Apple patent attack: the multi-touch gesture dictionary

The unstoppable Apple patent machine has struck again. This time, the Cupertino-cash-cow has applied for a patent on a new multi-touch "dictionary" which would establish gestures, or "chords" in multi-touch systems. The dictionary would not only provide a guide and somewhat-programmable system of movements, but would also function as an application which runs either on its own or in the background during other applications, allowing gestures to be recognized. It would seem that based on other recent patent requests, Apple is keenly interested in not only defining a new system of input, but owning that system as well, which likely means that the future of the company is going to look a lot lighter in the "key" department -- and really, isn't that what Jobs is after to begin with?

[Via PC Joint]

[Rob @ Aug 2nd 2007 1:33PM]

Oh man, you need all day to read through all the details on the patent application/form.

[nintendo fanboy hater @ Aug 2nd 2007 1:59PM]

get ready for some minority report style interface systems to come out in the next few years... all we need now is for them to mix this with microsofts own system and we are golden

[mike @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:05PM]

Apple purchased the guys who made the "Multi-Touch" keyboard.

http://www.fingerworks.com/

I have one of these and it supported about 30 different "chords" or gestures. Nothing new here. Move on.

[Mike Manzano @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:28PM]

There's absolutely something new here. I had a one of those finger boards, but what they're explaining in this patent is a feedback mechanism to teach you how to gesture while you are gesturing.

For example, putting down three fingers would bring up icons on your screen explaining what you can do next.

It also goes into assigning functions to your own gestures, something that fingerworks was working on but never completed.

[Patiwat @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:08PM]

How can they patent this?

Didn't Lotus vs. Borland show us that command hierarchies could be copied? Command hierarchy is not protected by copyright law because it was a "method of operation." I don't see how a command hierarchy of gestures is different from a command hiearchy of menu items.

[Zennalathas @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:26PM]

You should know by now that El Jobso and his cronies have no grasp of the legal system. At least, this time around, they're not stealing something outright.

I want to know how this is going to affect Microsoft's Surface stuff...if the patent goes through, will that force MS to change anything?

[Mike Manzano @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:30PM]

The patent is about interactive teaching of a command hierarchy to users, not about command hierarchies.

RTFP.

[Constable Odo @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:19PM]

Well, at least the middle finger gesture is still public domain.

[Ray-- @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:20PM]

i just tried some of those gestures on my desk... some of them are crazy.. thumb and 2 finger? How do i make that recycle looking gesture with 2 fingers?? And when i use my thumb with any other finger my fingernail just drags across the desk...unless I contort my hand to make the finger part touch.... yuck!

[alienbones @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:20PM]

>the Cupertino-cash-cow<

You've got that right, Engadget, and you'd better believe it.

[ken gray @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:27PM]

looks kind of like these ;0)
http://www.fingerworks.com/userguides.html
http://www.fingerworks.com/gesture_guide_mouse.html

[enkaedu @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:29PM]

The patent system is a mess, and it is stuff like this that is ruining it. The system relies on humans, who are way overloaded with applications in the feeding frenzy that is the patent system. Total overhaul is required. The sad thing is that patents like these - the Dr. Evil 'patent the question mark' kind - are likely to be granted by some nubhead at the PTO who just doesn't have time to say no.

I really like the attempt the USPTO is making on doing social network-style peer review for patent applications, harnessing all of us to say, "no way...been done" before patents get granted. Hope that trial works out.

[Jeff @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:29PM]

Well Fingerworks the first multitouch interface I had,
in fact I got the drop in one in my old tibook 15. Fingerworks used the exact same terminology "chording".
I think the unity between Fingerworks and Apple is now
manifesting daily.

[YouFaceTheTick @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:34PM]

Too bad Apple is using archaic capacitive touchscreens, which effectively negates the usefulness of the screens to men with tiny fingers as people with thick fingers, long nails or an inability to press their fingertipes against the screen cannot use the touch abilities.

[BestSnowman @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:37PM]

I find the amount of and genericness of these Apple patents a little bit scary.... I've heard Microsoft employees state on several occasions that they use patents for protection not litigation (as is demonstrated by a history of not suing on patents). I can only hope that Apple is doing the same!

[craig @ Aug 2nd 2007 8:59PM]

You don't know Apple's history then. Apple routinely uses it's patents offensively to discourage competition.

[Forrest @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:55PM]

I don't think patents for general HMI methods should be allowed. If it involves hardware, sure...but gestures? Think back to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti_(Palm_OS)

It ultimately places a burden on the consumer, either limiting their choices to devices that share a familiar input method, or forcing them to learn multiple input methods. What if someone held a patent on the QWERTY layout? As inefficient as it might be, it's a standard. Could you imagine having to change the way you typed a few times a day just because your work uses HPs, and you have a Dell at home?

I'd much rather see some industry group take over the development and specification of HMI methods. If multi-touch really is the way of the future, it would be nice if a device could sport a certification so you'd know you could interact with it in a familiar way. Nothing would keep a particular company from developing their own standard if they thought they could do better.

[Mike Manzano @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:32PM]

Jesus people read the patent. It's not patenting gestures, its patenting a method to interactively teach a command set to users while they use a device.

[Forrest @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:50PM]

I wasn't responding to the patent's contents, and I don't think I claimed to be doing so. I was responding to the other comments and to the text of the article itself. Thanks for the flame, though..it's a bit chilly in my office at the moment.

[Ellianth @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:33PM]

They're trying to patent the pinch? wow...

[Emceay @ Aug 2nd 2007 3:37PM]

I really hope Surface can keep up... But this is rather foreboding, in the near future being mac or pc savvy will mean knowing the different gestures between the two systems to accomplish the exact same thing.. much like option/command/alt/whatever, it always confuses me.

[Mr. Picklesworth @ Aug 2nd 2007 4:05PM]

"get ready for some minority report style interface systems to come out in the next few years..."

"I really hope Surface can keep up..."

Pff, this gesture dictionary only matters for boring capacitive multitouch.
The real future is with optical multitouch; Microsoft's favourite multitouch technology, and the one used in existing big-ass tables like CityWall and the stuff associated with www.NUIGroup.com.
Optical multitouch (with the Diffused Illumination method) not only gets touches directly on the screen but can also get (blurrier) input from a distance.
Thus, with some clever code, the user interface can differentiate between a 'flick' and a stiffer dragging operation without unnatural movements. You can flick or drag just like you would in real life, and thanks to the depth of information the device can seamlessly gather from your input, it can figure out precisely what you mean.

Putting lawyers around these gestures would be rather stupid of Apple. It would not make them user friendly, it would make them non-standard and unusual. Different devices would use different systems, so everything would be different. So much for intuitive interface...

Then again, gestures are stupid. The point of having multiple touch points is to Escape gestures!
With multitouch (of the theoretically infinite touch points variety), resizing images does not need a stinking arbitrary gesture. It can track your touching the image and apply some simple maths to resize it, rotate it, etc. as you move your fingers.
For example: One corner is being dragged, so the others will follow with it because the material is rigid enough. Two corners are being dragged in opposite directions, the material rotates AND expands such that those two corners are where you put them.
Elegant, tidy and natural.

I think creating a gesture-driven interface around this technology is backwards. Gestures are not a natural interface; they are a primitive compromise to provide quick control in limited interfaces. That is not what this technology is about, because multitouch Is Not limited like a single-touch screen or a keyboard & mouse.

[michael @ Aug 2nd 2007 4:21PM]

Is it me, or are patents so restricting?

You could patent an invention that does time traveling.

Then no other company would be allowed to do that, and thus restricts time machine making to one company. That doesn't seem fair to me.

I think that any company that could throw a bunch of things together real well, should deserve to be at the top of the market. Patents restrict what you can and cannot do.

Am I wrong about this or not? Because that's what patents seem to be these days. Making sure that nobody else can succeed. Thus the market lying in your hands.

[nintendo fanboy hater @ Aug 2nd 2007 5:06PM]

get ready for some minority report type computer interfeces in the next few years... all we need now is for them to mix this with microsoft's system and we've got something here.

[ark_v2 @ Aug 2nd 2007 7:25PM]

I've slowly beginning to believe that apple just patents crazy ideas so other companies that could actually use them to a certain degree, couldn't, even when apple doesn't seem able to do it...

[craig @ Aug 2nd 2007 9:03PM]

That's exactly what happens...at Apple and at their competitors as well. The difference is that Apple uses their patents to eliminate competition. Other companies use their portfolios defensively or to generate revenue.

[Roger Huston @ Aug 2nd 2007 7:37PM]

I have one of those figerworks keyboards too. They are great. I wish that Apple would support them. I would like to buy more.

[James @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:44AM]

So, in the span of, what? 20, 25 years? Apple has gone from innovator to hermit to second fiddle to peak of coolness to patent troll. Uh, quite a roller coaster, I guess, but the recent "dip" is troubling to me...