Apple Patent Application Uses 3rd Party App Screen as Example | Hacker News Reader

Apple Patent Application Uses 3rd Party App Screen as Example

venomousporridge.com

117 pointsjmtame31 comments

Accurate headline: "Someone clueless about patents glances at a patent application, sees an image that matches an existing app, and assumes that is what is being patented".

The exiting app he's talking about in fact does not appear to do what the patent describes, which would have been apparent had he tried to actually read the patent application.

Oh yeah, totally, but does that make it OK for Apple to rip off an image?

Indeed. At very least there is a copyright issue to think through here. And if Apple does have the right to use the image for this purpose through some clause in their developer agreement then that makes it even more scary rather than less - think of all the content in every app that Apple would suddenly have been granted rights to use for secondary purposes.

"But even if you’re fine with that, how about this: one of the diagrams in Apple’s patent application for a travel app is a direct copy, down to the text and the positions of the icons, of an existing third-party app that’s been available on the App Store for years."

he wrote that 'one of the diagrams' was a direct copy. not the entire application. i don't think it's easy to dismiss apple taking the home screen and including it in their patent file. apple may have different functionality beyond the home screen, but they have nonetheless downright copied the home screen.

edit: updated the title, amended 'screen' to the end to clarify

They're not patenting the screen, which is what your amended title now says.

Try: "Apple Uses Copy of Existing 3rd Party App Screen in Patent Application"

Serious question- Does anyone actually read these things? Patent applications are enormously unreadable, and in virtually any internet discussion it comes down to "They patented something trivial!" "No, the details are what matter" .... QUIET....

So what did they patent?

yet another patent for a another software application implementing a business process(es)

abstract ideas should not be patentable.

When it comes to software, the patent office's answer to that is essentially "no". Pass it through, let the courts decide what to do with it, because they have no official measure to determine if it should be allowed or not.

Idiotic, but pragmatic, but surely they can use some common sense...

Since this was also reported a few days ago, is there an update to the situation?

Have the original app developers made any comments? Anything?

Seems like they just did. Thanks Ravir for posting the link.

To summarize, they have no deal with Apple and they're surprised about the patent. They're looking for good affordable patent lawyer and/or looking for Apple Legal to contact/discuss this issue with them.

Note that the patent doesn't necessarily cover the functions of the 3rd-party app. It's only the diagram that I'm sure is a copy.

I'm the guy whose blog is linked here. I've posted a followup: http://venomousporridge.com/post/909651311/whereto-patent-fo...

It clearly reads on the USPTO site: "United States Patent Application". This is an application for a patent, NOT a patent! Just because someone files an application does not mean they are going to get a patent (even if they usually do).

Yes, but even trying is both dishonest and a waste of the patent office's time. The patent office can still make things right, but Apple just did (some) Evil™ here.

The post title still needs to be changed.

That probably wouldn't have been enough. I paid more attention to the article than to the title itself. I would have been fooled anyway.

No they didn't. This is the same thing that happens any time anyone gets riled up about a patent. Someone glanced at the title or an image (in this case) in a patent application and assumes that is what the patent is for. In this case it is not, which is clear if you read the actual claims of the patent. The image is one of many existing third-party app screens used in this patent application to show apps where the invention in question (location-based notifications) might find use.

Apple did not "just do some Evil" here. This is simply bad reporting about someone's mistaken mis-observation. I don't know why, but when it comes to Apple, a lot of people's normal inhibitions for shoddy reporting become spectacularly lowered.

If I copied a business partner's design in line art and put it in a patent application somewhat related to the business partner's business it would be OK? I think not.

If you were patenting a TV and in your patent's example diagram, the TV showed Mad Men playing on it, would that be OK? I don't know if it would or not, but it sounds like they're trying to patent the TV, not Mad Men.

Since short fragments are allowed as fair use, one frame from a movie should be ok too. Whether you can copy a wireframe design of an interface under fair use is an interesting question though...

I was assuming that Apple knowingly tried to patent prior-art. _That_ I would consider Evil™. But apparently, this may not be the case.

Now, looking at the claims, this patent application could probably be attacked from another angle (such as obviousness).

Discussed here 6 days ago: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1561364

was there any response from futuretap?

I've only seen a tweet from them thus far: http://twitter.com/futuretap/status/19947170850

They just did - http://www.futuretap.com/blog/the-patent-case-we-havent-call...

I think this is just a storm in a cup of water. Seriously, read the entire patent application. The usage of the screen may fall under fair use just to make a point in the patent application. Don't get lawyers involved. Those parasites are not worth it for something like this. That is just my gut feeling.

This is Apple. They will bring the lawyers into it. You can't even talk about their pre-released products without a lawsuit hovering overhead.

And ... this is Apple. They win this patent, they'll sue. They've always done this.

Is apple the new microsoft? I lively remember a lawsuit from apple against miscrosoft, because microsoft had a wastebin icon on the desktop. copy instead of innovate.

Sounds like they're hosting the prior art themselves.

In the world of silicon valley intellectual property lawyers what you see is hardly never what it is.

Doesn't stop the lawsuits from being filed ...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com