Hacker News Reader

Comment by flatline3 | Hacker News Reader

The automatic touch screen-based linkification of phone numbers, addresses, and calendar dates was fairly novel <edit>for smartphones</edit> when Apple introduced it. I don't believe anyone else was doing it <edit>on smartphones</edit> -- and if they were, there's prior art, and the patent should be invalidated.

What made it that especially interesting was that it alleviated a large part of the need for copy+paste. If you'll recall, the first iPhone OS didn't ship with copy+paste.

I'm having trouble figuring out what "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data" actually refers to.

View on HN

There was a whole HN thread throwing up prior art about the linkification patent (and also on Reddit). Linkification was being done in the '80s, based on one of the programs that someone managed to scrounge up in the thread, and the '90s as well. No patents issued - people just did it.

The fact that these programs were written tells us that software writers innovate regardless of whether patents are issued for their work or not. That's the nature of software (and technology in general). The difference is, some software makers don't expect to protect their new features from competitors with patents. That's the crux of it, imo.

Thanks. I have my own negative opinions about software patent novelty, I just wanted to point out that it was somewhat unique on smart phones.

Suffixing an old idea with "on smart phones" is not innovation, even if you do it first.

I see your point. My counter-argument would be that it solved a unique touch-screen problem of a lack of keyboard/mouse and a lack of an easy way to highlight text.

I think the thing I'm hung up on is that Apple stormed into the phone market and did a whole bunch of smart things that nobody had thought of, but are obvious in retrospect.

I don't agree with software patents, but I can't help but hesitate before agreeing that it's beneficial to the industry to let Apple's competitors wholesale copy their work (even the small things).

I disagree. I think it can be innovation, but find the idea of protecting that innovation ridiculous.

The question of if something is orthogonal to the question of if something deserves protection.

I had a Sony smartphone running some sort of Symbian OS which did just this well before the iphone came out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com