-- ======
Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries.
I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
"package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
road?
On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> --
> ======
> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> subsidiaries.
I did a little digging since posting this. A developer at Microsoft named
Bill Buxton has an interesting time line on the history of multi touch ... I
think that this suggests that one (with deep pockets and the motivation)
might be able to argue prior art:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:13 PM, JP <Joachim.Pfeif...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> road?
> On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
> > All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants to
> > play it safe will stay out of the US market.
> > Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have the
> > right lawyer that is.
> > --
> > ======
> > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > subsidiaries.
The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east, T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free world.
JP wrote:
> I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> road?
> On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
>> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
>> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants to
>> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
>> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have the
>> right lawyer that is.
>> --
>> ======
>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
>> subsidiaries.
-- ======
Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries.
The US is in need of some major copyright reform. Apple should of
never been granted the patient on multi-touch interfaces, as its the
next natural progression from a single touch interface.
On Jan 27, 2:05 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware
> shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east,
> T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and
> developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
> The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could
> order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites
> which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be
> charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
> If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you
> should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and
> remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free
> world.
> Al.
> JP wrote:
> > I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> > "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> > Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> > The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> > part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> > Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> > road?
> > On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> >> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
> >> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants to
> >> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
> >> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have the
> >> right lawyer that is.
> >> --
> >> ======
> >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> >> subsidiaries.
> --
> ======
> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> subsidiaries.
> The US is in need of some major copyright reform. Apple should of
> never been granted the patient on multi-touch interfaces, as its the
> next natural progression from a single touch interface.
> On Jan 27, 2:05 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware
> > shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east,
> > T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and
> > developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
> > The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could
> > order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites
> > which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be
> > charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
> > If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you
> > should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and
> > remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free
> > world.
> > Al.
> > JP wrote:
> > > I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> > > "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> > > Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> > > The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> > > part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> > > Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> > > road?
> > > On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > >> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
> > >> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants to
> > >> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
> > >> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have the
> > >> right lawyer that is.
> > >> --
> > >> ======
> > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > >> subsidiaries.
> > --
> > ======
> > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > subsidiaries.
In fact someone is already working on it for Android, JF has already
released an Android fork with a multitouch browser. I did install it on my
device.
[mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of madcoder
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:55
To: Android Developers
Subject: [android-developers] Re: Apple Granted Multitouch Patent
In my opinion, the patent is worthless. Multi-touch has been in use
long before the iphone started using it. A good example of this is
I hope Android will have multi-touch in a future update because of
this.
On Jan 28, 4:08 am, technick <techn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The US is in need of some major copyright reform. Apple should of
> never been granted the patient on multi-touch interfaces, as its the
> next natural progression from a single touch interface.
> On Jan 27, 2:05 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware
> > shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east,
> > T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and
> > developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
> > The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could
> > order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites
> > which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be
> > charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
> > If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you
> > should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and
> > remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free
> > world.
> > Al.
> > JP wrote:
> > > I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> > > "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> > > Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> > > The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> > > part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> > > Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> > > road?
> > > On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > >> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
> > >> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants
to
> > >> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
> > >> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have
the
> > >> right lawyer that is.
> > >> --
> > >> ======
> > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > >> subsidiaries.
> > --
> > ======
> > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > subsidiaries.
Yes, I believe the G1 is capable of multi-touch, but I don't think
there will be many apps using it unless it is part of the standard
distribution from Google.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and many people could download a
third-party app that allows for multi-touch and that *may* avoid the
patent issue altogether.
On Jan 28, 7:58 pm, "Marcio Alexandroni" <mar...@cialogica.com.br>
wrote:
> In fact someone is already working on it for Android, JF has already
> released an Android fork with a multitouch browser. I did install it on my
> device.
> [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of madcoder
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:55
> To: Android Developers
> Subject: [android-developers] Re: Apple Granted Multitouch Patent
> In my opinion, the patent is worthless. Multi-touch has been in use
> long before the iphone started using it. A good example of this is
> I hope Android will have multi-touch in a future update because of
> this.
> On Jan 28, 4:08 am, technick <techn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The US is in need of some major copyright reform. Apple should of
> > never been granted the patient on multi-touch interfaces, as its the
> > next natural progression from a single touch interface.
> > On Jan 27, 2:05 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > > The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware
> > > shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east,
> > > T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and
> > > developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
> > > The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could
> > > order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites
> > > which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be
> > > charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
> > > If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you
> > > should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and
> > > remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free
> > > world.
> > > Al.
> > > JP wrote:
> > > > I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
> > > > "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
> > > > Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
> > > > The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
> > > > part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
> > > > Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
> > > > road?
> > > > On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > > >> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
> > > >> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants
> to
> > > >> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
> > > >> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have
> the
> > > >> right lawyer that is.
> > > >> --
> > > >> ======
> > > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > > >> subsidiaries.
> > > --
> > > ======
> > > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > > subsidiaries.
If it doesn't make it in the standard distribution I can see developers coding it directly into their apps because it's an extremely useful thing from a user perspective.
Remember, this is *only* a US patent, it does not apply to the rest of the world, so developers who are not US based and have no US assets can freely write code and offer it for download without *any* fear of being put at-risk by the patent. The worst that is likely to happen is a unfounded cease and desist letter to try and scare the developer.
A few years ago I wrote a simplistic XML parser that someone tried to get me to stop distributing because of a US patent. I pointed out that I was not a US citizen or resident, owned no assets in the US, the web server from which parser was distributed was not US based, and so I would be interested to hear why they felt they had any basis to their claim.
I received a thank you for my response and never heard any more about it.
Even if Google refused to list applications with multi-touch in Market that wouldn't stop them being listed on non-US sites like AndAppStore and included in custom firmware built and distributed outisde the US. I, for one, would far prefer time and money was put into development of Android as opposed to being put in to fighting a case in a legal system that is well recognized as fundamentally broken and awards compensation to who put coffee cups between their legs whilst driving, spill it, burn themselves, and sue the coffee vendor (http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html).
madcoder wrote:
> Yes, I believe the G1 is capable of multi-touch, but I don't think
> there will be many apps using it unless it is part of the standard
> distribution from Google.
> On the other hand, I could be wrong and many people could download a
> third-party app that allows for multi-touch and that *may* avoid the
> patent issue altogether.
> On Jan 28, 7:58 pm, "Marcio Alexandroni" <mar...@cialogica.com.br>
> wrote:
>> In fact someone is already working on it for Android, JF has already
>> released an Android fork with a multitouch browser. I did install it on my
>> device.
>> [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of madcoder
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:55
>> To: Android Developers
>> Subject: [android-developers] Re: Apple Granted Multitouch Patent
>> In my opinion, the patent is worthless. Multi-touch has been in use
>> long before the iphone started using it. A good example of this is
>> I hope Android will have multi-touch in a future update because of
>> this.
>> On Jan 28, 4:08 am, technick <techn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The US is in need of some major copyright reform. Apple should of
>>> never been granted the patient on multi-touch interfaces, as its the
>>> next natural progression from a single touch interface.
>>> On Jan 27, 2:05 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
>>>> The most intelligent solution would be disabling it in the firmware
>>>> shipped in the US. Most handst manufacturers are based in the far east,
>>>> T-Mobile can ship them to whomever they want outside the US, and
>>>> developers working outside the US can continue to work on it.
>>>> The same approach was used with encryption in pre-2006 where I could
>>>> order a VPN server from any number of European or far east websites
>>>> which, technically, if I took into the US or left the US with I could be
>>>> charged as an arms smuggler under US law.
>>>> If your country has laws that prevent you getting a technology you
>>>> should talk to the politicians about changing the law, not try and
>>>> remove the functionality from devices shipped to those of us in the free
>>>> world.
>>>> Al.
>>>> JP wrote:
>>>>> I speculate one of the reasons that multi-touch was not in the Android
>>>>> "package" because the patent was pending. I predict that noone outside
>>>>> Apple will touch multi-touch even with a 10ft. pole (pun intended).
>>>>> The bigger issue in my view is gesture-based scrolling, which *is*
>>>>> part of Android and which happens to be claimed in the patent.
>>>>> Somebody enlighten us how this is not going to be a battle down the
>>>>> road?
>>>>> On Jan 27, 9:52 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
>>>>>> It's only a US patent and the world is a big place.
>>>>>> All it means is that if anyone has a Multi-Touch innovation and wants
>> to
>>>>>> play it safe will stay out of the US market.
>>>>>> Welcome to America, the land of the free, well, as long as you have
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ======
>>>>>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
>>>>>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
>>>>>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
>>>>>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
>>>>>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
>>>>>> subsidiaries.
>>>> --
>>>> ======
>>>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
>>>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
>>>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
>>>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
>>>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
>>>> subsidiaries.
-- ======
Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries.
On Jan 28, 6:33 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> Remember, this is *only* a US patent,
It affects anybody outside the US as well, because Google (and others,
Palm, for example) either pay up, or limit themselves in what they
provide in their products *including the SDKs*. "Retrofits" are
usually impractical "hacks", and there's a constant threat these are
being shut down with the next firmware release - just like that.
You can bet Nokia, RIM, and all the other non-US companies will ship Multitouch devices at some point and, if challenged, probably just not sell them in the US, so if the Google et al decide to not ship functionality based on US patents it's going to make Android look very poor choice compared to it's competitors in the global market.
Al.
JP wrote:
> On Jan 28, 6:33 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
>> Remember, this is *only* a US patent,
> It affects anybody outside the US as well, because Google (and others,
> Palm, for example) either pay up, or limit themselves in what they
> provide in their products *including the SDKs*. "Retrofits" are
> usually impractical "hacks", and there's a constant threat these are
> being shut down with the next firmware release - just like that.
-- ======
Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries.
I generally agree with you. You are comparing apples with oranges
however (pun intended). Saxon Innovation and this whole slew of non-
practicing entities (also known as "patent trolls") exist for the sole
purpose of extorting money from legitimate businesses. Apple would
shoot themselves in the foot if they started enforcing the rights
granted through this (and I suppose other) patents. If this happens,
the touch-screen oriented model of user interaction would mostly be
available with their products only. Although Apple's big, they are not
quite big enough that they wouldn't have to rely on having their boat
lifted along with everybody else's as a result of the proliferation of
touch-oriented handsets by virtue of introduction through numerous
vendors. In my humble opinion, anyway. I am looking in particular at
manufacturers in China and "extended workbench" countries which
deliver to growth markets, and which are not be quite there yet as far
as software is concerned. Android should come as an opportunity to
deliver a software platform that supports the touch-oriented model for
their products almost "out of the box".
> On Jan 28, 8:05 am, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:> You can see from the article athttp://www.infoworld.com/article/09/01/16/Firm_seeks_to_bar_Nokia_RIM...
> > that the worst that a firm can do is try to ban companies importing
> > products into the US which may breach a US patent.
> I generally agree with you. You are comparing apples with oranges
> however (pun intended). Saxon Innovation and this whole slew of non-
> practicing entities (also known as "patent trolls") exist for the sole
> purpose of extorting money from legitimate businesses. Apple would
> shoot themselves in the foot if they started enforcing the rights
> granted through this (and I suppose other) patents. If this happens,
> the touch-screen oriented model of user interaction would mostly be
> available with their products only. Although Apple's big, they are not
> quite big enough that they wouldn't have to rely on having their boat
> lifted along with everybody else's as a result of the proliferation of
> touch-oriented handsets by virtue of introduction through numerous
> vendors. In my humble opinion, anyway. I am looking in particular at
> manufacturers in China and "extended workbench" countries which
> deliver to growth markets, and which are not be quite there yet as far
> as software is concerned. Android should come as an opportunity to
> deliver a software platform that supports the touch-oriented model for
> their products almost "out of the box".
|
