This is going to get messy. Really messy. Apple’s been granted a patent on slide to unlock. You know what uses slide to unlock? Just about every other touchscreen UI out there, in one way or another.
9to5Mac reports on the patent, which was applied for well before the launch of the original iPhone; that’s pre-glacial in smartphone terms. The patent — US Patent 7657849 to be specific — is for “Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image” and the abstract reads as follows
A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display. The device is unlocked if contact with the display corresponds to a predefined gesture for unlocking the device. The device displays one or more unlock images with respect to which the predefined gesture is to be performed in order to unlock the device. The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined location and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined path. The device may also display visual cues of the predefined gesture on the touch screen to remind a user of the gesture.
I’m no lawyer, but that seems like a really broad patent to grant, and a really big problem looming for every smartphone operating system that isn’t iOS. [9to5Mac via ZDNet]
Matt
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:36 AMStupid.
Drew
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:09 AMI’ve had it.
I’m patenting “things that do stuff” and sue everyone!
Just to cover my ass I’ll also patent “stuff that does things”
Stevie-Steve-O
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:21 PMWell I’ve already patented Stuff That Things Do, and your proposed patents sounds eerily similar. Ima gone sue you!
Lord Crumplebottom
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:23 PMRic Silver created the Electric Slide in 1976. He’ll sue you both!
Oliver Rose
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 4:10 PMOmgosh! I do things :[ I’m so going to be poor now.
I blame apple for this mess! I’m releasing my own brand which will rip off of apple in every single way that it can without going against the Patents, then in all the ways I couldn’t rip off them, I will rip off of other successful brands to substitute the loss. My Brand is called Orange.
While we’re at it, let’s sue Christopher Martin ( lead singer of of Coldplay ) for naming his child Apple, HE’S GONE AGAINST THE PATENT, THAT’S ONE PATENTING TOO FAR! BURN HIM.
Priggle
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:14 PMClutching at straws..
Wok
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 5:32 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY
Pariah
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 12:31 PMYou sir, made my day.
Luke
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:40 AMThis is just idiotic.
johnd
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:53 PMNo, it’s not. It was novel and original at the time. Just because a whole pack of other companies copy it doesn’t dilute that originality.
It’s another case of Apple coming up with something new, everybody else following along like sheep, and then complaining when Apple decides to exercise some intellectual rights.
ben
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:00 PMhate to tell you this but for me to get out of my side gate at home I have to ‘slide to unlock’ the bolt. All apple did was digitise this, not invent it.
Chillienet
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:18 PMPlease do some research on the Neonode N1m.
Josh
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:22 PMThis will be another case of Apple ‘inventing’ something, other companies invent something similar but better and then Apple getting all pissy over it.
Nemo
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 5:52 PMThis is not Apple’s original idea. Please read this
http://m.androidcentral.com/apple-granted-patent-slide-unlock-even-though-it-existed-2-years-they-invented-it
johnd
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:03 PMYou have got to be kidding. This is nothing like the “slide to unlock” concept. I know you wish it was, but it just isn’t. Where is the object or image that you slide across the screen?
I suggest you look again without the Android fanboy bias.
Mayhem
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 9:42 AMI disagree with companies applying for very broad patients and not taking full advantage to what the patient covers. Companies like Apple should only be granted patients on what they actually use.
Dan Miller
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:40 AMHow can a action be patented?
Peter
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:43 AMIf Apple sued every competitor out of the arena, I still wouldn’t buy an iPhone.
Rob
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:03 AMAgreed… I’d have to keep my sgsII and hope it lasted forever
Surely there are rules against trying to get a monopoly on the market… isn’t that what Apple used to complain to Microsoft about?
Francis Mullane
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:38 AM+1 this ^
samc
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 5:36 PM+1 again
adrian
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:14 PM+1
Bob
Thursday, December 29, 2011 at 12:19 PM+2
MDolley
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:44 AMI think Windows Phone is going to be OK.
“The device displays one or more unlock images”
Windows Phone doesn’t display an unlock image. It displays a user defined wallpaper. You move the entire interface (including notifications & date/time) upwards to unlock.
Pranoy Ghosh
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:51 AMAccording to the patent’s terminology it can be any image (even if it’s user defined) and moving it upwards is a predefined location so a Windows phone will be just as liable as any other touch screen phone that uses this technology.
Nick
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:46 AMMSFT and Apple don’t sue each other anymore.
Barry
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:31 PMIf one sues the other, then the other will come back twice as hard. It’s like the Cold War and the ICBMs. Matural Destruction.
Plus didn’t the two agreed a long time ago not to because of a certain court case that happened and that gave Apple a huge life line? I bet if Apple decided to sue Microsoft then teh ICBMs will come out before the court papers are even filed with a Judge.
MotorMouth
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:35 PMIncorrect. You do not move the WP7 wallpaper to a predefined location, you move it in a predefined direction. I think that distinction is more than enough to stop any infringement but you can add to that the fact that there is no specific unlock image, it is a gesture that moves the entire screen. I tend to call it the “blind” (as in “venetian blind”) because that is exactly how it works.
Of course, if the patent has only been granted today, I can’t see how they can enforce it, given that other OSs have been doing the same thing for some time now.
Norgan
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:09 PMYup WP7 is safe here, there are no unlock images or indicators of direction unless they are p ut there by the user in the custom wallpaper. The entire “blind” moves up to open the phone, not a swipe of an unlock image.
Still the patent system is obviously broken, i thought you couldn’t petent something that had already been released to the public for sale. (unless of course the patent was lodged before any sales or public disclosure?)
Mick
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM+1
Josh
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:31 PMthis is the same as for android 2.3 on my gsII aswell
SilentWolf
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:40 PMYeah its sucks because Apples unlock gesture is lame balls, WP7′s one is slick as.
SilentWolf
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:41 PMI meant to say, if they could sue them it would suck XD
David
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 6:52 PMWP7 is fine simply because Apple and MS already have a cross licensing agreement in place.
I wouldn’t worry about android either though – a very similar Apple patent was already all but thrown out in one of the European cases vs Samsung. While a decision in the US or Australia could be different, it’d be pretty surprising in this case.
Nick
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:45 AMThis is awesome. :D
Matt
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:45 AMVery broad patent indeed.
Antonia
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:47 AMThe predefined gesture to unlock my phone is the press of an image (on the face of a button) and the predefined path is down slightly. I wonder if the patent is broad enough to affect any and all switches.
How can the patents office grant a patent on something that’s been in the public domain for years?
AnthonyP
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:48 AMTime to burn down the US patent office!
Woodze
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:16 AMI’m sorry AnthonyP, Apple just patented burning down offices, oh and all other forms of anarchy.. You’ll have to find some other way of expressing your anger!
Shepard
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:25 PMLucky for you apple havnt yet patented wit,probebly because they cant create it themselves
Tezz
Friday, October 28, 2011 at 1:06 AMyou’re mistaken they don’t need to have wit to patent wit, they just need the money to patent wit or to buy the patent to wit off the wit patent holder.
p.s. wit, patent, patent, wit, wit.
p.p.s. that is all.
Glenn
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:48 AMReally Apple? While you’re at it, why don’t you get a patent on the use of Touchscreens, or a patent on the correct way to view a screen, or a patent on being douchebags?
Chazz
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:53 AMThat don’t need a patent on being douchebages. They’ve got the IP rights on that.
markd
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 3:49 AMYou’re such a badass Chazz :P
light487
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:52 AMMicrosoft should’ve patented the right-click so Apple computers could never have more than one button… :p haha
jeremy
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:56 AMRight click was invented at Xerox-Parc (menu click), along with the mouse itself – Apple removed functions from the original (and correct) design because steve was a “simplicity” obsessive :-)
Namarrgon
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 7:41 PMHe tried to remove keyboard shortcuts too, in his obsession to have One Canonical Way to do everything.
Thankfully his design team snuck them in again, and eventually talked him out of that particular usability nightmare.
jeremy
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:54 AMApple patented a mecahnism for unlocking. Locks and latches etc are patented all the time, and that is fair enough. The patent was taken out a real long time ago, everybody else just didn’t check. The idea is not actually that obvious (except in retrospect). I suspect this one will stand unless someone finds prior-art, and as a long the touch screen user, I am thinking not – maybe palm pilot or old sybian devices? http://io9.com/5808604/10-physical-gestures-that-have-been-patented.
Tim Blane
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:44 AMThis has been looked at in a Dutch Court, and they found valid prior art.
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/dutch-judge-considers-apples-slide-to.html
“The swipe-to-unlock gesture patent application was filed on December 23, 2005. But earlier that year, Neonode, a small and little-known Swedish manufacturer of mobile phones, released its Neonode N1m phone running Windows CE. That phone already had a slide-to-unlock feature”
Chillienet
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:23 PMAs for prior art, I believe the Neonode N1m was announced 6 or more months before apple applied for this patent. Check out how to unlock the Neonode N1m at the 4 minute mark of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj-KS2kfIr0
simon
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:54 AMim awaiting a “slide to interact” patent… nice
light487
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:55 AMJokes aside.. why should my Galaxy SII’s pattern lock be affected by a megalomaniacal (sp) company who doesn’t even use pattern locks in their existing phones and most likely has no plans to use it….
All this ridiculous petty patent stuff is going to ruin technology, not just smart phones.. innovation, design, invention all curtailed and stunted because of a communist regime called Apple.
Josh
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:24 PMWill it really euin it?? really wht they are doing if forcing technology to evolve, Everyone hates on apple, but really android is just a copy of iOS. By making them have to actually invent there own technology might actually see advancements in technology from someone other then apple..And really any gadget lover wants new advancements not just copys of already existing stuff
Steve
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM“android is just a copy of iOS”
I can’t believe someone could type this with a straight face.
Richard
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 6:47 PMYour pattern lock wouldn’t be affected what so ever but…
z3d
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:00 AMfacepalm
Ammusionist
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 4:46 PMIs that a touch interface to interact with your face using a gesture? You could be in trouble there!
Joel
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:00 AMThe patent was applied for about 5 years ago, when the first iPhone came out, and there weren’t hundreds of Copy Cat devices around. It’s not like Apple suddenly saw the competition and decided to patent everything 5 years after the iPhone first launched :P
Peter
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:18 AMSeems pretty basic to me that if you have a touchscreen device, you use the screen to interact with it. This shouldn’t be patentable.
Richard
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 6:51 PMTheres many other ways you could unlock it. Using a physical button somewhere, image that you tap or long press, Androids unlock pattern, pinching something and thats just to name a few.
It’s obvious because Apple brought it to the masses and the competition then followed suit. It’s not like the iPhone was the first touch screen device on the market, and while there may be the odd case of prior art here and there, generally they werent using this mechanism to unlock the device so calling it obvious for its time is very debatable.
Chillienet
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:28 PMNeonode N1m announced in Q1 2005, apple applied for this patent in December 2005. Check out the 4 min mark of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj-KS2kfIr0
Alex
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:04 AMWell … at LEAST there’s face unlock – as buggy and flawed as it is.
taylor
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:04 AMStill, patents ruin progress. Imagine if electricity was patented, we would be well behind where we are now
Andrew
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:49 PMYou can’t patent natural phenomenon. You can however patent a specific method for generating elevtricity, just not the electricity itself.
Chris
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:00 PMI would have to check, but there were a whole heap of patents for electricity generation and transmission (the whole fight between AC and DC power technologies). Thing is Patents last 25 years and then thats it. There has been a push to make patents in tech last about 10 years as the pace of technologcal change increases. The drug compainies are against it though so that is not going to change.
vanOorsome
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:05 AMHow can a patent even be validated when the technology exists prior to applying for the patent? This is all I have to say on this matter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj-KS2kfIr0&t=4m5s
Glenn
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:13 AMQuite easily, did they patent it? no probably not.
Greg
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:15 AMThere doesn’t need to be an existing patent to claim prior art.
vanOorsome
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:43 PMSo by your logic I can patent anything I like that hasn’t already been patented and then sue anyone who has ever used that thing that I patented, no matter how well established that thing is?
Chris
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 3:02 PMYou are correct. In fact the US passed the law which changed the burden of proof from “first to invent” “to first to file”
Eltail
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:10 AMIt was something that didnt exist until Apple came up with it. Should LCD screens not be patented just because everyone uses them? Apple obviously met the requirements under the law. Bag out your government, not the company that is obeying the law.
Chazz
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:31 AMIt did exist and there is big difference between obeying the law and using bullshit loopholes just because they can’t match their competitors.
BenDTU
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:38 AM“just because they can’t match their competitors”
I keep hearing this, but which company sold 4 million phones in one weekend?
Chazz
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:44 AMWhich company has been dropping marketshare with their mobile OS for the last 18-20 months?
BenDTU
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:08 PMThat ‘Dropping marketshare’ is due to the size of the market expanding.
Richard
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 6:52 PMBingo. Their customer base is still growing.
markd
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 3:55 AMDare I even ask Chazz what he or she means by ‘cant match’. I suspect from previous comments it means “For some reason I get annoyed by the success of products designed for people who aren’t interested in computers as a hobby’. Must….not….open…can..of…worms.. :D
Eltail
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:21 PMWho was using it?
Lasty
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:22 AMBeyond a joke…
Anyone patented BREATHING yet? If not, i’m on it!
5432
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 5:35 PMTerrible attempt to make a point. A touchscreen unlock gesture is a specific way to unlock a phone (yes, there are buttons, and the traditional way to unlock a phone is to hold one down for a specific amount of time, so it’s not the only way to unlock a device).
Breathing is a function controlled by the medulla with inputs from chemoreceptors in response to central and peripheral protons, carbon dioxide and oxygen, with signals carried by the phrenic nerve from nerve roots C3, 4 and 5 with the C5 coming from the brachial plexus, and contributions from intercostal nerves amongst others in forced expiration.
Completely different things. No, seriously, completely different things.
Bob
Thursday, December 29, 2011 at 12:20 PM*rolls eyes*
Turd
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:29 AMNice good work apple. Keep it up!
James C
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:30 AMWhy is this news all of a sudden? Apple have had this patent for ages. In fact, they’ve been using that in their case against HTC since March 2010.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/
TSH
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:32 AMI’ve been wracking my brain and I can’t think of any system prior to iPhone that used that method to unlock. This very broad patent covers the lock “grid” in Android and all methods of unlocking WP7 and WP8 touchscreen devices. This may actually be a novel unlock method developed by Apple.
light487
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:44 AMDidn’t HP’s iPAQ range have something similar to this?
Barry
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:28 PMdidn’t SPB have this for WM6 and WM6.5? If they did before iPhone then wouldn’t the patent be invalid?
johnd
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 1:50 PMYep, SPB did have that. They copied it from the original iPhone, and actually admitted to it.
It wouldn’t be the first time a Russian company didn’t quite get the concept of copyright and patents.
MotorMouth
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:01 PMThere is no way this applies to WinPhone 7 or Win8, neither of which have an “unlock image”.
TSH
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 2:48 PMAll that is needed is that the screen displays an image, “with respect to which the predefined gesture is to be performed in order to unlock the device.”
i.e., the “slide up” gesture, or the (very cool sounding, but still covered) user-defined unlock gesture in Win8.
The only way to get around this and still use a gesture to unlock is to have the phone display nothing while you unlock, or an image that does not relate to the unlock gesture.
BenDTU
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:33 AMOh dear.
Does ‘Prior Art’ have to happen before the patent was applied for or before it was granted?
I’m going to assume this patent was applied for around the time the first iPhone was released and nobody was using slide to unlock, as opposed to now when everyone is?