
Apple granted broad mobile patent - ianox
http://www.macworld.co.uk/apple-business/news/?newsid=3370881
======
Sidnicious
> _We can’t take all of our energy and all of our care and finish the
> painting, then have someone else put their name on it._

What a load of shit. What happened to “great artists steal”? Great art must be
stolen to inspire new, greater art.

The iPhone is awesome. May a thousand devices like it bloom.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
_“What happened to “great artists steal”?”_

That's because the inverse isn't valid. Not every thief is a great artist.
Steve Jobs and Tim Cook apparently didn't consider Android to be great art.

The original quote, to put in context what Jobs was referring to:

“One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the
way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad
poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or
at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of
feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn;
the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will
usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse
in interest.” —Philip Massinger

[http://nancyprager.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/good-poets-
borro...](http://nancyprager.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/good-poets-borrow-great-
poets-steal/)

NB: Jobs mistakenly attributed it to Picasso, who never said such a thing.
Jobs probably read Richardson’s biography of Picasso, in which the text is
misquoted and attributed to T.S. Eliot.

~~~
inept
"NB: Jobs mistakenly attributed it to Picasso, who never said such a thing.
Jobs probably read Richardson’s biography of Picasso, in which the text is
misquoted and attributed to T.S. Eliot."

The quote you have above is in fact T. S. Eliot's words, in reference to
Massinger, from his selection "The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and
Criticism", 1921.

If you re-read the citation, you will see her intention that _neither_ T. S.
Eliot nor Picasso specifically said "Good artists borrow, great artists steal"
but a "bastardization" of Eliot's original writing.

Eliot's intention, "A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in
time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest." would discredit every
technology company or figure that has been defended by the cliche.

<http://www.bartleby.com/200/sw11.html>

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Excellent find, thanks for sharing. It's nice to read the paragraph in its
context. From the blog post, I understood that T.S. Eliot quoted Massinger,
and that it wasn't his own opinion. Now I see they were Eliot's own words.

 _"Eliot's intention, "A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in
time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest." would discredit every
technology company or figure that has been defended by the cliche."_

I don't believe so. For example: Jony Ive's designs for Apple have been said
to be copies of Dieter Rams' vintage designs for Braun. Ive himself has openly
acknowledged that he is inspired by Rams, and that he tries to follow Rams' 10
design principles [1]. I believe that, by Eliot's standards, makes him a 'good
poet', given that Ive took from a designer remote in time (50 years a go),
from a different product category (computers instead of home appliances), and
using different materials (aluminum and glass instead of wood and steel).

[1] <https://www.vitsoe.com/gb/about/good-design>

------
bcrescimanno
I'm not entirely sure why this is surprising news to anybody; in the original
iPhone announcement, I believe Steve Jobs said, "...and boy have we patented
it."

Let's be frank: Apple is not the only major technology company with a massive
collection of questionable patents that they _could_ use to stifle their
competition. The system, as it is today, basically forces companies into these
patents because if they don't patent it someone else will. To put it
colloquially: "Don't hate the player, hate the game."

~~~
samdk

        "Don't hate the player, hate the game"
    

If you find your arguments relying on catchy phrases like this, you should
reexamine them, because they're probably lacking.

I especially dislike this one in particular because it's used as an excuse to
avoid having to justify harmful actions. "Everyone else was doing it too" is
not a valid excuse for doing something wrong, especially when you are--as
Apple is--a large enough "player" that your actions help shape how the "game"
is played.

In any case, your presentation of Apple's actions is a lot more benign than
reality. It's one thing to acquire questionable technology patents to help you
defend yourself against litigation. That's unfortunate, but doesn't really
actively harm anyone. It's also not what Apple is doing: Apple is using its
patent portfolio offensively to try to shut out competing products.

~~~
bcrescimanno
Attempting to inject a little humor does not invalidate an argument. I'm not
really attempting to defend Apple; I'm simply saying, "this is the state of
affairs and Apple is not the only offender."

We can dislike that excuse all we want; but, why are we faulting for-profit
companies for working within the legalities of the system to do what they're
supposed to: grow their business and maximize their profits? It's a flawed
system, to be sure; but, it's the system we have at the moment.

~~~
samdk
It's obvious Apple isn't the only offender, but they are a big and, lately,
very active one.

I fault them for their actions because I think what they're doing negatively
affects a large number of people. It being legal and them being able to make
money because of what they're doing doesn't make it okay.

To be clear: I will say the same thing about any company using using frivolous
patents to suppress competition. It _is_ a flawed system, and the people in
the best position to oppose the system are the people in charge of large tech
companies. Apple is _not_ doing the best thing possible within a flawed
system, and they are _not_ trying to change the state of affairs. They are
using their patent portfolio aggressively to try to suppress competition, and
I think that's a problem.

------
nicholassmith
If Apple decides to use them it'll take _years_ for it to litigate, and
they'll probably be proved invalid in the process.

Don't fear poor Android phones, you're safe for now.

~~~
fusiongyro
You know, I actually think it would be better if the patent was upheld.
Imagine the fiasco it would create. It would put the spotlight on the
absurdity and abuses of the patent system when applied to technology. Might
even get non-technical folks interested.

Ultimately I think the solution is going to be one of the ones Judge Posner
outlined in his editorial, but it might take a big shakeup like this to turn
patents into the issue-of-the-moment for the populace and get something done
(you know, in the usual rushed, nobody-read-this-legislation way).

~~~
reitzensteinm
Especially if the patent were found to be invalid elsewhere, and Android gets
banned only in the US. _That_ would cause people outside our industry to stop
and think.

Unfortunately I'm pretty sure Apple wouldn't get that far - they could demand
a $20 or $30 royalty instead, so consumers won't be directly confronted with
the insanity; Android phones would just start being closer in price to
iPhones.

~~~
fpgeek
Well, the Galaxy Nexus was (temporarily) banned only in the US. That ban got
people to stop and think, but few of those people noticed that the ban didn't
mean anything for the rest of the world.

------
VanL
The hyperventilating in this article is ridiculous. First, patents always
issue on a Thursday - and any large company usually has a number in the pipe.
There is nothing unusual about a company the size of Apple getting 25 patents
issued in one release.

Now, I haven't read all of the 25 patents issued to Apple, but this article
makes the classic mistake of confounding the specification (which describes
lots of stuff) and the claims (which describe what is protected). Here is what
this patent is _actually_ about:

1\. A method, comprising: at a portable multifunction device with a touch
screen display: displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch
screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a
vertical position in the electronic document; displaying a vertical bar on top
of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar
displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the
electronic document, wherein: the vertical bar has a vertical position on top
of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the
vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the
electronic document; and the vertical bar is not a scroll bar; detecting a
movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the
electronic document; in response to detecting the movement: scrolling the
electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of
movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is
displayed, moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the
new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic
document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and
maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed
portion of the electronic document; and in response to a predetermined
condition being met, ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to
display the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein the
displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is
less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.

Translated from patent-speak, this just means that the little position
indicator along the side of the display indicates where you are in a document.
Further claims indicate that the position indicator disappears when you don't
do anything for a minute. Anyone who has seen iOS (or Mac OS X Lion) has seen
it.

If I were Google, though, I wouldn't care about this patent. Why not? Because
of the words "and the vertical bar is not a scroll bar." These words were
added to get around prior art. All Google would need to do is allow its
position indicator to _also function as a scroll bar_ and this patent doesn't
apply.

I am annoyed by patents as much as the next guy - more, even, because I deal
with them every day - but this kind of breathlessness helps absolutely no one.

~~~
diminish
Today a lot of mainstream media published articles along the same line on how
Apple's new patents will kill competition; which makes me think, they do it to
push the aapl share price higher in the lack of any major apple product
announcements in the current quarter.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
_“the lack of any major apple product announcements in the current quarter.”_

Apple fourth fiscal quarter of 2012 started in the last week of June and will
conclude in the last week of September.

WWDC usually falls in FQ3, one month a go Apple released new notebooks during
the event. That was good timing, it means Apple will be able to keep up with
demand when the Back to School crowd starts shopping.

Mountain Lion will be released within the next two weeks, which will also
boost Mac sales.

The next hardware announcement will be no earlier than September (new iPhone),
but that will probably still be in FQ4.

------
watmough
Apple fanboi that I am, freely admitted, my Nexus 7 is wonderful, and I think
the granting of this entire patent is insane.

------
smackfu
I don't really trust anyone to properly interpret patents.

~~~
moron
No kidding.

------
mattmaroon
Anyone who thinks this is a death-knell for Android (especially any time soon)
doesn't understand how patent law works in practice.

------
StavrosK
Don't be silly, that would mean that something would change in the patent
system.

------
jack-r-abbit
Android won't be killed off. There will always be an Android.

"If you outlaw Android, only outlaws will have Android." - Anon.

------
freehunter
>"Steve Jobs, former Apple CEO, may finally get his wish and see Android
devices ... completely taken off the market."

Was the author not reading the news last October?

~~~
salmanapk
What are you referring to?

~~~
personlurking
that SJ passed away and the author is using the wrong grammatical tense.

~~~
RobAtticus
Perhaps I'm being dense, but what is the proper tense?

Nothing in that sentence reads to me like the author thinks that Steve is
alive (okay, 'see' maybe).

~~~
freehunter
Personally I wouldn't have used that sentence at all. If I needed something
along those lines, I would have written "Steve Jobs' longtime wish may finally
come true ... to see Android devices taken off the market."

Just the wording "get" and "see" imply that he could still receive these
benefits.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
I guess that would depend on your interpretation of the afterlife. There are
plenty of people in the world who believe that he is still here, just on a
different plane of existence...

~~~
freehunter
I don't want to get into a spiritual discussion, but I would seriously hope an
afterlife would have more interesting things to do that watch your previous
world continue on without you.

------
Rhymenocerus
Hoorah for us all, even less viable products for us to choose from! I don't
understand why people look up to Jobs, but still hate Bill Gates for his
business practices during the 90's.

"Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have
always been shameless about stealing great ideas." - Steve Jobs﻿

------
seclorum
Well, that seals it. My next Tablet will be based on 100% open sources. I will
now proceed to build an Ubuntu-based tablet to replace the iPad form-factor..
_boots up laser cutter and 3d printer_ .. </dream>

------
richworks
"It could kill off Android completely in the US and not anywhere else."

Granted, the US is a major market for Android but these patent disputes will
get laughed at in the UK courts and others as we have seen so far.

------
wwwtyro
So, my question is: given all the controversy in the (tech) media over patents
lately, how is the patent office able to rationalize granting (what appears to
me to be) a very bad patent?

~~~
noonespecial
There is no rational thinking at all going on at the patent office. They
reject your initial application a few times to make sure you're good and rich
and then grant it figuring the courts will work it out.

------
majorapps
I honestly believe that this is the beginning of the end for the patent
system. If this was granted and enforced we would see something along the
lines of the advertising mantra: "good advertising the the fastest way to kill
a bad product"

------
arrowgunz
Competition is what drives companies to create better products. Without that
there would be very little progress in innovation. I am an Apple fanboy and
still hope nothing happens to Android.

~~~
greyfade
Trouble is, broad patents effectively outlaw competition.

------
evilmushroom
Hmm.. brb patenting the process of applying for a patent.

~~~
mindcrime
I think IBM actually have a patent on "patent trolling."[1]

[1]: [http://slashdot.org/story/11/01/02/1534223/ibm-files-the-
pat...](http://slashdot.org/story/11/01/02/1534223/ibm-files-the-patent-troll-
patent)

~~~
evilmushroom
doh! foiled again.

------
spc476
It sounds like a reprise of the Apple vs. Microsoft "Look-and-feel" lawsuits
of the mid 80s, only with patents, not copyright.

------
huggyface
Ridiculous headline (the submission simply mirroring the original article)
that is the sort of hysterical end-of-times interpretation of patents that has
yielded so many nonsensical, time-wasting discussions before.

~~~
lmm
It's entirely possible the submission was originally made with a better
headline, and then mod-edited to match the article.

