What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
79 Comments
- LiquidSpark, on 02/08/2009, -2/+46Scrutiny? It doesn't even pass the laugh test. There's so much prior art on multi-touch. They have a patent on paper. Not one that would hold up in court.
- AquaOSX, on 02/08/2009, -1/+25Short answer. No.
Long Answer. Noooooooooooooooo. - hardeep1singh, on 02/08/2009, -2/+25This patent is nothing more than a mockery of what goes on in the US patent office. I would love to see it getting invalidated.
- QuantumNighmare, on 02/08/2009, -2/+11Is Apple really set on becoming the new Evil Corporation? Patenting multi-touch and using it as a weapon to stop the advancement of technology makes as much sense as patenting the mouse and keyboard, forcing people to use punch cards.
Or should we fawn over apple and enjoy the creation of a new monopoly? - Vadi0, on 02/08/2009, -4/+11Yay patents (and Apple, in this case), for promoting innovation. Patent the idea first and keep it to yourself, surely this helps advance the technology in this area more than if anyone who wanted to work in this could.
In the end, what really counts is who makes the best use of the technology, not who came up with it first. - djdole, on 02/08/2009, -0/+7Here's a newsflash; Apple DIDN'T INVENT Multitouch.
Do a little research. Multitouch has been around for decades. - DelMonte, on 02/08/2009, -3/+9If you're dumb enough to think that Apple tries to patent multi-touch as a whole, have a good laugh... but that won't make it true.
Apple is trying to patent specific ways to interact with interfaces and widgets using multi-touch. Some of these may or may not have prior art. I'd like to see you guys do some actual research and read the actual patents before spewing some simplistic dumbed down answer like "Apple tries to patent multi-touch, but it existed before!! lol!!!11!". - YourMaster, on 02/08/2009, -0/+6a) They aren't similar at all. How is saying a patent is valid because the patent office issues it IN ANY WAY like saying Bush read the bills he signed into law? The only similarity I can see is that you (presumably) disagree with both.
b) I'm as certain as is reasonably possible that Bush read every one of those bills. I personally suspect his understanding was deficient compared to his opponents -- I'm no fan of Bush -- but I'll also say that just about nobody truly understands the impact of most of these bills. Otherwise there wouldn't be any arguing over them.
c) Presumption of validity is a legal matter that can hold up in court. - DelMonte, on 02/08/2009, -2/+8Oh please stop implying that Apple tries to patent "multi-touch" as a whole like it never existed before...
Apple tries to patent specific implementations and methods of doing multi-touch interfaces and widgets, which may or may not have prior art, NOT the concept of using multiple fingers on a screen which obviously existed before. - fucknuggets, on 02/08/2009, -1/+7I would love to see palm start enforcing its patents. Apple would have to completely redesign the interface for the iphone.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/28/apple-vs-palm-t ... - factsahoy, on 02/08/2009, -0/+5The USPTO is disgracefully dysfunctional, issuing patents that violate its own rules against patenting such things as algorithms (software) and THE OBVIOUS (selecting something to buy it). Once this stimulus plan is hashed out and approved, Obama's next step should be comprehensive overhaul of the patent system, which is what is killing the very innovation it was supposed to foster. It's now a corrupt tool of well funded bullies, who wait until someone's life's work finally succeeds and then step in to steal it.
Seriously, why should anyone write an app anymore, for any platform, when someone might have patented the collection of controls you dragged onto a dialog box in your IDE? Or maybe they patented highlighting an erroneous item in red. So they wait and wait and then STEAL YOUR WORK.
Furthermore, who gives a ***** about multitouch? In all these years of hype, we've seen it doing two things: zooming and rotating. And jack ***** else. The vast majority of apps don't even use those features, and working all day with your arms extended to your screen for other purposes would simply suck. This is truly the "pen computing" of the '00s (although you still hear people whining for that boondoggle's return).
Let's focus more on what's wrong with our patent system and less on faddish, nearly worthless gimmicks. - inactive, on 02/08/2009, -1/+6Wow...I don't think ANYONE was expecting a post this bad...even from a fanboy
- ladbroke, on 02/08/2009, -0/+5My guess is about as well as that sweet patent for a windows interface held up against Microsoft.
- inactive, on 02/08/2009, -10/+15In other news: Who cares?
I'm so tired of hearing about Apple. Please, make it stop. - djdole, on 02/08/2009, -0/+4"NEW" evil corporation? "New" monopoly?
Apple's been a monopoly of sorts for quite a while. When it comes to the use of it's software & hardware, Apple is probably the least friendly to it's users and the industry as a whole than any other company in the field. - allocate, on 02/08/2009, -5/+9Uhm, well, it did issue. There's that pesky presumption of validity thing.
- inactive, on 02/09/2009, -0/+3there is no real thought needed for such a ridiculous comment. Apple didn't invent a ***** thing when it comes to the iPhone, and it is not the best phone on the market. Not even close.
- djdole, on 02/08/2009, -1/+4I agree with nuggets, Pretty pathetic troll attempt.
Especially considering Apple is just now catching up to the real innovators of the PC laptop industry of 2004 who innovated with an 8+hour battery life laptop. Apple still hasn't even standardized their OS by allowing it to be installed on third-party hardware. Pretty much EVERY innovation fanbois herald and worship Apple for had been first created/implemented by another company or research group.
In fact, the only thing Apple is actually good at is absorbing and adopting/buying OTHER people's ideas tossing them into a product, jacking up the price twice it's actual worth
I don't know what's more pathetic, the fact that many of their users actually believe apple is unique, or the fact that they're willing (often EAGER) to be fleeced at every Apple product release.
Innovative. HA. - jayselle, on 02/09/2009, -1/+4Are you a patent attorney? Didn't think so. Apparently you don't know how the game is played when it comes to patents.
- djdole, on 02/08/2009, -1/+4@MatthewDukeMatthewDuke
Here's a newsflash. I DIDN'T SAY Apple patented multitouch, I said they didn't INVENT it.
For someone who claims to actually read, you sure had a hard time with my THREE SENTENCE comment.
(btw, the Buckeyes suck. :-p ) - fucknuggets, on 02/08/2009, -1/+4no apple would try to tie it up in court but if it did prevail they could be fourced to give palm a large part of the profits off the Iphone which could potentially bankrupt them. get off your god damn high horse and stop defending a company that doesn't give a ***** about you.
- uRmyHartBstopR, on 02/09/2009, -0/+3No. They should and can only patent gestures of multi-touch not the multi-touch capability.
- DelMonte, on 02/08/2009, -0/+2@QuantumNighmare:
My post was targeted at people simply saying that Apple can't patent "multi-touch" because it has been done before, even though it's not what they're patenting.
Your point about the obviousness of specific implementations was not brought by any of these people because they don't seem to be aware that the patents are about specific applications.
If you want to debate about what's obvious or not, and what should be patentable, go ahead, but that's a completely different debate. - Lawcheehung, on 02/09/2009, -0/+2man it would suck if this patent gets the thumbs up, i'd like to see more multi-touch products in the future without being just limited to Apple...
- jwolcott, on 02/10/2009, -0/+2Mmmmmm, apples are yummy!
- inactive, on 02/08/2009, -0/+2There is a chance that this is the dumbest SPAM attempt ever. Why would anyone click on that?
- magusat999, on 02/09/2009, -0/+2Speaking of patent on the click... ebay needs to be addressed on that one - and the retarded patent officer that killed the auction industry by granting them that stupid patent.
- javaroast, on 02/09/2009, -0/+2Always the name caller aren't you. I guess that's all you can rely on when someone challenges the validity of what you are saying. Here's the problem... you want to defend Apple regardless of the situation, even if you have to set aside your common sense to do so. And the topper is that you have to resort to name calling instead of coming up with a real argument. But in this case you have no argument and you know it. Apple had no case against Microsoft, because of the licensing. And Xerox had no case against Apple only because that statue of limitations ran out so the Xerox suit fell through. What it amounts to is that no one company can claim piracy of the GUI. You know... though you'll never admit it and I know it.
- magusat999, on 02/09/2009, -1/+3That doesn't mean they deserve a patent (monopoly) and certainly doesn't automatically make then "innovators". They are simply re-using touch screen technology, which has already been inventive.
- TVarmy, on 02/08/2009, -2/+4I think the patent system needs to have a lifespan set on a per-patent basis. Technology is moving way too fast for the existing system. At most, Apple should have multitouch for 3 years, not 14 or whatever. I'm thinking even 12 months is plenty.
- bri719, on 02/09/2009, -0/+2depends how much they spend to defend it... otherwise, no. my guess is they may give up after some serious legal challenges are revealed.
- MrChunks, on 02/08/2009, -7/+9You're going to love this! No really!
Just this minute, Digg released a new feature called "Customize Topics". It lets you select topics you are and aren't interested in seeing. There's an Apple checkbox that you can uncheck if you're so tired of hearing about Apple.
And yep! They released it just.. oh, wait. - magusat999, on 02/09/2009, -0/+1The wheel is a simple machine that cannot be patented. A gear is an "implementation" of a wheel - and therefore cannot be patented either. Same concept goes for Apple and it's "implementation" of a prior mechanism. Multitouch is simply a series of touches - it is not new technology and should not be awarded a patent.
- SpiderTeets, on 02/09/2009, -0/+1the apple iphone breakdown
LG prada ripoff (and a bad one, c'mon, the iphone is not a good looking device)
taking multi touch and trying to market it as their own under patent
lame. - SOS84, on 02/08/2009, -4/+5This patent is going down faster then a ten dollar whore after getting punched in the stomach by a fat guy with sores on his face.
- TVarmy, on 02/08/2009, -1/+2See, my point is that technology is a field that grows and changes quickly, and competition seems to encourage innovation just as much as the patent system. However, I do believe individuals/companies should be allowed to benefit from their ideas, but they should have the exclusive rights for a short enough amount of time that it does not significantly impair the industry.
- fucknuggets, on 02/08/2009, -0/+1a lot of the features in the Iphones interface are protected under palm patents.
- factsahoy, on 02/08/2009, -0/+1"They deserve a certain amount of control and ownership to the technology that they have created and developed. While they did not invent the graphical user interface or, the mouse they did however bring those products to the market before anyone else did."
First of all, those two sentences are totally contradictory. Second, what you're saying is: If someone invents a new wrench and I'm the first guy to sell it in my store, I should own its technology.
Wrong and wrong. - factsahoy, on 02/09/2009, -0/+1YOU'RE wrong. It's spelled "you're".
- banshee90, on 02/09/2009, -1/+2the IBM Simon was the first Smart phone and the first phone to use a touch screen so shouldnt they be suing all the other companies that copied their idea for a smart phone
- ARTLUKM, on 02/08/2009, -4/+5I think the main point to patents in cases like this is simply to slow competition. I'm sure Apple knows it won't hold for long.
The iPhone has been on the market for almost two years, and only now are competitors getting ready to offer devices with anything resembling multi-touch. That's a pretty good head start if you ask me. - DelMonte, on 02/09/2009, -0/+1@QuantumNighmare:
The problem of "obvious patents" lies with the US patent system, not with Apple.
If Apple doesn't patent even the "obvious" stuff, then someone else will get the patent and then sue Apple because they're "popular" and have 28 billions in cash reserves. - DaveAtDigital, on 02/08/2009, -1/+2The idea of putting a patent on multitouch gestures is such nonsense.It's like putting a patent on the click. I would hate to have to relearn gestures for each brand of multitouch.
- MatthewDuke, on 02/08/2009, -3/+4Hey, the only other person on digg who actually read the patent besides me. Nice to meet you!!
- starfes, on 07/27/2009, -0/+1http://www.starfes.com
http://www.starfes.com/fes
http://www.starfes.com/vb
http://www.starfes.com/dir
http://www.starfes.com/gam
http://www.starfes.com/apt
http://www.bramjfes.com/
http://www.bramjfes.com/vb
http://www.bramjfes.com/dir
http://www.bramjfes.com/gam
http://www.bramjfes.com/book
http://www.bramjfes.com/fes
http://www.alknem.net
http://www.alknem.net/vb
http://www.alknem.net/gam
http://www.fes4host.net
http://www.fes4host.com
http://www.shmran.net/ - mrmudgeon, on 02/09/2009, -0/+0Apple is an innovative company, but that does not mean that Apple is not using the patent system innappripriately to slow competition.
- factsahoy, on 02/10/2009, -0/+0It wasn't THEIR idea. Get a clue. A one-minute search of the Web would clear up your ignorance.
- pedronym, on 02/09/2009, -0/+0Excuse me? You could have chosen any other product but c'mon! I used the LG Prada for 3 days and the "touch screen" seriously sucks balls! Have you ever even used any of the two devices you're comparing?
Once again, let's stick to the issue, Apple is not trying to patent multi-touch, they're trying to patent their implementation of multi-touch, if you have a new idea on how to make multi-touch devices you're free to do what you want. The same way you can have two keyboards that work the exact same way with a very different implementation of technology. For what I understand, they're are just trying to defend they're way of building multi-touch screens, not the technology itself. If you think that that's wrong then you agree that the Patent system is a little outdated and nothing more. -
Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is