Can some explain Apple and it's Patents? (patent ideas)

Tempest · 03-03-2010, 16:42

Having looked more into Apple over the past months and starting to get some views about them (and my Jobs) which I would say are rather negative (to the point of seeing them as a danger)

But leaving that to one side............

I'm trying to grasp this Patent thing with Apple and I'd like some clarification of how this works.

From what I have seen, Apple seem to be VERY keen on thinking up ideas, perhaps the UI of a computer, how touch operation may work, how a screen works, cameras in the unit, the operation of devices etc etc etc..........

All kinda random stuff. And they apply for (get?) a patent for this idea, then, mostly never use this idea.

Then (it seems) years later, someone makes a device that might infringe something Apple thought about as a vauge idea years ago, and then they might try and sue them for copyright.

Now, perhaps I'm wrong here, but can this be right?

Don't you have to at least produce something/use your idea for it to become valid in some way?

I hope I'm totally wrong as I'm seeing this action by Apple as a very negative thing from OUR public point of view. And I can't really accept that our system allows Apple to do this.

Can someone please correct me in my thoughts on this one?

gertrude · 03-03-2010, 20:29

Is America not the only country which allows you to patent an idea? Which is why this is such a hastle.
Morons, how can they possibly think that a patent system that allows this is workable and not suppressive of innovation.

G

statto · 03-03-2010, 20:33

They're now suing HTC over infringement issues with about 20 patents involved, which is a bit ridiculous considering how much more innovation has come from HTC than Apple with mobile phone development.

ian turner · 03-03-2010, 20:43

Others patent ideas without necessarily applying them.

Tempest · 03-03-2010, 20:49

From what I see (and I'm kinda making this scenario up) but it's what I've been seeing recently (upon looking into Apple)

They sit there and think, oh a touch screen, we can't make that, but we'll patent the idea.
A camera behind the screen, no idea how you would make that, but we will patent it.

A screen being able to recognise a shape, again, no idea, but we will patent it.

Multitouch, no idea, but will patent that.

Touch sensitive bezel, again, not worked that out but will patent that.

(some of the above I know they can do)

If a company such as Apple can sit down and think up things that would be nice to have as features to use on devices in the future, and are just putting in patents for ideas of things they can't make.

Just so that in "x" years time, if someone else works out how to do it, then Apple step in and either stop them, or try and sue them for millions, then Apple need a good slapping.

If this is what they are doing (and I hope they are not)

Then potentially Apple could hold back innovation and devices being made by others in the future and being a negative force to you and I as consumers.

I was not (and still am not) sure if I've understood this right, but it seems (to me) like what Apple are doing, and I don't think one company should be allowed to stifle invention and future products for the rest of the world into the future by sitting there thinking up things they can't make and patenting them as Apple ideas no-one else can do.

Tempest · 03-03-2010, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by statto

They're now suing HTC over infringement issues with about 20 patents involved, which is a bit ridiculous considering how much more innovation has come from HTC than Apple with mobile phone development.

As you said (more info here)

http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/02/the...about-android/

So if Apple say 10 years ago had an idea for a touch screen (I'm making this up) and now say, sorry, we though of it, everyone must stop selling touch screen devices.

Not that this would happen quite like this.

How can a company be allowed to do this?

I can understand "Specific Things" like an Apple Logo, an Intel Chip, etc etc.

But you should not be allowed to copywrite a general idea.

IMHO

BaggyDave · 03-03-2010, 22:52

Sounds like they are upset that with the Android being open source they can't get a cut from the profits . . .

yes sad . . .

nigel_williams · 03-03-2010, 23:06

Imagine if Sci-Fi writers like Arthur C Clarke were able to patent their ideas? Where would the modern world be then?

I totally agree that patents should not be granted for such generic ideas. It's like cybersquatting or rap artists sampling songs and calling it their own.

rwniel · 04-03-2010, 04:01

Steve Jobs is a complete hypocrite, in the official statement that was issued he says "We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it. We've decided to do something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours."

In a 1998 interview (aired in the documentary "Triumph of the Nerds?") he said "(Paraphrasing Picasso) Good artists copy, great artists steal - we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas".

The problem is more with the patents being issued in the first place though; the majority are so general you could debate them for years and still not figure out exactly what was meant. One for the lawyers I guess.

Robert

zantarous · 04-03-2010, 04:24

You have to look way way beyond Apple here you seem to be singling them out here, companies sue each other all the time over ridiculous patents.

Look at Tivo and Gemstar between them they hold most of the PVR patents and are not afraid to come down on anyone that infringes on them. And I am talking simple stuff like laying out a TV guide in a grid and the way epsiodes are series linked. The problems is that stuff like mobile phones, PVRs etc there is only so many ways to implement an idea.

Mobile phone companies are probably stepping over all sorts of patents but so far mostly restrained from suing each other knowing full well that it would be more hassle then it would be worth.

It does appear you can patent an idea look at this for ridiculousness http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/te...y-patent_x.htm

Quote:

A Sony Electronics spokeswoman told the magazine that no experiments had been conducted, and that the patent "was based on an inspiration that this may someday be the direction that technology will take us".

All the big boys do it, think of an idea now and someday down the line they can either invent it themselves or make money of someone elses invention.

Maybe I should submit a load of patents and wait to get rich.

agrocott · 04-03-2010, 08:29

all the big guns are patenting anything they can think of, Apple is more about the ui, IBM seems to be more about business processes but these guys want it mainly to be able to license out the patent so they do stuff all and recieve a nice royalty cheque every year

jroadley · 04-03-2010, 08:43

Much as I love Apple - they are turning in to the very thing that they first set out against!

akira9000 · 04-03-2010, 08:51

I have just applied for the patent of "having a good idea".
So if anyone has a "good idea" they will owe me some money. If that doesn't work I have also patented the "the process of taking somebody to court for stealing a good idea from somebody else".

Reckon that should cover me.

belgarion_v · 04-03-2010, 08:59

Why not let Steve Jobs explain it to you.

Pay particular attention at 17 seconds in, its the Apple philosophy.

Vince

Tempest · 04-03-2010, 09:08

I can fully understand getting a patent/copywrite on a specific item and how it's made.

As on a piece of equipment I use, there is a protective glass lens.

It's just a round (approx 20mm dia) piece of thick glass (6mm thick) which has a notch out of it and it was made my Rank Xerox so no-one can copy it, but they don't make them anymore.

We get them from someone else now, and to avoid copyright they put on a flat rather than a ground notch and then can supply ok.

It's only a piece of round glass but the copyright obviously was the exact physical design and I'm happy with that.

But it would be stupid for someone to apply for a patent for "A round piece of glass" and anyone else who makes a round piece of glass has to pay us royalties.

sideshowbob · 04-03-2010, 09:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by akira9000

I have just applied for the patent of "having a good idea".
So if anyone has a "good idea" they will owe me some money. If that doesn't work I have also patented the "the process of taking somebody to court for stealing a good idea from somebody else".

Reckon that should cover me.

I think it would be a bad idea to post smileys in response to posts I find funny.

My free advice to anyone looking to patent any ideas in the states, if your idea is bumhole related, you can clean up. The field of penis related patents is crowded by comparison.

agrocott · 04-03-2010, 10:19

depending where you are you can patent anything http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/1418165.stm

03-03-2010, 16:42	#1
Tempest Calm outside Storm Inside Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Horley (Gatwick) Posts: 15,728 Thanks: 8 Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts	Can some explain Apple and it's Patents? (patent ideas) Having looked more into Apple over the past months and starting to get some views about them (and my Jobs) which I would say are rather negative (to the point of seeing them as a danger) But leaving that to one side............ I'm trying to grasp this Patent thing with Apple and I'd like some clarification of how this works. From what I have seen, Apple seem to be VERY keen on thinking up ideas, perhaps the UI of a computer, how touch operation may work, how a screen works, cameras in the unit, the operation of devices etc etc etc.......... All kinda random stuff. And they apply for (get?) a patent for this idea, then, mostly never use this idea. Then (it seems) years later, someone makes a device that might infringe something Apple thought about as a vauge idea years ago, and then they might try and sue them for copyright. Now, perhaps I'm wrong here, but can this be right? Don't you have to at least produce something/use your idea for it to become valid in some way? I hope I'm totally wrong as I'm seeing this action by Apple as a very negative thing from OUR public point of view. And I can't really accept that our system allows Apple to do this. Can someone please correct me in my thoughts on this one? Last edited by Tempest; 03-03-2010 at 16:43.

03-03-2010, 20:29	#2
gertrude Forum's Pet Cow Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: I Don't Know Posts: 542 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Is America not the only country which allows you to patent an idea? Which is why this is such a hastle. Morons, how can they possibly think that a patent system that allows this is workable and not suppressive of innovation. G __________________ If it looks like it works, and it feels like it works, then it works

03-03-2010, 20:33	#3
statto Jedi Master Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 11,390 Thanks: 31 Thanked 87 Times in 30 Posts	They're now suing HTC over infringement issues with about 20 patents involved, which is a bit ridiculous considering how much more innovation has come from HTC than Apple with mobile phone development. __________________ Not posted from an iPad because, quite frankly, it just isn't compatible with my lifestyle profile.

03-03-2010, 20:43	#4
ian turner Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: the pits Posts: 8,601 Thanks: 0 Thanked 74 Times in 74 Posts	Others patent ideas without necessarily applying them. __________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hard drive died ? You've lost all the photos of your children? Didn't make a backup ? I've called the Social workers !!! :eek: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

04-03-2010, 04:01	#9
rwniel Registered User Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: London Posts: 2,871 Thanks: 22 Thanked 48 Times in 33 Posts	Steve Jobs is a complete hypocrite, in the official statement that was issued he says "We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it. We've decided to do something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours." In a 1998 interview (aired in the documentary "Triumph of the Nerds?") he said "(Paraphrasing Picasso) Good artists copy, great artists steal - we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas". The problem is more with the patents being issued in the first place though; the majority are so general you could debate them for years and still not figure out exactly what was meant. One for the lawyers I guess. Robert Last edited by rwniel; 04-03-2010 at 04:05.

03-03-2010, 20:49	#5
Tempest Calm outside Storm Inside Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Horley (Gatwick) Posts: 15,728 Thanks: 8 Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts	From what I see (and I'm kinda making this scenario up) but it's what I've been seeing recently (upon looking into Apple) They sit there and think, oh a touch screen, we can't make that, but we'll patent the idea. A camera behind the screen, no idea how you would make that, but we will patent it. A screen being able to recognise a shape, again, no idea, but we will patent it. Multitouch, no idea, but will patent that. Touch sensitive bezel, again, not worked that out but will patent that. (some of the above I know they can do) If a company such as Apple can sit down and think up things that would be nice to have as features to use on devices in the future, and are just putting in patents for ideas of things they can't make. Just so that in "x" years time, if someone else works out how to do it, then Apple step in and either stop them, or try and sue them for millions, then Apple need a good slapping. If this is what they are doing (and I hope they are not) Then potentially Apple could hold back innovation and devices being made by others in the future and being a negative force to you and I as consumers. I was not (and still am not) sure if I've understood this right, but it seems (to me) like what Apple are doing, and I don't think one company should be allowed to stifle invention and future products for the rest of the world into the future by sitting there thinking up things they can't make and patenting them as Apple ideas no-one else can do.

03-03-2010, 22:52	#7
BaggyDave Old N Tired Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire UK Posts: 1,737 Thanks: 17 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	Sounds like they are upset that with the Android being open source they can't get a cut from the profits . . . yes sad . . .

03-03-2010, 23:06	#8
nigel_williams Registered User Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: South London Posts: 3,503 Thanks: 1 Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts	Imagine if Sci-Fi writers like Arthur C Clarke were able to patent their ideas? Where would the modern world be then? I totally agree that patents should not be granted for such generic ideas. It's like cybersquatting or rap artists sampling songs and calling it their own.

04-03-2010, 08:29	#11
agrocott SWG/EQ2/WoW - Kryptoz Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The 21st plane of quazi-dimension alpha Posts: 1,979 Thanks: 0 Thanked 35 Times in 34 Posts	all the big guns are patenting anything they can think of, Apple is more about the ui, IBM seems to be more about business processes but these guys want it mainly to be able to license out the patent so they do stuff all and recieve a nice royalty cheque every year

04-03-2010, 08:43	#12
jroadley Registered User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Norwich Posts: 4,745 Thanks: 34 Thanked 81 Times in 33 Posts	Much as I love Apple - they are turning in to the very thing that they first set out against!

04-03-2010, 08:51	#13
akira9000 Team Rod Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Lincs. uk Posts: 1,520 Thanks: 6 Thanked 17 Times in 13 Posts	I have just applied for the patent of "having a good idea". So if anyone has a "good idea" they will owe me some money. If that doesn't work I have also patented the "the process of taking somebody to court for stealing a good idea from somebody else". Reckon that should cover me. __________________ Mac rich - Time poor Last edited by akira9000; 04-03-2010 at 08:52.

04-03-2010, 08:59	#14
belgarion_v Vince Donald Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Doncaster, South Yorkshire Posts: 795 Thanks: 7 Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts	Why not let Steve Jobs explain it to you. Pay particular attention at 17 seconds in, its the Apple philosophy. Vince __________________ The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.

04-03-2010, 09:08	#15
Tempest Calm outside Storm Inside Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Horley (Gatwick) Posts: 15,728 Thanks: 8 Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts	I can fully understand getting a patent/copywrite on a specific item and how it's made. As on a piece of equipment I use, there is a protective glass lens. It's just a round (approx 20mm dia) piece of thick glass (6mm thick) which has a notch out of it and it was made my Rank Xerox so no-one can copy it, but they don't make them anymore. We get them from someone else now, and to avoid copyright they put on a flat rather than a ground notch and then can supply ok. It's only a piece of round glass but the copyright obviously was the exact physical design and I'm happy with that. But it would be stupid for someone to apply for a patent for "A round piece of glass" and anyone else who makes a round piece of glass has to pay us royalties.

04-03-2010, 10:19	#17
agrocott SWG/EQ2/WoW - Kryptoz Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The 21st plane of quazi-dimension alpha Posts: 1,979 Thanks: 0 Thanked 35 Times in 34 Posts	depending where you are you can patent anything http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/1418165.stm

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Explain wireless to me in an Apple context!	ajb	Computing Forum	5	05-09-2005 13:12
Europe Says NO To Software Patents!	CarlP	Computing Forum	4	06-07-2005 20:43