Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. Goyena's Avatar
    Posts
    893 Posts
    Global Posts
    894 Global Posts
       #1  
    http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

    Since multitouch is the biggest issue at the heart of the patent pugilism, I found the above article from an informed, but interested third-party very interesting.

    He goes into the intricacies of multi-finger, multi-point, multi-hand, multi-person, staying just short of the multi-tudes present at the multi-plication of the loaves and fishes.

    Hey - did anyone else see the Stuff UK youtube video on the Pre on reasons why it's a iPhone killer? After "It takes multitouch to the next level." they proceed to demonstrate the delayed drag-up from the gesture area to display the wavy icon bar while the narrator says "...it has multitouch magic that the iPhone would die for..." (which is just silly for so many reasons)...all you obsessed Pre-watchers know that this is of course a one-finger (uh, point?) gesture.
    Last edited by Goyena; 01/30/2009 at 07:44 AM. Reason: Added link to Stuff YouTube review of Pre
  2. #2  
    Can we haz linkz to the U.K Youtube video?
    .....Life is But Such Sweet Sorrow.....
  3. #3  
    I think he's referring to this one:
    If you found my post useful then please sign up for a Dropbox Account, I could use the extra 250mb of storage.

    HOW TO: Zip/Unzip via Pre/Pixi using Terminal
    HOW TO: Modify DTMF audio (webOS 1.4.5 or earlier)
    Palm Pre wallpapers
  4. #4  
    With all that prior art, it seems even more unbelievable that the PTO issues that broad-based patent to Apple. I guess the PTO's new philosophy is grant the patent, and let the courts sort it out.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  5. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb View Post
    With all that prior art, it seems even more unbelievable that the PTO issues that broad-based patent to Apple. I guess the PTO's new philosophy is grant the patent, and let the courts sort it out.
    I find this attitude interesting. When I was a patent examiner, they told us that we should allow about 75% of our cases. Now that I am on the other side and I talk to my friends who are still patent examiners, I hear that their allowance rates are under 10%. I see many, many (hundreds) more silly rejections than I see silly allowances. Also, the recent KSR decision raised the standard of non-obviousness, which makes it more difficult to get a patent.

    What you propose, granting the patent and letting the courts sort it out, is the way it is SUPPOSED to be. If the patent examiner can't find the invention in the prior art, then she SHOULD allow the patent. That's not what is happening today. BELIEVE ME! People in the PTO are afraid to make a decision and stand behind it, so they apply a rejection, any rejection, and let the Board of Appeals and Patent Interferences sort it out, costing patent applicants thousands of dollars to get a 10-year examination, cutting their valuable patent term in half. THAT is what is hurting the economy. Patents and technology fuel the economy and the PTO under the Bush administration took that away from the American companies that develop the technology that drives us.

    I hope John Doll can fix the PTO.
  6. #6  
    Well, I don't have any inside connections at the PTO, but I don't know how any technically competent examiner could have missed the prior art relating to multi-touch. Yet they granted apple one of the broadest technology patents I've seen , based on some of the vaguest patent claims I can recall.

    And I disagree with your asessment of "how it's supposed to work." Maybe that's what the PTO became in the last couple of decades as a result of staff shortages and lack of technology expertise, but the PTO is supposed to adequately and accurately review the patent application, prior patents, and other prior art, and make a decision based on that evaluation. If the patent examination process worked correctly, relatively few patents should end up in the courst, and even fewer be overturned.

    Maybe the courts still think the PTO is doing it's job, and is granting undue deference to the opinions of examiners. Maybe that's why we have so many patents that seem, to a rational man, ridiculous.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  7. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb View Post
    Well, I don't have any inside connections at the PTO, but I don't know how any technically competent examiner could have missed the prior art relating to multi-touch. Yet they granted apple one of the broadest technology patents I've seen , based on some of the vaguest patent claims I can recall.

    And I disagree with your asessment of "how it's supposed to work." Maybe that's what the PTO became in the last couple of decades as a result of staff shortages and lack of technology expertise, but the PTO is supposed to adequately and accurately review the patent application, prior patents, and other prior art, and make a decision based on that evaluation. If the patent examination process worked correctly, relatively few patents should end up in the courst, and even fewer be overturned.
    No government organization is every going to work that well.

    Maybe the courts still think the PTO is doing it's job, and is granting undue deference to the opinions of examiners. Maybe that's why we have so many patents that seem, to a rational man, ridiculous.
    How many patents exactly? Out of the 8 million or so patents that have issued, how many really qualify as "ridiculous"?

    When I was a patent examiner, I worked in business methods. I had at least one patent that I issued written up in the New York Times. To this day, that patent holds up. I'm sure I allowed many others that people didn't like. But those people weren't in my shoes, looking at the prior art that I found, reading the arguments of record I had before me, and so forth.

Posting Permissions