Problems with CoverBling

[Myriam Schweingruber]

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 15:40, Mathias Panzenböck
<grosser.meister.morti at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 04/17/2010 02:35 PM, Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 13:58, Lukas<1lukas1 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> I'm  not a lawyer, but if patent has just been issued, shouldn't it be
>>> invalid, and cover flow design kept free over a prior art
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_art ?
>>
>> Please do not top-post...
>>
>> Unfortunately it is unlikely to be prior art on our behalf, since
>> Apple filed the patent on June 28, 2007 and they released the first
>> iPhone on June 29, 2007. it's the date of request, not the date when
>> the patent is granted that is valid as a grant is retroactive AFAIK,
>> but IANAL. I don't think we had something similar in our code before
>> that. Markey, do you remember when you wrote the first code of it?
>>
>> For the record, they own the CoverFlow technology since 2006:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoverFlow
>
> How can the patent be valid if the technology was already there in 2006?

Did you read the link I gave you? They bought the technology, and the
patent acts retroactively.

> That IS before the patent was filed. It does not matter who made the prior
> art, once it is out you cannot file a patent any more.

Sorry, but where did you get that from? If something is not patented,
it can be patented subsequently. It is those holding the prior art who
have to prove that a patent is not valid. Do you really want us to
risk a patent case with Apple?

> Even if the patent
> holder to be released the technology himself. At least that's how it works
> in Europe. Is it really that different in the USA?

Well, because Software patents are not valid in Europe, even if filed,
at least until now. But we face a company that is based in the US and
was granted a US patent. We do not own any prior art AFAIK, hence we
have absolutely no stand here.

> And anyway, I do not understand how applying something from the real world
> to the virtual world can be patented at all. I mean what innovation is that?
> Just applying what is already there in a different medium. That's what
> software developers do all the time.

Sorry, but just because you think that does not make this patent invalid.

Just to make this clear: I didn't ask for input about the validity of
this patent from list participants, especially not since none of those
who have commented are lawyers. So unless you really are a lawyer and
have a substantial knowledge about Patent Law in the US and the rest
of the world, please abstain from comments that bring nothing
substantial. IANAL myself, so I think it is absolutely useless to
discuss this, none of us are specialists in that matter.

I was asking to comment on how we could work on a new applet (or by
modifying the existing applet). Please refer to the forum post link I
gave above. I would also very much encourage people to not give their
advice on patent laws there unless they are real lawyers. It is
useless and unproductive.


Regards, Myriam.

-- 
Protect your freedom and join the Fellowship of FSFE:
http://www.fsfe.org
Please don't send me proprietary file formats,
use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300)