Apple Granted Slide-to-Unlock Screen Patent; Potentially Grim News for Android

[jroc]

Which is why the patent should not have been award to Apple, and rather given it to the company that invented it.

As for this conversation getting out of hand... Is it? I didn't see any cursing, over the top name calling, etc... So some people disagree, so what? It was civil, so threatening to lock the conversation or ban people because we want to create this illusion that this is only a place for positive discussions seems sorta silly. It would be a pretty lame forum if all it was were a few threads with someone saying something and a bunch of "+1" or "I agree" responses, no?

Its safe to say I agree 100% with this. Unless Apple bought the company that invented it or bought the rights to it. Like how they bought Fingerworks and all their gesture technology.

OK
This is my bottom line. Some companies have had people patenting the code their little helper monkeys knocked out for years. They had the fore site to say "Hey this is good. Someone else might try to use it so I need to protect my IP and patent it." Good for them they put the money in the R&D and SHOULD protect their creations. If your product is good enough sooner or later someone will mimic it or blatantly try to rip it off

I'm a bit older and have a seen quite a few cell phones in my days. I honestly could not think of a single phone that had a touch screen which was used extensively let alone to unlock the phone prior to iOS. It's not the fact that they're unlocking a phone with their finger. It's the fact that the UI is intuitive. My 6 year old nephew can pick up my sisters cell phone and because he can read unlock and access that phone. Almost anyone whether or not they knew how to before hand walk into a store pick up that phone and unlock it. A person that can read but has never used a cell phone before can unlock the phone. It's that simple. But it's also so simple that it can't be done while it's inside your pants pocket. That sounds pretty genius and patent worthy IMO.

There's that word intuitive again. Ok...If Im following you correctly...its more intuitive on iOS than on Neonode because it has the words 'Slide to Unlock"? Ok...unlocking the phone can and should be be done by anyone that can read, I agree. Now...can finding your way around an iPhone be easy if:

The person never used a one button system before?
Never used an iPhone before?

Cuz in my case...coming from the old Win Mo...I picked up Android alot easier and faster than the iPhone after about an hour of use. I put the iPhone down and was frustrated because I couldnt find the Settings area...lol. That wasnt a problem on Android for me coming from the old Win Mo. To me intuitive depends on the individual and their experiences. Now...after using the iPhone for a week it may well be more intuitive than Android. Like how I know how to use my keyboard shortcuts and used that instead of a mouse when I did data entry years ago at work. My co workers didnt understand. To me it was simple: I used the number pad to the right (had to enter numbers mostly for me job) so it made sense to use the keyboard to navigate around the screen.

 

[???]

since i hate the slide to unlock thing, and was really happy when my rom allowed me to bypass it by hitting the menu key instead.


so i see this as a good thing, if my next phone doesn't have me sliding my finger across the screen every damn time i want to see something on it. but since the keys are going away, who knows. either way, a simple way around this should be able to be done. and better over all anyways.

 

[MissionImprobable]

OK
This is my bottom line. Some companies have had people patenting the code their little helper monkeys knocked out for years. They had the fore site to say "Hey this is good. Someone else might try to use it so I need to protect my IP and patent it." Good for them they put the money in the R&D and SHOULD protect their creations. If your product is good enough sooner or later someone will mimic it or blatantly try to rip it off

I'm a bit older and have a seen quite a few cell phones in my days. I honestly could not think of a single phone that had a touch screen which was used extensively let alone to unlock the phone prior to iOS. It's not the fact that they're unlocking a phone with their finger. It's the fact that the UI is intuitive. My 6 year old nephew can pick up my sisters cell phone and because he can read unlock and access that phone. Almost anyone whether or not they knew how to before hand walk into a store pick up that phone and unlock it. A person that can read but has never used a cell phone before can unlock the phone. It's that simple. But it's also so simple that it can't be done while it's inside your pants pocket. That sounds pretty genius and patent worthy IMO.

Still lost as to why you keep going back to the intuitive thing; what does it matter how intuitive their slide to unlock is or is not if the system was already invented by another company? You can't patent what someone else has already developed and brought to the market in some identifiable manner. Apple under Jobs went beyond overboard in their patent attempts and this is just another example. It's fine to truly protect intellectual property, but this is not an example of a responsible attempt to do so. Next thing you know they'll try and patent voice search.

 

[sb1831]

Still lost as to why you keep going back to the intuitive thing; what does it matter how intuitive their slide to unlock is or is not if the system was already invented by another company? You can't patent what someone else has already developed and brought to the market in some identifiable manner. Apple under Jobs went beyond overboard in their patent attempts and this is just another example. It's fine to truly protect intellectual property, but this is not an example of a responsible attempt to do so. Next thing you know they'll try and patent voice search.

ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT. It's patentable, useful, novel, and non-obvious. You can patent the exact same thing as someone else so long as you make certain changes which meet certain criteria.

Personally I think this patent will get struck down, but that's me.

 

[MissionImprobable]

I thought it would be a given what I was meaning without making specific changes which Apple certainly didn't not do enough of. The only major difference in what Apple did was place a "slide to unlock" text and graphic on the screen; other than this their feature is not significantly different than what had already been introduced. Anyway, you're free to believe whatever you like.

 

[jkhonea]

I thought it would be a given what I was meaning without making specific changes which Apple certainly didn't not do enough of. The only major difference in what Apple did was place a "slide to unlock" text and graphic on the screen; other than this their feature is not significantly different than what had already been introduced. Anyway, you're free to believe whatever you like.

So it seems like you should be mad at the patent office, not Apple. The patent office doesn't just hand these out. Either the other company didn't have a patent, or the patent office ruled Apple's significantly different.

 

[jkhonea]

Not being sarcastic, legitimate question, are you familiar with the patent process and what needs to be done to achieve the patent? There has to be a full patent research and review by patent attorneys, the patent office reviews all patents similar, qualifies them and then offers the patents. It's a very in depth and costly process.

 

[Jimbop]

Not being sarcastic, legitimate question, are you familiar with the patent process and what needs to be done to achieve the patent? There has to be a full patent research and review by patent attorneys, the patent office reviews all patents similar, qualifies them and then offers the patents. It's a very in depth and costly process.

I'm not familiar with the patent process, as it is something I have never had to study, but I have a legitimate question. Does the patent process that you describe also take into account technologies similar to it already in place but without patents? This is really what the problem boils down to. If the swipe to unlock feature was not initially patented, are patent lawyers legally obligated to document similar non-patented uses of their patent application?

 

[akhi216]

There has to be a full patent research and review by patent attorneys, the patent office reviews all patents similar, qualifies them and then offers the patents. It's a very in depth and costly process.

The patent office doesn't just hand these out.

So you're saying that maybe designers of the Neonode N1m didn't patent slide-to-unlock either because they didn't have the money to do so or they considered it as generic (which IMO it is) thus feeling that it was unncessary to do so, and Apple took advantage of this and applied for the patent the first day that the Neonode N1m was released and went on to get HTC and Motorola tied up in legal disputes that involve them having this would-be ill-gotten patent pending. That would make this...

So it seems like you should be mad at the patent office, not Apple.

...somewhat invalid since no likes a corporate bully,

OR you're saying maybe the designers of the Neonode N1m did in fact patent a slide-to-unlock technique and Apple got their slide-to-unlock patent deemed not similar to the one that the designers of the Neonode N1m patented; the improbability of this happening is extremely high considering this...

There has to be a full patent research and review by patent attorneys, the patent office reviews all patents similar, qualifies them and then offers the patents. It's a very in depth and costly process.

...unless Apple managed to pull some strings with money, which would make this...

So it seems like you should be mad at the patent office, not Apple.

...again somewhat invalid since no one likes a corporate bully


Sent from my DROID3 using DroidForums

 

[MissionImprobable]

Not being sarcastic, legitimate question, are you familiar with the patent process and what needs to be done to achieve the patent? There has to be a full patent research and review by patent attorneys, the patent office reviews all patents similar, qualifies them and then offers the patents. It's a very in depth and costly process.

That issue had already been argued earlier in this thread and others. Regardless of the patent system, for Apple to try and take advantage of a situation that they knew to be questionable is still not okay. I think that we would likely all agree that though what many of the banks and real estate companies did before the financial collapse was legal, it wasn't ethical. This may in no way be to that level, but Apples lawsuits over the years have become commonplace and often unjustified.

 

[jkhonea]

If Apple's lawsuits are unethical, so are all of the other hundreds running currently between all the corporations of the world. Again, quite simply, Apple ain't the only one. This is commonplace for all corporations. It's just the "in" thing of the media to target Apple's exposure now.

As far as the patent process, for technology it is definitely broken. But again, Apple isn't the only one taking advantage of it, all corporations are. You are just seeing Apple's more than others because they are in the media eye.

 

[jkhonea]

Since ICS implemented the new Facial unlock i don't think this is a big deal for Andy.. :icon_ lala:​

I absolutely can't wait to try the facial unlock. That is cool. And the more I watch and videos are released, it seems like it is actually rather fast.​

 

[Jerrod6]

I haven't read all of the nine screens of this thread so pardon me if I am repeating something. After seeing demos of ICS all that seems to be needed is to change slide to unlock to PUSH to unlock. Google needs to keep and patent the "slide to use the Camera" and the facial recognition to unlock.

 

[MissionImprobable]

If Apple's lawsuits are unethical, so are all of the other hundreds running currently between all the corporations of the world. Again, quite simply, Apple ain't the only one. This is commonplace for all corporations. It's just the "in" thing of the media to target Apple's exposure now.

As far as the patent process, for technology it is definitely broken. But again, Apple isn't the only one taking advantage of it, all corporations are. You are just seeing Apple's more than others because they are in the media eye.

Agreed, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to be interested in every unethical business decision made. We're all interested in this because it deals with a product that we enjoy the use of. Just the nature of the beast.

 

[akhi216]

Agreed, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to be interested in every unethical business decision made. We're all interested in this because it deals with a product that we enjoy the use of. Just the nature of the beast.

This.

Sent from my DROID3 using DroidForums