Home

Share this Story

Apple’s Pinch-to-Zoom Patent Ruled Invalid by USPTO

Sorry, Apple, but according to Apple Insider, your pinch-to-zoom patent has been invalidated by the USPTO.

This patent (7,844,915 claim 8) was a major player in Apple’s initial win over Samsung back in August, but it’s still unclear if this will change any of the outcome of the trial. There is still time for appeals, post trial hearings, final rulings, and all that jazz.

And that’s your daily snoozefest of patent chatter.

Via:  Apple Insider

  • Ray

    As they say, It doesn’t matter who you are today, because tomorrow is another day. What we are seeing is a highly inflated poor excuse for an innovative company, harassing the little guy(looking for a chance to exist) so that only THEY can eat. The superstar Tech company cannot be conquered by outsiders(Google, Samsung, Nokia), it will implode from within. Just look at the Romans.

    That being said, I’m already noticing a change in the weather at Cupertino. What do you think?

  • http://profiles.google.com/davidukfl David Wanless

    Rumor has it Apple is going to patent the patent system. Anyone caught seeking a patent will be sued for breaching Apple’s patent on patents.

  • jer85008

    Sorry to put the brakes on the Apple hate mail – but doesn’t this open up foreign copycats to stealing more IP from an American company? Please correct/enlighten me but in our rush to heap more S#$7 on Apple isn’t this bad for American business? Personally, I don’t want to see Apple fail – I want to see Apple/Google/Microsoft in a fierce technology war where they are all successful to some degree and we benefit from killer products. Right now, I’m firmly in the Google camp but will follow the leader in terms of technology and innovation.

    • Droidzilla

      You can’t steal something that doesn’t belong to someone. Apple has been abusing the patent system for years; basically patenting things that either already existed (prior art) or were iterative and obvious (also ineligible for a patent). These are not in need of protection. What the USPTO did here was essentially say, “Uh, yeah; we never ought to have granted that. Sorry.” They did not say that no one has any right to IP; just that Apple’s IP, in this case, was illegitimate.

      • jer85008

        Thanks for the intelligent non-snarky reply – usually good discusisons on the DL forums!

  • Derkk

    Love to see these crazy wide open patents being reversed. Should have never been granted in in the first place. Patents are there for protection against a very specific design, not a basic idea.

  • cjlee89

    USPTO: United States Patent Troll Office…

  • Manny

    Kellex your a turd.. This site conveniently forgets 5 – 10 android stories a week but you post this. Your an undercover apple fanboy running a droid site.

    • http://twitter.com/RavnosCC RavnosCC

      ooo, ooo, ooo YOU ARE

    • http://twitter.com/offenbergerab Aaron Offenberger

      If you’re going to insult someone, please learn proper grammar. There is a difference between your and you’re. Google it, or feel free to sit in a second grade English course.

      • Manny

        So you were hired by THE INTERNET to correct grammar? YOU ARE ALSO A TURD. Leave it to an android fanboy..

  • master94

    Down with Apple, hope to see it burn to the ground.

  • npooty

    This is interesting. Didn’t Judge Koh just release a statement indicating that although Samsung devices won’t be banned in the U.S., her original ruling that patents were violated still stands, which included “pinch-to-zoom”?

    Hmmm….

    • Zack

      Yes but that was simply that the a patent was in fact infringed on, this is completely different, the patent it self is not valid

    • MicroNix

      New book:

      “When Apple’s Money Can’t Make The Competition Go Away”

    • JRomeo

      Wait, the patents in the Judge Koh Apple/Samsung case referred to design patents, not software patents…………….. Correct???????

  • Buckoman

    Speaking of pinch to zoom, I’m experiencing a delay of multitouch recognition on my devices running Jelly Bean. Anyone else with this issue and/or how to fix it? It’s a real turn off from my GS3 and Nexus.

    • michael arazan

      I get a delay when in settings of my phone, using stock JB, every time I go into apps and force close trivial apps and games, the whole system freezes for a minute or so.

      • Kindroid

        Do NOT force close apps in Android. Android has a very sophisticated app management system that controls how apps are running. When you force close an app…it interferes with the algorithms that control the operation of that function. For all Android users….please quit force closing apps.

  • chris125

    About time the patent office does something right

    • MicroNix

      This can’t be +1’d enough!

  • http://twitter.com/davidbavin David Bavin

    Since when does such a patent like this exist?!

    • http://twitter.com/Belatukadro Justtyn Hutcheson

      Hence is the way with the current Patent system, they tend to grant them and when an issue is brought up in court or through the media, they go back and do the research later.

      • http://twitter.com/davidbavin David Bavin

        Explains the millions of patents.

  • Ray

    I think they should Invalidate Apple Inc.

    • Stevedub40

      Who would down vote a wonderful comment like this? Preach on brother!

  • JBartcaps

    Is Apple going to sue USPTO now?

    • Stevedub40

      Looks like a sad iSheep got astray and ended up on this forum down voting all the good comments. I’ll give ya a +1!

    • Ray

      They might patent the English Alphabet, and sue USPTO for using their innovative idea.

    • chris boyer

      wait i thought apple invented uspto

      • Ray

        You never know…They might be supplying the honest folks at the USPTO with some (in the red) AAPL stocks behind closed doors.

  • BulletTooth_Tony

    And there was much rejoicing.

    Yayyy.

  • http://twitter.com/LiiIiikEaBau5 LiiIiikEaBau5

    Steve Jobs wont forgive anyone of you who invalidated this!!!

    • a.youth.in.Asia

      He will consummate the curse! He’s going to rise! Imhotep!

  • Silver Veloz

    Excellent!

  • http://www.youtube.com/kimirPORTALS kimir

    I’m so sad.

    HAHAHAHAH

  • moelsen8

    Good times

  • nightscout13

    Finally the USPTO is feeling the heat.

  • Butters619

    Now if only the rounded rectangle design patent were invalidated.

    • TheVoiceOfReason

      Yeah, a company can’t patent shapes. The hell is up with that?

      • http://twitter.com/LaurenJ62479398 Lauren Jensen

        and sue USPTO for using their innovative idea.http://www.youtubeRewind2012.qr.net/jWH1/watch?v=oD7KWAQr8Q8

      • michael arazan

        I was using a rectangular device with rounded corners and a flat screen before the iphone and the patent, it’s called a TV. How can you patent a design that’s already being used by several manufacturer’s before you?

        • AJ

          Moses was using it before everyone.

  • antinorm

    *nelson* HA HA!

  • Capt. Crunch

    I love reading the apple fanboys responses, most of them are complaining about how since the USPTO issued the patents they shouldn’t be allowed to invalidate them. Try using the same argument with prohibition.

  • thecharrr

    It would just reduce the amount Samsung owns at best, all the phones were hit for 3+ patents each

    • violator702

      I believe this is the second patent to be ruled invalid in the recent weeks though.

    • snowblind64

      Definitely a reduction of the fine. It’s pretty clear that Samsung is guilty of ripping off some of Apple’s design elements but software patents are a complete joke and should be dismissed.

      On a side note, I can’t help but feel that Samsung’s lawyers screwed up pretty badly by not dismissing that jackhole Velvin Hogan.

      • http://twitter.com/Bateluer Robert Boluyt

        Samsung’s lawyers seemed like they missed a lot of opportunities for mistrials.

        • Droidzilla

          Probably done on purpose as Samsung could have been going for the end game: invalidation of the patents, not a ruling saying they didn’t infringe. Basically, it’s no issue that they infringed on a patent if that patent is invalid. Much stronger victory, here.

  • Bewara2009

    Not this again!

  • Thomas Partida

    Hahahahahahaha!!!