Creative's latest: The Zen Patent

Still waiting to see whether they patent their unique process for putting worms on MP3 players, but in the meantime Creative just scored a patent for its user interface for portable media players. To make things simple for us they're dubbing this the "Zen Patent", and, surprise, surprise, they're already making some noise about how the patent covers the UI used in the iPod and iPod mini. You probably already know how dim a view we take of the USPTO these days, but c'mon, a patent for a UI that "enables selection of at least one track in a portable media player as a user sequentially navigates through a hierarchy using three or more successive screens on the display of the player"? Isn't that sort of obvious? No matter, we're counting down the minutes until Creative files suit against, well, everybody.

[Thanks, Dave Z.]

[asher @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

I just scored a patent for a type of information distribution via the internet. It utilizes a form of a website that can be udpated sequentially with paragraph type blocks of information. These can then be linked to more detailed posts. I call it an Internet Web Information Log. Fire up the attorneys Engadget, you're first on my list for stealing this unique idea that is utterly my own!!!!

[archie @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

What a bunch of baloney. If I'm not mistaken, you have no choice but sequentially move through a hierarchy. And the very fact that they state this as a form of navigation is rather redundant. So to is the use of sequential.

Holy Crap! You know what, Apple is in trouble because they ALSO used words in their user navigation.

[Pip @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

This wont go anywhere due to prior art.

[Neutral Party @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Though i dun really care much about it, but it shld silent some Apple fans who keeps thinking that Creative copied Apple's GUI, when it was Creative who designed the GUI long before there was iPod. Apple simply copied the GUI and made it, well, simpler i guess. But one way or another, give Creative some credit. Apple isn't always the best.

[z drilx @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

I guess the computer industry is really getting sooooo stupid it only has enough intelligence to try to patent everything that always was evident. Why don't they just innovate? Maybe they can't? There is a need for some kind of patent revolution.

[Eugy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Sorry guys.. i just patented a form of communication that uses lines that join forming letters, then words, then sentences. I am thinking about calling it "scriptura v1.0".

The most pathetic thing about most patents filed lately is thatcompanies are spending money in that stuff, money that they could spend in improving their products, or even better, release the actual products without unwated bugs (hello Creative)

[Brad @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

To 4:

This doesn't prove that Apple copied Creative. This just shows that Creative is a company that doesn't have much going for it and hopes to screw some people over with this patent.

Patents like this are worthless. Everyone uses this sort of UI for their music players, so it's nothing special.

[Rio @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Didn't Rio patent it first? Isn't that what SigmaTel just bought from D&M Holdings?

[Malfoy Roark @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

I was doing this years before them there "modern portable media players". Maybe its just bad folder structure but I have to go thru at least 3 windows (My Computer->K drive->Music->name of album->chosen song) to select a song when on my "PMP" aka laptop aka notebook.

[archie @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

"Apple simply copied the GUI and made it, well, simpler i guess"

Soooo... Neutral Party, what are you saying? Is it that Creative invented the concept of "hierachy"? I have to give Creative Labs absolutely no credit here. I just don't get it. I mean crimeny, once you select something ("ooooo... maybe they invented the concept of "selecting"), you then have to go select something else (ie. open, close, details, etc.) to actually activate it. How intuitive and ingenious is that? Jeebus, they even screwed up the whole concept of hiearchy. I like Apples UI that they made a great deal more.

[Penn @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

I think it is best companies stop or reduce "lawyering" and get on with really developing products the market needs and wants. The world, and consumers, would be better for it. Patents can be flawed because of similarity of thoughts, and frankly, software patents is a flawed concept.

[Ray @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

have any of you people (including Peter) even read the patent? If you invent something that no one has done before you deserve protection. Thats the way it works - thats what gives the little inventor a fighting chance against companies like MS, Apple, IBM, etc... If there is prior art then the court will figure that out, but don't slam a company for protecting a new idea... it's the smart thing to do. If the interface isnt the best "method" of finding music on a portable device... well then the others can just use a different method and everything will be fine. If it's far superior and unique... well then they deserve some "inventors rights". People shouldnt be able to copy your stuff for free.

The court will flush it all out and determine if this thing is valid/unique/etc...(trust me apple will fight it -- they file patents too you know so they arent innocent in this matter) not a bunch of people making comments about a patent they havent even read.

[paralipsis @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Clearly it's not Einstein working at the patent office any more. This is pathetic, the very definition of a frilvolous patent.

There is a fine line between protecting IP and stifling innovation. This patent jumps up and down on that line and spits in the face of every portable MP3 player manufacturer out there (except for Creative of course)

[bhaalspawn @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Apple aren't in trouble. Last time I checked they had more money than creative to fight a court battle, this patent is on dodgy ground anyway as it is too wide ranging and covers prior art. Also by the time any decision is made portable music players will have evolved (IMO) to use an icon based interface similar to an OS.

So the granting of the patent if (and it's a big if) it's even valid is irrelevant.

[The Jeremy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Bring it (the lawsuits)! If Creative files against Apple or Sony, its not going to be a cakewalk like they had with Aureal. Apple and Sony have lots of cash to put up to squash Creative (like IBM to fauxSCO). If they were smart, Creative would use the patent against iRiver and other small competitors and drive them from the market so creative can have a monopoly of the scraps of the MP3 portable market.

[semi @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

before apple fanboys go on about the "nonsense patent"

"In its press release, Creative said Apple had filed for a patent for a user interface in a multimedia player in late 2002, but its application had been recently rejected."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4198360.stm

frivolous indeed

[Neutral Party @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Haha...I should've expected tat Apple fans will come bashing and defending their precious iPod. Juz to clarify a point, i dun really care much the rivalry between Apple or Creative. Somehow, it just irks me that some Apple fanatics are simply too biased and can't see past the light, thinkin that iPod is the best thing in the world and other brands dun stand a chance. Yes, iPod is extremely successful but that doesn't necessary means it's the best. Just the same fact that Windows is successful but not necessary the best.

One other thing, if the patent is truly as crap as most would believe, maybe to the Apple fanatics, it's worth to know tat Apple tried to file for the patent, sadly it was REJECTED.

Had Apple won the patent, i'm sure u Apple fanatics will probably say "Yeah, Apple deserved it blah blah blah"

If anyone else won the patents, u Apple fanatics will say "The patent is a worthless piece of shit blah blah blah..."

Ask any true neutral parties and they will tell u the same. Having said that, allow me to reiterate i got NOTHING against Apple iPod. I think it's an elegant piece of hardware. I juz can't stand the crazy Apple fanatics who seemed to worship the ground Steve Jobs walks on. I mean, see past the light, the world is ALOT more than just the apple...

Thanx for reading...

[Jan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

I think the important thing to note is that the patent app was filed in 2000, before the ipod came out and after Creative's first MP3 player had been released.

According to the press release:
"Creative applied for the Zen Patent on January 5, 2001 and it was
awarded on August 9, 2005."
"We shipped the NOMAD Jukebox to U.S.
retail customers in September of 2000"
"The Apple iPod was only announced
in October 2001"

I guess we'll have to wait and see how it shakes out. Interesting how many other patent apps may be out there and not even on the radar yet.

[Kawari @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

These days the patents are driving me nuts, what if tommorow making love in a certain style is patented by some company and they sue me for adopting such a style in my bedroom.

[Chir @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

If you would just read the patent, you will find plenty of innovation in there, some of which are not intuitively obvious.

For example, after choosing a track from a hierarchy, the track begins to playback. On a computer file system, only that particular track is added to a playlist. However, in the design presented by this patent, all tracks in the subcategory of the hierarchy would be added to the playlist. Those of us familiar with digital audio players are familiar with this feature, but according to this patent, this is one innovation Apple copied from Creative, or perhaps invented apart from Creative, but at a later date.

Another example is the dynamic nature of the hierarchy presented herein. Again, in a computer file system, if the folder structure is ArtistAlbum, then it is impossible select all tracks of a particular genre, because the folder structure does not take into account genre. If the folder structure is GenreArtistAlbum, then it would be impossible to select all tracks by a single artist, if that artist's tracks are split into different genres. The hierarchy in the patent solves this problem by dynamically allocating files into any desired order of hierarchy. This is another innovation that Creative made before Apple, according to this patent.

[Stan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Hurray! about time some one crushed the crapPod (opps iPod). The creative zens are way better than the crapPod and its about time some one finally slapped Apple for just copying others ideas. After all they didn't even invent the Macintosh, they stole the idea from Xerox.

[Brian @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Yeah but it's important to note that Apple engineers in the Lisa team developed some pretty useful concepts like pull-down menus and the clipboard. Now, I know Xerox invented the gui so it's a bit of a red herring. But where would we all be now if Apple had patented the clipboard and sued everyone for its use. What if Microsoft had patented tabs?

[Benson Leung @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Patents are a world of hurt, really... a real quagmire. This is one of those instances... it's like what happened with Sony and the rumble feature for controllers... they *could* ask for royalties, but it would just be ridiculous to bankrupt a company over being successful with an idea...

And to #21, who said that the Macintosh wasn't invented at Apple... shame on you... a group of Apple engineers 20+ years ago by all accounts devoted their lives... spent months barely sleeping or eating... they worked nearly to madness to create the Mac back in 1984... and you trivialize engineering so badly when you deny them the credit completely.


Even if Apple didn't invent the GUI, they slaved over their product like no one else had ever done, working 90 hour weeks under the iron fist of Steve Jobs... As an engineer, i give them mad props... but to you, because of some illogical hate for Apple, just say "they stole it."

Guh...

Apple may not have invented the GUI, but in those critical months where all of their engineers were at full steam, they did invent a lot of things we take for granted now... this window that you're reading from right now...say it's overlapping another window below it... move the top one aside... notice how what was behind the window is now revealed? Someone at Apple had to invent that....

[Ron Holmes @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

Prior art could include the old Iomega HipZip. I honestly don't think anyone deserves patents on this sort of obvious crap, but the patent office is obviously in the business of keeping lawyers in Porsche's.

[MOGua @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

people need to stop saying this patent is stupid just because it was Creative filing it.

Apple tried to file the same patent 20 months after Creative and they got rejected.

[blop @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

How can it *not* be said to be stupid? How would *you* avoid a hierachical structure when choosing music/files? Or even when taking something out of your fridge when you want a snack? Ie. entering your house narrows the choice down to your rooms, now enter the kitchen and finally the fridge... As someone said that's what we've been doing on our computers with folders etc for how long? Long!

A patent of something like the clickwheel is something totally different. A patent of something that is more or less unavoidable by competitors is *drumroll* stupid.

For patent infringement fun look up a certain story between Matsushita and IBM.

[Neutral Party @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

It's certainly very heartening to noe that there are sensible and wise ppl out there tat doesn't blindly subscribe the "iPod-is-the-best-no-matter-what" ideology. Be it Creative, Sony, iRiver, Samsung, or the sadly defunct Rio, these brands produce very decent players that offers consumers more choices and most importantly better options.

And it's evident that for Apple fanatics here, the issue is not about the whether patent holds substantial value. It's about Anything-iPod-is-good and Anythin-Creative-is-bad. Apple din get the patent so pls dun sour others who got it. Apple can by all means, patent everything they invent, and i will not discredit them for it. But if they think that Creative is stupid to file such patents, say that to their precious Apple coz they did exactly the same, only failed in their attempts.

One way or another, i am NOT directing this to the Apple supporters at large. I'm juz perturbed by some of the "Apple iPod extremist"...Their support for iPod is so extreme sometimes it feels like terrorism...

Thanx for reading again...

[Chir @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

blop you could try actually READING the patent before making your baseless accusations. Or at least read my previous quote for a brief synopsis.

[Pip @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

"One way or another, i am NOT directing this to the Apple supporters at large. I'm juz perturbed by some of the "Apple iPod extremist"...Their support for iPod is so extreme sometimes it feels like terrorism..."

No offense meant or anything, but taking a look at the thread there is more extremism against Apple, than for it. Every time we have a story like this, we have 30 posts hating on Apple, and like 4 zealots. Then we have your post saying "omg Apple zealots is liek terrosim!!!".

[Neutral Party @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

To Pip:

Maybe u might wanna check out other threads featuring Creative-related products. U'll noe what i mean...All is in plain sight...It's like 100 posts hating Creative for all sorts of reasons without basis...

[Neutral Party @ Dec 19th 2005 12:19AM]

To Chir,
Your description of the patent was nicely done...Though everyone knew the logic and how it works, very few managed to actually see thru the brilliance of the idea, and how it had actually helped in navigation...

One thing to add, though a little out of topic here, is tat i wish Creative's Sim Wong Hoo would just keep quiet and concentrate on developing their players. Verbally bashing against iPod is NOT gonna boost sales. It might even generate bad publicity. My 2 cents worth...