44 
Even though Apple scored a big victory against Samsung inside the court, it looks like Apple is losing its stronghold on its patents. After tentatively invalidating the ‘Steve Jobs Patent’ on multitouch, the USPTO has invalidated Apple’s ‘pinch to zoom’ patent. The ‘pinch to zoom’ patent was crucial in scoring a billion dollars off of Samsung.
The agency declared invalid the entirety of Apple’s patent on Wednesday, according to a document issued by the patent office that was filed by Samsung in federal court in San Jose, Calif. The document lists portions of the patent that were struck down on reexamination, on the basis that prior patents covered the same inventions.
Samsung, who’s on the hook for a billion dollars, is hoping this document can lead to a new trial. Apple, which has other patents tentatively invalidated, will probably have to convince the USPTO on its patent’s merit. There’s still many steps to go before the patent becomes fully invalidated but it ain’t a good first step for Apple. Also, how screwed up is the patent system if so many patents can be awarded yet invalidated upon “further reexamination”? [WSJ]
Samsung Challenges Apple Pinch-to-Zoom Patent With 2001 Tech
Pinch to Zoom Is Literal On This Elastic Touchscreen Display
Kinect's New Multitouch Tricks Let You Pinch Thin Air to Zoom
Somehow, “I told you so” doesn’t seem enough….
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121205194059/simpsons/images/e/e9/Nelson_Ha-Ha.jpg
The US Patent system is completely different to the rest of the world. My better half is a Patent attorney who tells me that while a patent will generally be thoroughly examined in Europe, then granted or not, this isn’t how the US does it.
First, they have first to invent, not first to file. So, even if you get your patent in first, someone else may try and prove that they invented it first. If they do, they get the patent, not you. You only get a year for this, but..
Second, their approach is very much to give it a cursory glance, a search, then grant if nothing obvious is wrong with it. There is a certain warped logic to this, as it means that monies spent are minimised unless the patent is actually of commercial relevance, where the legal process can swing into action if anyone is disputing it. Downside, you can file a lot of stupid patents as they don’t cost much unless you got lucky.
Last, as the founder of a tech co. reliant on patented IP, this is counterintuitively good for a small company with limited funds.
Paying to file patents costs a lot of money, but if the patent is even half decent, it’s affordable to insure against legal action to defend it. Money now is really expensive, especially in this financial climate, so a theoretically large but future and unlikely cost is actually far better, and allows us to use our money now to build a business.
The American system is still messed up tho.
Lazy instantiation anyone?
They still have their rounded corners to fall back on!
Behold, the ghost of Jobs is about to haunt you! On another news, Apple – you lose!