One patent being invalidated didn't throw out the rest of the patents and trademarks Samsung was found to have violated.
21. PhoneCritic (Posts: 629; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)
Thank you. Do you know what other patents that were claimed to be violated?
As far as I recall it had to do with the overall design on some older models and the bounce back feature which I heard ( don't know if this is true) was rectified by a update that corrected the said violation.
25. tedkord (Posts: 9684; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
It helps Samsung. Also, the rubber banding patent was initially invalidated, and to save it Apple had to redo the claims, and Samsung filed for a retrial on that patent based on the products not violating the new claim.
14. jove39 (Posts: 1741; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
That's good...in touch enabled devices pinch-to-zoom is very obvious gesture so right move by USPTO.
15. MartyK (Posts: 742; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
they use common sense and their eyes!!..yay!
16. alpinejason (Posts: 262; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)
They did it first but who knows if it is good to patent anyhow
30. tedkord (Posts: 9684; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
They didn't do it first. There are YouTube videos of researchers using pinch to zoom a full year before the iPhone or the patent filing.
17. good2great (Posts: 1042; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
wow what a biased article title. come on PA continue to divide your readers. smh
19. donfem (Posts: 633; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
What's your point? Article states the nullification of an invalid claim...So?
28. Commentator (Posts: 3645; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
In saying "USPTO gets one right," the article implies that the USPTO has made incorrect decisions before, placing the authority of their power in question. It would appear then that the author is biased against the USPTO in that he disagrees with some of their past decisions.
Good thing we live in a country where skepticism of authority is a God-given tradition. 'Murrica!
31. tedkord (Posts: 9684; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
It's not biased to expect the USPTO to only pass and uphold patents that meet the definition of patentable - novel, non obvious and useful. Pinch to zoom only met one of the three.
24. blazee (Posts: 406; Member since: 02 Jan 2012)
What's so biased in this article? I think Michael is just happy like most are, that uspto is finally revising some bogus patents which are used to monopolize the market
22. darkkjedii (Posts: 19143; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Good, this should come standard on smartphones, without the legal hassles.
29. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Yay! Now just kill the rounded corners, slide-to-unlock, and their other goofy junk patents.
32. Mr-Robert (banned) (Posts: 23; Member since: 27 Jul 2013)
Well said they dont deserve any patents. Banned Apple when applying for any patents. A R&D company focuses on progresing and modyfing a product already produced by other companys!
Get lost Apple.
33. fanboy1974 (Posts: 1345; Member since: 12 Nov 2011)
I don't see how iPhone users can view this website on safari. Time to go back to my Note 2.
36. Mr-Robert (banned) (Posts: 23; Member since: 27 Jul 2013)
They never care or are bothered! What they care is that they have an Apple device, and it's made by Steve Jobs. They believe him as a GOD! Lmao!
34. shutslar (Posts: 3; Member since: 06 Jun 2013)
If you want a good explanation of this and other Apple/Samsung cases check out Groklaw,net. PJ and team has case information as well as some explanations about the law and technologies. They do a great job of making this understandable to us common folks and the media At this time they have 735 different posts about the various Apple/Samsung cases. Posts are usually made as soon as the information is available. I have been following these case from the beginning. I've been reading Groklaw.net since the site was created to follow the SCO litigation against Novel and the rest of the world (a decade ago). It is a great resource.
38. OnlyiPhone (unregistered)
Every time phone arena has a post about anything involving apple people don't like apple I honestly wonder if everybody genuinely doesn't like apple or are just hopping on the hate apple bandwagon.... Terrible smh...I understand an opinion but damn every post every single post........
39. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)
THANKS GOD!!! now get rid of those other patents for once they did something RIGHT
41. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 3696; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)
I think the touch gesture is also included in 21s list. So Apple please do not try to patent such obvious features.