SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The German high court has upheld an earlier ruling, that Apple's "Slide to Unlock" Patent (EU Patent 1964022) is a trivial extension of the state of the art embodied by the Swedish Neonode N1 released in 2003 (with Windows CE), and is therefore invalid.
From Reuters:
The Neonode N1 had substantially similar technical features, the patent court had found. It ruled Apple's easier-to-use interface was not in itself patentable. Neonode sold tens of thousands of phones before declaring bankruptcy in 2008. It reorganized itself as an intellectual property firm licensing its patented optical technology for use in phones, tablets, readers and other touchscreen devices.
Motorola Mobility, at the time a unit of Google Inc but now owned by China's Lenovo Group Ltd, filed the original suit in a Munich court against the Apple user interface patent. Apple won that case but the ruling was later overturned by the federal patent court.
Also at Heise (German).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by cmn32480 on Thursday August 27 2015, @12:40PM
It's about time that the courts took these companies to task for this kind of trivial garbage that is a pollutant in the patent system.
Hopefully it will start to happen in the US soon.
"It's a dog eat dog world, and I'm wearing Milkbone underwear" - Norm Peterson
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @12:56PM
the courts took these companies to task
Did they? It's years later. All the stifling-the-competition that the now-invalidated patent was supposed to accomplish, has been done.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:01PM
(Score: 4, Interesting) by theluggage on Thursday August 27 2015, @01:48PM
Hopefully it will start to happen in the US soon.
Don't hold your breath: In the EU, "computer programs" are explicitly excluded from patentability [wikipedia.org]. European "Software Patents" are still granted based on on doublethink that slides a cigarette paper between "computer programs as such" and a "computer-implemented invention" or "a technical solution to a technical problem". These are far less robust in court than the case law that US software patents rely on.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @03:16PM
... But there's been slide to whatevers since who knows. Physical slide to whatevers have existed, and just doing it virtually on a computer is not a patentable invention.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 27 2015, @03:26PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday August 27 2015, @03:31PM
> And, no, you never had a physical slide-to-unlock button on your dumbphone.
Sure did, but it was on the right side. I should have patented putting it on the left and/or the front
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 27 2015, @03:47PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:26PM
The gap on one side got smaller as the gap on the other side got bigger. Not the best show on earth, for sure.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:49PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday August 27 2015, @05:35PM
You sure?
The 'too bad they never made any sequels', do you remember it? [laptopmag.com])
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @08:00PM
I said slide to whatever, not a physical slide to unlock, and i wasn't talking about just phones. And yes, it is fucking trivial to make slide to whatever in software. The patentable part could be the touch part of the phone, which it has been, but using that slide motion on a touch screen to do a function is not patentable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:29PM
I've never understood what the slide to unlock patent could possibly cover.
You have a touch screen, already patented
You have an API that detects touches and causes events to fire, already patented and copyrighted (so touching the screen in one position and sliding to another would be covered by this)
You have software that reacts to calls from the API, already copyrights if not patented too. (the above trigger an event would be covered by this)
So "Slide to Unlock" boils down to existing collection of technologies and software plus a picture of a lock.
So it's a patent on a picture of a lock. How is that possibly patentable? And if it is then surely every single possible combination of API call and graphic is equally patentable. Maybe I can have a patent on a blue button on a touch screen.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:58PM
So "Slide to Unlock" boils down to existing collection of technologies and software plus a picture of a lock.
If you get some dough, some meat sauce, and some mozzarella and put it on the counter, would you call that a pizza?
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @08:07PM
The pizza would not be patentable in itself, except for maybe design patent, which would protect the looks. The process and the machines in used in making that pizza would be that patentable part.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by penguinoid on Thursday August 27 2015, @05:01PM
You know what would be really funny? If attempting to patent something were considered a statement that the thing they were attempting to patent is worthy of intellectual property rights protections. Then if the patent is rejected for prior art, instead of getting a patent they have to pay licensing fees to whoever owns the prior art (or to the general public).
RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
(Score: 1) by ese002 on Thursday August 27 2015, @09:39PM
That would give another advantage to patent trolls. Since they don't make anything they would not have to pay licensing fees if they lose.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 28 2015, @12:28AM
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday August 28 2015, @03:26AM
1. Invent and patent a time machine.
2. Take all patents into the past, long before you built the time machine.
3. Refile all the patents and license them freely.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]