I once saw a patent on that already earlier somewhere, which i assumed was the reason none of the automotive navigation UI's where doing this.

Just checked again, and it's verbatim this use case and even active until 2030 still:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100305853A1/en

3-D map display

Abstract

A computer generated 3-dimensional map display includes a reference icon identifying an observation point in the geographic area defined by the map, the map being presented on a curved surface which extends from a first plane to a second plane which is substantially orthogonal to the first plane. The observation point is located in the first plane. The display is configured such that the height of landmarks and buildings in a defined foreground of the reference icon are presented normal to the first plane, the height of land marks and buildings at a defined far distance are presented normal to the second plane and the height of land marks and buildings in a defined middle ground are presented normal to the non-linear portion of the curved surface. The geographic area represented can be translated along the curved surface to provide a perception that the reference icon is roaming through the displayed geographic area.

By no other than "Here and There" Schulze and Webb Ltd later rebranded to BERG.

The generic use case of a multiperspective camera method for that was arguable covered in a 1997 Disney paper latest.

Multiperspective Panoramas for Cel Animation https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall00/cs597b/p...

The patent application is not yet publically available, so I can't tell what aspects of the system they are trying to protect. They probably have some narrowly tailored features that they can protect. Maybe related to the rendering, or some toggle button feature of the display. But, as to the broad concept of a curved hybrid combination of street view and overhead view, I agree that they will not be able to protect that aspect.

Especially that it looks like to be an European patent and it is not clear what wouldn't be "software" in their patent.

But if it's not vibecoded landing page, they might also know that they have a dummy patent request that will probably be rejected but that probably in so many month that they can use the patent pending to get commercial and investment traction till then.

Playing devil's advocate: the projection alone won't be the patent and probably is not patentable on its own, the patent will be about applying such projections for real-time navigation which brings non-obvious difficulties that must be solved in a particular way (like the way the project is transformed during turns, how navigation is overlayed, and how motion sickness and distractions are counteracted) making the patent consist of the projection-styled navigation enabled by certain rules (what and how to present it) and the technical way the projections are transformed.

Having said that, the novelty is questionable since the projection is pretty well-known and creating a functional proof of concept that solves many of the patent's problems likely takes a day or so. But I'm not a lawyer so what do I know in this department?