More of my sites
WinInfo Daily News
SuperSite for Windows
Windows IT Pro Magazine
Connected Home
Thurrott Dot Com
Windows Weekly at TWIT
|
About this site
For six years, the Internet Nexus served as my technology blog, but I've since started
blogging at the SuperSite Blog instead. If you're looking for the blog, please head there. --Paul
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Apple fails to patent iPod interface
So I love the iPod, but let's be serious: There isn't a single bit of software or hardware in the unit that hadn't been seen elsewhere first. What makes the iPod unique is its stunning design and the perfect combination of previously available UI and functionality. So while I don't mean to suggest that I'm "glad" their patent application has been soundly rejected, as this AppleInsider article discloses, I do think it's fair that Apple not be rewarded for improving, but ultimately just copying, what came before. That said, they should absolutely be able to patent the "screen-less" UI of the iPod mini. I'm sure MP3 makers are lining up to copy that one.A near three-year-long attempt by Apple Computer to patent the menu-based software interface of its popular iPod digital music player has ultimately proved unsuccessful, AppleInsider has discovered.
The company's patent application, which lists Apple vice president Jeff Robbin and Apple chief executive Steve Jobs as two of its primary inventors, received a final rejection last month from the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Standing in Apple's way appears to be a prior filing by inventor John Platt, who submitted a patent application for a similar software design for a portable device in May of 2002 -- just five months before Robbin submitted his claims on behalf of Apple.
Platt's application describes his invention as a system or method that "generates playlists for a library collection of media items via selecting a plurality of seed items, at least one which is an undesirable seed item." The process by which the iPod's software displays its own menu-based interface is very similar to the process Platt's filing goes on to describe.
In an attempt to trump Platt's application, Robbin through his patent lawyer petitioned the patent office to review an amended set of claims last November, shortly after his initial filing had been rejected in light of Platt's.
Upon review, the patent office in July issued a 6-page document pointing to prior claims made by Platt and offering its final rejection of Robbin's application.
[ Posted at 8:54 AM | Permalink ]
|
