USPTO Invalidates Apple's Pinch-to-Zoom Patent

Status
Not open for further replies.

A Bad Day

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
2
For USPTO:

Invalidating an absurd patent: One step forward

Green-lighting an absurd patent: One step backward.


And it seems as if it's taking more steps backward than forward sadly...
 

davewolfgang

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
451
0
18,810
17
Are they finally realizing they are looking stupiderer-er-er-er every time they "approve" one of these that EVERYONE KNOWS has been around for years?

Or are they maybe worried about actually losing their jobs because of all the junk they are approving...??
 

A Bad Day

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
2
[citation][nom]wannabepro[/nom]I am going to patent the right to be stupid.OH WAIT. The USPTO already did...[/citation]

How are you going to patent it? IBM has or filed a patent on a process of filing a patent.
 

wannabepro

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
296
0
18,810
6
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]How are you going to patent it? IBM has or filed a patent on a process of filing a patent.[/citation]
Good point..
We could pull an Apple and sue them..
 

benji720

Honorable
May 24, 2012
227
0
10,710
26
I feel like there should be a massive cash penalty toward a company every time that company's patent gets invalidated. It could be 3% of their gross annual sales of the device in question. The money could go to school systems. It would discourage the rampant abuse we see and encourage more competition. It would definitely lead to fewer and more carefully worded patents.
 
I would venture a guess IBM files more patents per month than Apple does annually. IBM has been for years and 2011 was no different it was granted 6180 patents for the top spot of number of patents granted. Apple doesn't make the top 10 but Samsung was number 2 in 2011.
 

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,613
0
19,780
0
this just makes the USPTO look worse than if it had approved it. because of the USPTO former opinions on this patent, you could say the samsung $1 billion ruling was unjustified. the worst part is that samsung ws already denied appeal for some very odd reason. how the hell could an appeal not be approved for such a big case where the decision was made in 2 days...

USPTO really stepped in shit here
 

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
2,019
0
19,780
0
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Samsung is still out a billion...don't think Apple cares all that much..lol[/citation]

What makes you think that?
Nothing has been 'paid' as there is no final judgement to all this.
But Samsung, thanks to Apple, got a huge boost in Sales making them the #1 player in the Mobile market now; they raised their chip prices on Apple as well and Apples Market value went down some 200 Billion so far.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Ideally patents are meant to stimulate and protect creativity, and intellectual properties that is if they are clever and smart ones but so far the laws are shielding stupid and outdated patents that stifle creativity.Both Apple and Samsung are guilty of hiding behind patents to stifle creativity and competition.
 
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]IBM files more patents annually than Apple does.[/citation]
IBM spends more than 2.6x as much money on R&D as Apple does. Despite Apple having 1.5x the revenue and 2.3x the market capitalization.
http://www.booz.com/global/home/what_we_think/global-innovation-1000/top-innovators-spenders/51180614

The IBM patents are high quality, technical patents too. They're acknowledged industry leaders in many research fields, and the world's leading company when it comes to publishing in scientific journals. Field effect transistor memory, scanning tunneling microscope, ultraviolet laser surgery (used in LASIK), giant magneto-resistive read-write heads (produced an order of magnitude increase in hard disk capacity), carbon nanotube manufacture - all IBM. None of this pansy stuff like design patents or things everyone already knew how to do but put it on a cell phone patents.
http://www.scimagolab.com/blog/2012/worlds-top-100-companies-by-scientific-knowledge-production-a-scientometric-characterization-scopus-2003-2010/
 

CrArC

Distinguished
Jun 5, 2006
219
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]darkavenger123[/nom]I can't believe there's still people lining up to buy iPhone5 at midnight. Never underestimate the power of stupid people.[/citation]Seriously?? I feel better that I'm still pining for a Nexus 4, now. Not that I was waiting in line or anything, more staring at the forever-sold-out notice on the Play store -_-
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
2,344
0
19,960
50
AMENDMENT XI
Passed by Congress March 4, 1794. Ratified February 7, 1795.

Note: Article III, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 11.

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
As an example, back in October the Dutch court ruled that Samsung did not infringe on Apple's multi-touch patent despite the U.S. ruling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS