Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Apples new patent (what a joke)


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
62 replies to this topic

#21 zedz   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Posted 30 October 2011 - 04:35 PM

If slide-to-unlock wasn't the result of innovative genius, then why wasn't it around years ago? Because the problems it solves weren't. Problem: You are carrying a touch-screen device in your pocket, and need to be able to activate it easily.

have you seen a psp? & no doubt many other prior devices that fit in pockets
its a game device that you carry around in your pocket
how do you tun it on/lock it
you slide a little switch :blink:


edit - it seems the iphone wasnt even the first touchscreen phone to have slide to lock, this was (a year before the release of the iphone, perhaps they can sue apple :lol: for nicking slide to lock)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonode#N1m

Sponsor:

#22 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 901

Posted 31 October 2011 - 06:41 AM

Disgusting behaviour. And the problem with Apple is they aren't simply happy to settle, but it often ends up that other companies aren't able to license it at all. So you get to situations like no one being able to make magnetic power connectors, or that I can't buy a Samsung Galaxy tablet.

Personally I wish that someone would do the same back to them - Nokia sit on a tonne of patents (and actual patents, not rubbish like this, that's fundamental to phone and smartphone technology). Apple would be dead in mobile technology if Nokia pulled the rug from under them, and refused to licence.

A virtual implementation of an existing physical invention is not patent worthy.

And you don't even have to look at physical locks - my Nokia 5800 smartphone unlocks with a physical swipe on the side.

If this is the level for patents now, maybe people just need to start writing apps that cover swipes for all kinds of basic features.

Apple really isn't unique in this, Microsoft files for several thousand patents per year (Which should imply that they make tens or even hundreds of real inventions per day), IBM and other big companies are doing the same, the US patent system pretty much forces companies into this behaviour. (Some are more likely to use their patents aggressivly than others though)

Apple weren't the first to do dumb patents, but they popularised it, or were the first to do it really dumb...? ;)

Really though - for all the claims that Apple revolutionise any market they enter, and the claims that technology wouldn't progress without them, it's clear their behaviour is on the contrary going to end up stifling progress in phones and tablets.

Im suprised graphics techniques have not been patented yet. I mean after this, then what other hope do we have. The progress of man kind is going to hell.

They have - Carmack's Reverse was patented by Creative, see http://en.wikipedia....lume#Depth_fail .
http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#23 Antheus   Members   -  Reputation: 2397

Posted 31 October 2011 - 08:11 AM

but they popularised it

Apple is the last to join this game.

Microsoft earns more from Android licensing than it does from Windows Phone product line. They are licensing GNU/Linux kernel. You know: "it's a nice little device you got there.. would be a shame if a linked list patent landed on it and broke its knees... "

Personally I wish that someone would do the same back to them


Apple has $81 billion in cash, besides everything else. That's GDP of Iraq.

#24 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 901

Posted 31 October 2011 - 08:16 AM

but they popularised it

Apple is the last to join this game.

Microsoft earns more from Android licensing than it does from Windows Phone product line. They are licensing GNU/Linux kernel. You know: "it's a nice little device you got there.. would be a shame if a linked list patent landed on it and broke its knees... "

Maybe, I was just parodying the typical Apple fan "Apple were first" line ;) (And "But Officer, Microsoft do it too" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement, given how MS are viewed - on the contrary, I'd say it proves the point that Apple are just as bad.)

Also note, "licensing". Whilst many patents are flawed in principle (and should rightly be criticised), I note that Apple take this to a whole new level by preventing products from being available. Imagine if Microsoft suddenly got Android pulled?

Personally I wish that someone would do the same back to them


Apple has $81 billion in cash, besides everything else. That's BDP of Iraq.

Indeed lots of multinationals have lots of money (though the recent comparison to the US Government was a rather flawed press release masquerading as news) - I'm not sure how you mean here? Yes, Apple are a greedy bloated company - tactics like this help them get that way. All the more reason why I wish other companies would do it back to them, rather than playing nice with them.
http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#25 Antheus   Members   -  Reputation: 2397

Posted 31 October 2011 - 10:46 AM

All the more reason why I wish other companies would do it back to them, rather than playing nice with them.


Here.

Apple could afford to go toe to toe with any of them and all it would need to do is drag the court battles out long enough until the rest spend all the money - while Apple would still have plenty of cash reserves left.

Only government regulation can solve these issues. A very unpopular solution.

#26 BeanDog   Members   -  Reputation: 1063

Posted 31 October 2011 - 05:54 PM

Im suprised graphics techniques have not been patented yet.

You mean like marching cubes?

~BenDilts( void );

Lucidchart: Online Flow Chart Software; Lucidpress: Digital Publishing Software


#27 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 01 November 2011 - 06:46 AM

Here.

Apple could afford to go toe to toe with any of them and all it would need to do is drag the court battles out long enough until the rest spend all the money - while Apple would still have plenty of cash reserves left.

Only government regulation can solve these issues. A very unpopular solution.


This reminds me of "Flash of Genius"; I agree with the general sentiment. It's even worse when it's just an individual, not a corporation that can at least present some sort of fiscal harm to another corporation. Individuals can pretty much be tied up in court until they die.

#28 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 901

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:41 AM

All the more reason why I wish other companies would do it back to them, rather than playing nice with them.

Here. Apple could afford to go toe to toe with any of them and all it would need to do is drag the court battles out long enough until the rest spend all the money - while Apple would still have plenty of cash reserves left. Only government regulation can solve these issues. A very unpopular solution.

Oh, I do agree it's a very unpopular situation, and they are behaving like the new Microsoft - bullying, and would rather rely on their large cash reserves to bully or buy out the competition would be just like what people used to dislike MS for. But having enough money to buy out the competition doesn't mean they can, if Nokia do not approve. Google already bought out Motorola's phone division - maybe Microsoft will snap up Nokia if anything, what with the WP relationship they now have with them. Also, Nokia do engage in patent battles with Apple - the issue isn't that Apple ignore them, they do after all pay Nokia loyalties. Having more cash doesn't necessarily mean you win even when you're in clear violation. Don't get me wrong, I can see it being better for Nokia etc to just take the money from Apple, but that doesn't stop me wishing that they'd pull the plug on Apple's use of their patents :) (And as an added bonus, it'd wipe the smugness from IPhone worshippers who think Apple invented everything.)
http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#29 phantom   Moderators   -  Reputation: 7556

Posted 05 November 2011 - 10:12 AM

heh, I do love Apple.

"wah! everyone steals our ideas!"
... releases iOS5....
"Look at our new shine notification system you can get to with a down swipe! Isn't it new and cool!"
Every Android phone user; "wait... wut? you mean the thing we've had for ages?"

*face desk*

#30 sevenfold1   Members   -  Reputation: 133

Posted 07 November 2011 - 09:11 PM

<br /><a href='http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Slide-to-Unlock-Apple-Patent-Android-unlock-Patent-infringement,news-12998.html' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.tomsguide...news-12998.html</a><br /><br />Im suprised graphics techniques have not been patented yet. I mean after this, then what other hope do we have. The progress of man kind is going to hell.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Wow, just one more reason why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer in this country.
I'm sure one can blame a bloated patent system with killing the economy at some point.
The rich and powerful have nothing better to do except stifle and hinder advancements in technology

Someone file a patent, and lets it sit and collect dust in some file cabinet for 20 years. They have no intention of
improving their so-called invention. It's just leverage to make the strong stronger, and the weak weaker.

Whatever happened to the day when people filed patents, they did it so they could have the time needed to market a real invention?

#31 Binomine   Members   -  Reputation: 538

Posted 09 November 2011 - 04:27 AM

The slide to unlock thing is close to where I think software patents should be.

The magic of software is that many things are very difficult to create, but very easy to clone. Software patents should be there to prevent people from cloning things that are non-obvious solutions that are novel and unique, in order to support companies that create non-obvious and unique ideas.

Of course, the patent office allows gibberish software patents that no one can decipher which pretty much cover anything and everything, which is why the patent system is so broken. It's going to be an interesting time in a few years when these gibberish patents are allowed to expire, and companies will have an expired patent war chest that has been legally recognized and defended.

#32 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 901

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:30 AM

heh, I do love Apple.

"wah! everyone steals our ideas!"
... releases iOS5....
"Look at our new shine notification system you can get to with a down swipe! Isn't it new and cool!"
Every Android phone user; "wait... wut? you mean the thing we've had for ages?"

*face desk*

Indeed... I suppose we should be glad they've progressed to catching up with the likes of Android and Nokia smartphones. I remember the early years on the IPhones, when the amazing new features were things even my dirt cheap 2005-era bog standard feature phone had. Yet I still remember walking around in London and seeing "IPhone gets 3G" making the headlines on the billboards(!), years after every other phone had it.
http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#33 zedz   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Posted 10 November 2011 - 03:29 PM

The slide to unlock thing is close to where I think software patents should be.

The magic of software is that many things are very difficult to create, but very easy to clone. Software patents should be there to prevent people from cloning things that are non-obvious solutions that are novel and unique, in order to support companies that create non-obvious and unique ideas.

aye? so you think slide to unlock is a valid patent! :blink:

looks like apple is applying for another similar obvious patent
link
Its not really apples to blame, it the patent office thats broken

heres a gesture someone should patent, finger druming (like a person does on a desk) you could have it two way left -> right & right to left

#34 Binomine   Members   -  Reputation: 538

Posted 12 November 2011 - 06:01 AM

The slide to unlock thing is close to where I think software patents should be.

The magic of software is that many things are very difficult to create, but very easy to clone. Software patents should be there to prevent people from cloning things that are non-obvious solutions that are novel and unique, in order to support companies that create non-obvious and unique ideas.

aye? so you think slide to unlock is a valid patent! :blink:

Pretty much every phone before the iPhone used a recessed button for unlock or sequential button presses. Now, I do believe this patent is a little too obvious and keeping people to use a slide to unlock for 14 years is ridiculous, but I do believe it was somewhat novel at the time.

It's like how Doom made it so obvious to make a bunch of Doom-clones and WoW made it so obvious to make a bunch of Wow clones. It wasn't obvious until someone did it. That is the nature of software. Hard to create, easy to duplicate.

#35 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 12 November 2011 - 09:17 AM

It's like how Doom made it so obvious to make a bunch of Doom-clones and WoW made it so obvious to make a bunch of Wow clones. It wasn't obvious until someone did it. That is the nature of software. Hard to create, easy to duplicate.


Neither Doom nor WoW was the first of it's kind. They were just, at least arguably, the best of their kind.

#36 zedz   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Posted 12 November 2011 - 12:09 PM

Pretty much every phone before the iPhone used a recessed button for unlock or sequential button presses. Now, I do believe this patent is a little too obvious and keeping people to use a slide to unlock for 14 years is ridiculous, but I do believe it was somewhat novel at the time.

but it wasnt mate
here is another tocuhscreen phone out a couple of years before the iphone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonode#N1m

it used slide to unlock the touchscreen phone as well

#37 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 901

Posted 14 November 2011 - 06:18 PM

Pretty much every phone before the iPhone used a recessed button for unlock or sequential button presses. Now, I do believe this patent is a little too obvious and keeping people to use a slide to unlock for 14 years is ridiculous, but I do believe it was somewhat novel at the time.

Why do you think it was novel?

As pointed out, it wasn't first anyway. But even if it was - the point is that for _any_ given feature, there will always be a first product it appears in. This therefore doesn't imply being first is novel, unless you're claiming that everything ever is "novel". And if everything ever got patented by whoever happened to make it first, the industry would grind to a halt.

But this isn't anything first - it's something already done (sliding to unlock), but now on a touchscreen. Should anyone who is first to do something on a touchscreen get a patent? What about a click? Or double click? Is this magically novel because it's a touchscreen?

It's like how Doom made it so obvious to make a bunch of Doom-clones and WoW made it so obvious to make a bunch of Wow clones.

There is nothing "obvious" here.

Maybe you're like the "idea guys" people who frequent the Help Wanted forums, who think the hardest thing about writing an MMO is simply coming up with the idea. But as the rest of us know, ideas are the easy part.

Now, in Doom there were specific technology problems that needed to be solved, and perhaps the same applies to WOW. Yes, if all you want to do is do something done before, it's easier if someone's figured out these problems and published the results. But this applies to all kinds of new games that come out, all the time. It's natural in technology for products to get better. A patent means that that stops - because suddenly no one else can use it. The problem is that even new technology still needs to build on the existing ideas and technology. Imagine if Doom or WOW couldn't have been written, because of all the previously existing game elements they used were also patented?

Not that the technology problems in Doom and WOW are anything like the joke of "innovation" that is under discussion here regarding Apple.

Doom 3 itself is an example against software patents - it turned out that the shadowing algorithm had already been patented by someone else, even though Carmack had independently derived the algorithm. ID managed to license it - had Apple have owned the patent, we wouldn't have Doom 3 (or at least, it wouldn't have had shadows).

Carmack is a vocal opponent of software patents, so it's a bit rich to use Doom as an example in favour of them!

It wasn't obvious until someone did it. That is the nature of software. Hard to create, easy to duplicate.

Duplication is covered by copyright law. Software patents mean it's illegal, even if you create it yourself, just because someone else patented it first.




http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#38 dpadam450   Members   -  Reputation: 944

Posted 14 November 2011 - 07:12 PM

There is the problem as well of techniques, can I patent cascaded shadow mapping? Deferred rendering? If not why? I came up with, well the end user doesn't know what you used, so you won't get more sales for something you cant see. But then I realized mp3 needs licensing and users don't know if you use Ogg, Mp3, or other. So how can any software ideas be patented? It's very confusing. So theoretically I think deferred rendering could be patented. So if it did, we SHOULD blame whoever patents it. To say don't blame Apple blame the system is dumb. They are using the system and doing something so disrespectful. So I blame Apple 100%. Laws ARE confusing. Should Apple apply for this patent? No. That's not confusing. Apple sucks. Pure greed in this case.

#39 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 15 November 2011 - 07:25 AM

There is the problem as well of techniques, can I patent cascaded shadow mapping? Deferred rendering? If not why? I came up with, well the end user doesn't know what you used, so you won't get more sales for something you cant see. But then I realized mp3 needs licensing and users don't know if you use Ogg, Mp3, or other. So how can any software ideas be patented? It's very confusing. So theoretically I think deferred rendering could be patented. So if it did, we SHOULD blame whoever patents it. To say don't blame Apple blame the system is dumb. They are using the system and doing something so disrespectful. So I blame Apple 100%. Laws ARE confusing. Should Apple apply for this patent? No. That's not confusing. Apple sucks. Pure greed in this case.


I disagree that we should blame people for taking full advantage of the system rather than the system. If the system worked Apple would never get this patent in the first place. I don't know where this expectation that corporations shouldn't do their best to increase their profits and protect those profits came from. You can only count on a corporation to do that; it's their nature. If the system is set up in such a way that corporations can take advantage of it to hurt the economy just by doing what is in their nature, it is a problem with the system.

#40 Alpha_ProgDes   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4692

Posted 15 November 2011 - 10:31 AM


There is the problem as well of techniques, can I patent cascaded shadow mapping? Deferred rendering? If not why? I came up with, well the end user doesn't know what you used, so you won't get more sales for something you cant see. But then I realized mp3 needs licensing and users don't know if you use Ogg, Mp3, or other. So how can any software ideas be patented? It's very confusing. So theoretically I think deferred rendering could be patented. So if it did, we SHOULD blame whoever patents it. To say don't blame Apple blame the system is dumb. They are using the system and doing something so disrespectful. So I blame Apple 100%. Laws ARE confusing. Should Apple apply for this patent? No. That's not confusing. Apple sucks. Pure greed in this case.


I disagree that we should blame people for taking full advantage of the system rather than the system. If the system worked Apple would never get this patent in the first place. I don't know where this expectation that corporations shouldn't do their best to increase their profits and protect those profits came from. You can only count on a corporation to do that; it's their nature. If the system is set up in such a way that corporations can take advantage of it to hurt the economy just by doing what is in their nature, it is a problem with the system.

In all honesty, if anything was done to prevent Apple from filing such silly patents, then the "oh noes deh regulataz iz hurr" platoon will deploy en masse saying that regulation is stifling business and is uncapitalistic, anti-free market.
Beginner in Game Development? Read here.
 
Super Mario Bros clone tutorial written in XNA 4.0 [MonoGame, ANX, and MonoXNA] by Scott Haley
 
If you have found any of the posts helpful, please show your appreciation by clicking the up arrow on those posts Posted Image
 
Spoiler




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS