Apple didn't patent IM. Apple patented touchscreen.

I patented penis, I'll see you in court corpse of Steve Jobs.

All patents exist in a quantum state, like Schrodinger's cat, until Apple decides to file for them.

Poor Subby was confused by all of the words in that article snippet and just jumped to a conclusion based on the pictures. This has nothing to do with messaging and email. This patent is about the user interface, and in particular, a scroll bar that disappears when you're not touching the screen.

In other words, something anyone would think of when developing such an app.

You mean the same messaging that has been on mobile devices since 1993 1983??

Hams have been doing portable wireless messaging through packet radio since the early 1980's.

Here's claim 1:
1. A method, comprising:
at a portable multifunction device with a touch screen display:
    displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document;
    displaying a vertical bar on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein:
        the vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
        the vertical bar is not a scroll bar;
    detecting a movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the electronic document;
    in response to detecting the movement:
        scrolling the electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is displayed,
        moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and
        maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
    in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,
    wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

A cursory look sez this is actually pretty narrow and easy to work around. It's also going to be tough to invalidate with that many elements. In other words, it's no concern for anyone except the Apple Product Duplication Corporation Samsung.

IIRC, Apple's Newton was one of the first touchscreen devices that did email and all that.

Who needs to make good tech products when you can just sue those that do?

Bob Down: Who needs to make good tech products when you can just sue those that do?

who needs to invest in R&D when you can just copy those that do?

Theaetetus: Here's claim 1:
1. A method, comprising:
at a portable multifunction device with a touch screen display:
    displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document;
    displaying a vertical bar on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein:
        the vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
        the vertical bar is not a scroll bar;
    detecting a movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the electronic document;
    in response to detecting the movement:
        scrolling the electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is displayed,
        moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and
        maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
    in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,
    wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

A cursory look sez this is actually pretty narrow and easy to work around. It's also going to be tough to invalidate with that many elements. In other words, it's no concern for anyone except the Apple Product Duplicati ...

I suspect most of the people in this thread will read this information and give it the critical thinking it deserves.

Well, while messaging was on devices prior to 1993 that is when the first phones came out that used SMS messaging.
The first commercially sold SMS service was offered to consumers, as a person-to-person text messaging service by Radiolinja (now part of Elisa) in Finland in 1993. Most early GSM mobile phone handsets did not support the ability to send SMS text messages, and Nokia was the only handset manufacturer whose total GSM phone line in 1993 supported user-sending of SMS text messages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Me ssage_Service

They retroactively invented it. Don't blame Romney. Blame Higgs Boson.

Interestingly (and a bit of evidence for this being nonobvious), people complained about the lack of scroll bars when Apple first did it:
If you want to blame someone for the disappearing scrollbar trend-and I really do-blame Apple. When you load up Lion, Apple's latest Mac OS, you'll see that most windows-from the Finder to iTunes to Web pages in Safari-show up without scrollbars. The bars only appear when you move your cursor over a window and then attempt to scroll (either with your mouse wheel or by using a touch gesture on your track pad). When you do so, you'll see that Lion has copied the scrollbar design from Apple's mobile iOS. Scrollbars on the Mac used to be fat and candy blue, but now they're skinny, gray, and-crucially-lack the arrow buttons that let you scroll with a single click. They also show up for just an instant; once you stop scrolling, the bars disappear.

The first time you encounter this, you'll think, Whoa, that's a terrible bug Apple forgot to fix! In reality, though, the company touts these "overlay scrollbars" as a key feature of the new OS.

If the people at Apple are soo smart to invent everything (that's already been invented or thought of) then why the fark can't they put a "back" button on their touch screen? I have to wait till a web page page fully loads to go back one page because I have to use the page's back button. shiatty AT&T service doesn't help either.

Or how about just a back button for Safari?

Putain, Apple!! I'm going back to Android, Galaxy here I come.

Theaetetus

Here's claim 1: 1. A method, comprising: at a portable multifunction device with a touch screen display: displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document; displaying a vertical bar on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein: the vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and the vertical bar is not a scroll bar; detecting a movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the electronic document; in response to detecting the movement: scrolling the electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is displayed, moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

A cursory look sez this is actually pretty narrow and easy to work around. It's also going to be tough to invalidate with that many elements. In other words, it's no concern for anyone except the Apple Product Duplication Corporation Samsung.

A cursory look to me says this patent should never have been granted (not meaning to imply it will be easy to invalidate mind you).

Nothing about this seems novel to me: applications have been showing scroll bars when needed (and not showing them when they aren't) for at least a decade. Simply taking that idea and applying it to touchscreens (and not calling it a scroll bar because scrolling is controlled through the normal touchscreen way) is not exactly original or innovative.

It's not quite rangeCheck, but it's not much better.

Desmo: If the people at Apple are soo smart to invent everything (that's already been invented or thought of) then why the fark can't they put a "back" button on their touch screen? I have to wait till a web page page fully loads to go back one page because I have to use the page's back button. shiatty AT&T service doesn't help either.

Or how about just a back button for Safari?

Putain, Apple!! I'm going back to Android, Galaxy here I come.

They got a patent for displaying a farking list?

So, same vertical bar that is on every windowed operating system since the inception of personal computers?

The patent system is farking broken. It's like taking a knickerbocker glory and putting a raspberry on top and patenting it because you didn't use a cherry but a raspberry. As if someone couldn't have made a knickerbocker glory, realised they had run out of cherries and then thought "oh, I've got some raspberries, I'll serve those instead".

Thankfully this doesn't happen in the restaurant trade, even when you get some crazy dudes like Ferran Adria and Heston Blumenthal who are doing things with molecular gastronomy that possibly deserve some protection. No, what happens instead is that they gain reputation. They're seen as the hip, cutting edge guys. Even though others copy them, people want to go to their restaurants anyway.

All that happens with these patents is that you get a lawsuit and then someone in the Android team just tweaks it so it slips under the patent and sticks it in the next version. The fundamentals of UI design are so old that they're out of patents, so Apple's patents require a whole bunch of ingredients. Change one ingredient and you bypass the patent. Apple are trying to fight a war to defeat Android, but it's really more like a game of whack-a-mole. Give it a couple more iterations of the iPhone and you'll be where Office suites are now - very few people are going to pay top dollar for the next version.

I completely agree that the patent system is broken, but still... Dumbmitter's trolly headline is just plain inaccurate.

Theaetetus: Here's claim 1:
1. A method, comprising:
at a portable multifunction device with a touch screen display:
    displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document;
    displaying a vertical bar on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein:
        the vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
        the vertical bar is not a scroll bar;
    detecting a movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the electronic document;
    in response to detecting the movement:
        scrolling the electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is displayed,
        moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and
        maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
    in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,
    wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

A cursory look sez this is actually pretty narrow and easy to work around. It's also going to be tough to invalidate with that many elements. In other words, it's no concern for anyone except the Apple Product Duplicati ...

Hey now, we cannot go looking at claims - all patent discussions shall be based on the first three words in the title of the patent. hence we really should be debating "Portable electronic device." Also in light of that: how dare Apple claim portable electronic devices! I have a Walkman that is 30 years old!

WayToBlue: A cursory look to me says this patent should never have been granted (not meaning to imply it will be easy to invalidate mind you).

Nothing about this seems novel to me: applications have been showing scroll bars when needed (and not showing them when they aren't) for at least a decade. Simply taking that idea and applying it to touchscreens (and not calling it a scroll bar because scrolling is controlled through the normal touchscreen way) is not exactly original or innovative.

Really? Applications have previously been not showing scroll bars only when the material wasn't more than a screen in length. That's not what this patent covers, and as noted above, people complained when Apple first started doing the disappearing scroll bar trick.

Apple. Yeah, we invented that.

USA Prime Credit Peggy: So, same vertical bar that is on every windowed operating system since the inception of personal computers?

This explicitly isn't that: "the vertical bar is not a scroll bar".

Theaetetus: USA Prime Credit Peggy: So, same vertical bar that is on every windowed operating system since the inception of personal computers?

This explicitly isn't that: "the vertical bar is not a scroll bar".

So... you take away functionality from something and patent it?

Teiritzamna: Hey now, we cannot go looking at claims - all patent discussions shall be based on the first three words in the title of the patent. hence we really should be debating "Portable electronic device." Also in light of that: how dare Apple claim portable electronic devices! I have a Walkman that is 30 years old!

It's like the Teabaggers or the Occupy folks... Any legitimate criticisms of the patent system, the federal government, or Wall St. are drowned out when they're simultaneously ranting about patent titles, death panels, and lizard people.

USA Prime Credit Peggy: Theaetetus: USA Prime Credit Peggy: So, same vertical bar that is on every windowed operating system since the inception of personal computers?

This explicitly isn't that: "the vertical bar is not a scroll bar".

So... you take away functionality from something and patent it?

No... If you claim a donut and describe it as surrounding a hole, you're neither trying to claim a hole nor are you taking functionality away from a biscuit.

Batten down the hatches!
Secure the mizzenmast!
Prepare for the hurricane of apple fanboi butthurt Mr Christenson, and look sharp about it, thar be butthurt on horizon that stretches into forever. Arrgh.

Theaetetus

WayToBlue: A cursory look to me says this patent should never have been granted (not meaning to imply it will be easy to invalidate mind you).

Nothing about this seems novel to me: applications have been showing scroll bars when needed (and not showing them when they aren't) for at least a decade. Simply taking that idea and applying it to touchscreens (and not calling it a scroll bar because scrolling is controlled through the normal touchscreen way) is not exactly original or innovative.

Really? Applications have previously been not showing scroll bars only when the material wasn't more than a screen in length. That's not what this patent covers

in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,

I would call "if (document.screen.height < window.height) displayBar = false" a predetermined condition being met, wouldn't you?

and as noted above, people complained when Apple first started doing the disappearing scroll bar trick.

Just because some (completely undefined) number of people were dumb enough to not grasp the concept doesn't make it nonobvious to a normal person.

WayToBlue: Theaetetus

WayToBlue: A cursory look to me says this patent should never have been granted (not meaning to imply it will be easy to invalidate mind you).

Nothing about this seems novel to me: applications have been showing scroll bars when needed (and not showing them when they aren't) for at least a decade. Simply taking that idea and applying it to touchscreens (and not calling it a scroll bar because scrolling is controlled through the normal touchscreen way) is not exactly original or innovative.

Really? Applications have previously been not showing scroll bars only when the material wasn't more than a screen in length. That's not what this patent covers

in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,

I would call "if (document.screen.height < window.height) displayBar = false" a predetermined condition being met, wouldn't you?

Sure, but if that's your predetermined condition, then this can't happen:
wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

Document.screen.height must be > window.height in this claim.

and as noted above, people complained when Apple first started doing the disappearing scroll bar trick.

Just because some (completely undefined) number of people were dumb enough to not grasp the concept doesn't make it nonobvious to a normal person.

I'll refrain from the obvious dig. ;)

Who needs to invest in R&D when you can just copy those that do?

Bears repeating.

ZAZ: Apple didn't patent IM. Apple patented touchscreen.

Which is funny because HP had that years ago and palm had touch screens on their devices, hell there is a video of bill gates demoing a version if touch screens years ago and it looks just like how they iphone works. I'm amazed any judge would let any of their patents stand since they are just patenting usage.

I see this is apples new game plan, fark making new devices and just stand pat then sue everyone else. Always were farktards and now they are seriously proving it.

Theaetetus

Really? Applications have previously been not showing scroll bars only when the material wasn't more than a screen in length. That's not what this patent covers

in response to a predetermined condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document,

I would call "if (document.screen.height
Sure, but if that's your predetermined condition, then this can't happen:
wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

Document.screen.height must be > window.height in this claim.

I don't mean to suggest that this exact thing has been done before, I'm saying that the concept of displaying the position indicator for some conditions but not others has been done before and the extension to touchscreen use is fairly obvious.

WayToBlue: I don't mean to suggest that this exact thing has been done before, I'm saying that the concept of displaying the position indicator for some conditions but not others has been done before and the extension to touchscreen use is fairly obvious.

Okay... but combining your example with the other references wouldn't actually accomplish the invention and would break what it's trying to do, so that example can't work. Maybe there are others you can find to show it's fairly obvious, but you have to actually find those references. Otherwise, it's just hindsight and gut feelings - which may, concededly, be correct - but you can't invalid a patent on just hindsight and feelings, and the PTO can't reject an application that way either, or they violate the due process requirement in the Constitution.

Desmo wtf u talking about? Safari has a back buttn and has since iOS1. The crack pipe....put it down...

You mean the same messaging that has been on mobile devices since 1993??

No, the patent does not cover that same messaging..

WayToBlue: I don't mean to suggest that this exact thing has been done before, I'm saying that the concept of displaying the position indicator for some conditions but not others has been done before and the extension to touchscreen use is fairly obvious.

Indeed. Anyone arguing this is some sort of innovation that's not obvious to someone in the trade is either a moron, or a piece of shat that profits off our broken patent system.

impaler: WayToBlue: I don't mean to suggest that this exact thing has been done before, I'm saying that the concept of displaying the position indicator for some conditions but not others has been done before and the extension to touchscreen use is fairly obvious.

Indeed. Anyone arguing this is some sort of innovation that's not obvious to someone in the trade is either a moron, or a piece of shat that profits off our broken patent system.

Ah, the old "if you have a rational argument, why that proves that you're biased, so therefore your argument must be false," also known as "I don't need to provide an argument, because anyone who disagrees with me is wrong, by definition."

Do you think it really convinces anyone?

impaler: WayToBlue: I don't mean to suggest that this exact thing has been done before, I'm saying that the concept of displaying the position indicator for some conditions but not others has been done before and the extension to touchscreen use is fairly obvious.

Indeed. Anyone arguing this is some sort of innovation that's not obvious to someone in the trade is either a moron, or a piece of shat that profits off our broken patent system.

If it were that easy, I am sure you can easily find 5 patents covering it... right?

the funny on this is simple


Apple doesn't hold the patent for "mobile device"

I know one of the guys who helped program Mirc

I'm going to patent filing patents and sue the shiat out of EVERYONE.

Kit Fister: IIRC, Apple's Newton was one of the first touchscreen devices that did email and all that.

Yup.

And it released in 1993.

Funny, that.

Ed Finnerty

IBM already filed for a patent on filing patents. We covered it in thread 5861241 last year. (http://www.fark.com/comments/5861241 )

dittybopper: You mean the same messaging that has been on mobile devices since 1993 1983??

Hams have been doing portable wireless messaging through packet radio since the early 1980's.

Technically you could call the Titanic a mobile device (well it was for a little while).