No, Seriously: Microsoft Patents Page Up & Page Down

59 thoughts on “No, Seriously: Microsoft Patents Page Up & Page Down”

  1. while looking at the patents cited by this dysfunctional patent, i found
    U.S. Patent 5,463,725 issued to IBM in 1995
    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5463725

    Abstract:
    An interface for making information available to a user provides a display similar to a printed book or magazine. In order to “turn the page” of the displayed book, the user touches the screen with his hand or a pointing device, and moves it across the screen. Movement across the screen, while touching the screen, causes an animated turning of the page of the displayed printed material. This page turning technique is very similar to the turning of a page with an actual book or magazine.

    Seems like Apple’s cover-flow and other photo/page browsing widgets on iphone are in violation of this one…

  2. For someone not leaving in the US, the numerous patents being filed is always fun stuff to read. Seriously, some things is just common sense/knowledge, I really can’t understand why it even is considered someone’s property! But as I said, I’m not American…

  3. finding stupid patents – sounds like a job for Mechanical Turk @ Amazon. I am sure if gigaom pays out a few bucks ($100 ?) for each selected entry, there’d be takers.

  4. good question, frank: “prior art, anyone?”

    since “the name of the game is the claims”, it’s not the abstract that is examined for patentability. did any of the posters read the claims before jumping the gun?

  5. Pingback: winandmac.com
  6. “did any of the posters read the claims before jumping the gun?”

    No. The general public doesn’t have a clue about patents. For this patent, the claims are actually quite specific to a particular algorithm.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.