Skip to Content

Apple awarded three major multi-touch patents

Have you noticed that since mid-2007, a lot of other phone manufacturers have come out with multi-touch displays that are all but identical to those on the iPhone? I certainly noticed, and it made me wonder if Steve Jobs's January 2007 claim regarding multi-touch, "Boy have we patented it," was just an idle threat.

As it turns out, Jobs's claim was just a few years early. Patently Apple reports that, as of yesterday, Apple has been awarded three very important multi-touch related patents. The first patent, "Portable Electronic Device with Multi-Touch Input," describes in detail the multi-touch input method present on the iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, and Apple's multi-touch trackpads. It also sounds remarkably similar to the input methods present on competitors' touchscreen smartphones.

The second patent, "Ellipse Fitting for Multi-Touch Surfaces," is similar to another patent that Apple filed last year. It describes multiple input methods that all iOS device users will recognize: typing, pointing, scrolling, object manipulation, and so forth. The third patent, "Simultaneous Sensing Arrangement," describes some of the sensing mechanisms present in multi-touch devices. Patently Apple has the full details on the patents if you're truly curious, but they basically represent patents for both the hardware and input methods behind multi-touch.

Patents are an unusually touchy subject, particularly when lawsuits over them are involved. Apple's initial lawsuit against HTC earlier this year sparked a firestorm of Internet rage, with many commentators complaining that Apple was engaged in anti-competitive practices and attempting to stifle innovation. That's certainly one way of looking at it.

Another way of looking at it would be to look at something like Marco Arment's smartphone retrospective and recognize that other manufacturers have achieved success in the smartphone market over the past few years only by copying features that Apple innovated, like multi-touch. And regardless of whether you agree with the phrase "Apple innovated multi-touch" or not, that's now what the record shows: Apple now explicitly owns the patents for multi-touch. Frankly, I'll be shocked if Apple doesn't sic its patent lawyers on the likes of HTC and other manufacturers over multi-touch now.



Categories

Apple iPhone

Have you noticed that since mid-2007, a lot of other phone manufacturers have come out with multi-touch displays that are all but...
 

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

20 Comments

Filter by:
Alaslai

....apple also bought a company called gesture works which had an multi-touch device on the market since 2005. It had no display though.

October 13 2010 at 6:00 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Chris M

Would anyone like to point out any capacitive multitouch mobile phone released in q4 2006/ q1 2007? As this was when apple filed these patents.

October 13 2010 at 4:51 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Nick

I do love these one-sided posts, where no one was successful in the cell phone market until Apple came along and everyone copied them. Nevermind S60 being around since somewhere around the dawn of time, or Android being in development for a couple years before the iPhone was introduced and "innovated" a UI. Not to mention the sheer amount of nerd rage on TUAW when Nokia or Motorola sues Apple for violating their "innovations".

October 13 2010 at 3:28 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
9 replies to Nick's comment
Sparks

I'd like to think that this is a defensive rather than offensive patent.

Take Motorola's lawsuit against Apple, demanding licensing fees for cellular technology patents. "Oh, hey, Moto... your Android devices use multitouch, don't they? Maybe we can cut a nice cross-licensing deal and everyone's patent problems go away. Ours, /and/ the ones you're about to have."

October 13 2010 at 2:42 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
NJL

@wygit
Doesn't matter what the oral history of "multi-touch" is... Apple holds the patent now, and that is what matters. The government recognizes that Apple is the official originator.

October 13 2010 at 2:20 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to NJL's comment
Nick

Er, no. Apple holds the patent now, but if Apple sues, and someone counters with prior art, that can invalidate a patent. The USPTO does not have the resources to thoroughly research patents, and a lot of stuff gets patents that everyone knows shouldn't have.

October 13 2010 at 3:29 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
wygit

So you think the government is always right?
The government gets overruled all the time. (see "Don't ask, don't tell")
and 2)
a little hazy on the concept of "oral history", are we?

October 13 2010 at 7:32 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
wygit

So.... we have another example of how screwed up the Patent Office is...

A history of Multi-touch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi_touch

October 13 2010 at 2:17 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to wygit's comment
outphase

I'm not sure if you understand the complexities involved in prosecuting a patent application. It's not like you just wave your hands and say "I did this!" and get a patent. Look at the claims of the granted patents and come back.

October 13 2010 at 2:27 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
NJL

"...other manufacturers have achieved success in the smartphone market over the past few years only by copying features that Apple innovated, like multi-touch." I've noticed this all along. The blatant copying of Apple's interfaces is the only reason a lot of these companies are successful. You don't have to look very far: check out the interface for the upcoming Samsung "Tab." It's identical to the iPad!

Go get 'em Apple.

October 13 2010 at 2:15 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
macserv

If the patents are too generic, it won't be hard to get around them, or to find prior art. In this case, nobody has anything to worry about, and life goes on.

If, on the other hand, a patent covers a specific, detailed implementation or process that didn't exist until Apple made it work, then it serves to protect their massive investment of dollars and man-hours, and everyone else will have to deal with the consequences of standing on Apple's shoulders.

October 13 2010 at 2:14 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.