
Apple’s Latest Patent Victory: In-Call Multitasking - davethenerd
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2011/12/21/apple-patent-in-call-multitasking/
======
darkane
How could this possibly be patentable? We've been able to make calls and
multitask from laptops for over 20 years. You can't claim it as inventive just
because the laptop can now fit in your hand. In the patent world, this is the
very definition of obviousness.

------
praptak
Is multitasking during video shooting covered by a separate patent? How about
multitasking while heating food, for devices that do heat food?

~~~
nudded
What does this have to do with multitasking on a touchscreen device during a
phone call?

~~~
hahainternet
He's mocking the triviality of the patent. Patents are supposed to protect an
innovative new process or technology. Putting a button on a screen to activate
a previously existing technology is just spending money to try and cripple
competitors who accidentally infringe.

~~~
dextorious
Trivial, I agree.

But I don't know what is sadder: Apple patenting this, or the fact that very
few (if any) phones did it before the iPhone...

~~~
hahainternet
Many many phones did this sort of thing before Apple. What they have patented
is to display a button for it.

------
kalleboo
Lots of phones did this before (for instance Sony Ericsson's dumbphone line
would multitask J2ME apps, even during calls).

What makes this patent valid is they took what existed before, stuck a "BUT
THIS TIME ON TOUCHSCREEN PHONES" at the end, and boom we have a new patent. I
don't understand how patents like these this count as novel and valid.

edit: thinking more about this (but without checking the original patent) this
must cover the "call in progress" bar at the top of the screen. I guess that
could be seen as a valid innovation, even though IMHO it's a bit too trivial.

------
sethbannon
Yet another example of just how desperately our patent system needs reform.

------
maxxxxx
I think this may be a good accelerator for real patent reform. Once the
economy has come to a standstill because companies are suing each other left
and right for silly patents people will see how ridiculous the system is.
Unfortunately this will probably still take a while and be very painful.

------
markokocic
Why nobody opposed this? I see comments that this "invention" is obvious, yet
nobody opposed it when Apple applied for it.

Isn't it more effective to prevent Apple from getting this patent in the first
place than to wait for it to sue somebody over this patent and then battle it
at court?

~~~
philf
You can't oppose a patent application unless you work in the patent office.

~~~
markokocic
Yes you can[1], and you should if that patent affects your business.

The whole point of public patent application is that the competitors have time
to oppose it if there's no reason for that patent to be granted.

And that's what a lot of non-tech companies are already doing.

[1]<http://www.fishiplaw.com/faqs/cat/opposing-patents/36/>

------
monochromatic
That claim is really hard to read without line breaks and indentation. [Here's
a link to the patent itself](<http://www.pat2pdf.org/patents/pat8082523.pdf>),
and the claims are on the last couple of pages.

------
peterb
It is not a victory until it has been tested in court.

------
ryandvm
Think Different

~~~
Rhymenocerus
<http://goo.gl/bTwm1>

~~~
christkv
reminds me off those old adbuster think different posters for apple with
famous dictators.

------
DiabloD3
Android did it first, so wtf prior art?

~~~
rimantas
When? iPhone had this type of multitasking since day one. It was multitasking
for third-party apps what was missing.

~~~
DiabloD3
This answers my question. I do not (and have never) owned a cell phone, so the
iphone hype and android hype gets confusing.

