According to AFP (via Google), Apple was just awarded a patent for muti-touch. Of course, they didn’t invent the technology. But they describe specific interactions they developed.
US Patent 7,479,949 is awarded to “(Steve) Jobs et al” for a method of “detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display” to command computing devices.
A multi-page patent available online at the US Patent and Trade Office on Monday details iPhone or iPod Touch commands such as finger or thumb swiping, twisting, or spreading to flip pages, rotate views, or enlarge images. Read more…
The patent records an early application date of Sep., 2006 but most of us became aware of multi-touch via Jeff Han‘s brilliant demo video at TED (Filmed Feb 2006; Posted Aug 2006). (I still enjoy watching this video even though a lot of this interaction is becoming more common.)
Something I didn’t know: according to Wikipedia, multi-touch capable screens were developed as early as 1982 by the University of Toronto and Bell Labs.
I’m no patent attorney but the existence of prior art may make any legal defense of this patent difficult, to say the least. However, it seems the claims relate to very specific interactions and their resulting response, such as the 2 finger drag scrolling a page or other methods of screen manipulation.
Those of us at NYU in 2005 and even a bit earlier remember Jeff’s work with multi-touch even before TED.
It’s never who invents but the person or entity who develops and captures the majority of popular public opinion.
I’m no patent attorney either, but I would bet that the significant value of this patent to Apple is not in the offensive potential of the 20 claims in preventing others from making and selling products similar to the iPhone. To successfully challenge an imitator, Apple will have to defend these claims as new and not obvious in view of the work of Han and others.
Whether Apple’s claims are valid (or are in fact in the public domain) may only be relevant if Apple chooses to seek remuneration from makers and sellers of iPhone imitators, and Apple may back down if rivals challenge the validity of their patent claims.
However, the details of the patent’s 358 pages probably go a long way toward providing Apple with a legally defensive “right to use” all the features of the iPhone. Without the comprehensive disclosure in this unusually lengthy patent specification, Apple might be more vulnerable to litigation in nuisance infringement suits based some competitor’s invalid patent claims.