The iPhone patent: Steven P. Jobs, inventor

The US Patent and Trademark Office has revealed a mammoth document that can only be described as The iPhone Patent, a 371-page spectacular that covers Apple's handheld multi-touch UI paradigm in excruciating detail. Many of the mocked-up screen shots depicted in the paperwork are dead ringers for screens that we're well acquainted with in the production phone, while others represent ideas that either haven't finished cooking or eventually found their way into the Cupertino circular file (follow the break for a picture of a home screen with dedicated "Blog" and dictionary apps, for instance). The application also mentions "modules" for video conferencing, GPS, and other currently non-existent (though widely expected) functionality. And in case there's any doubt over who was responsible for this compendium of legalese, industrial design, and technical diagrams, one only need look at the header of page 1: "Jobs et al." Yep, Steve himself wasn't the least bit shy about taking credit atop an entire column of company A-listers for inventing the iPhone's trademark user interface, which we're guessing came about from a mix of equal parts truth, ego, and ass-kissing from the legal department down the hall. Seriously though, if you're Scott Forstall down there at number two on the Inventors list, what are you going to do -- go boardroom showdown all John Sculley-style?

[Via Cellpassion]

[Booshack @ May 30th 2008 3:41AM]

Really engadget? Really? We don't care...

[Alex @ May 30th 2008 3:42AM]

Mind shutting the fuck up?

[danny @ May 30th 2008 4:39AM]

engadget can post whatever they want, because i don't pay money to read it

[Tony Rayo @ May 30th 2008 6:37AM]

I understand where this person is coming from (esp. if you use RSS feeds as your main way of viewing content). Engadget does seem to report on almost everything Apple related, they should really make their own subsite for it.

... oh wait, isn't that what TUAW.com is suppose to be?

[Andy TGD @ May 30th 2008 6:38AM]

Really, if you don't like the news then:
a) Don't read it.
b) Go to another news site which doesn't cover it.

But I've got news for you buddy, journalists cover this kind of stuff... yeah. Even if you don't personally care doesn't mean others feel the same. ::rolls eyes::

[Ryan Trevisol @ May 30th 2008 8:37AM]

@ Tony Rayo: I'm with you, they should just bring the TUAW folks on board here and merge the sites, since 30-40% of their content is a mirror of Engadget's apple news anyway, and often delayed.

[Ellianth @ May 30th 2008 10:51AM]

Hey Andy, if you don't like his comment don't read it...

P.S. Good editors care what their readers think. He's a reader, he has an opinion, and he's allowed to share it.

[Chris @ May 30th 2008 12:23PM]

"P.S. Good editors care what their readers think. He's a reader, he has an opinion, and he's allowed to share it."

You might have a point if his opinion was shared constructively.

[Seth A @ May 30th 2008 12:36PM]

I have been reading TUAW for a pretty long time, in fact, it brought me to Engadget. However, I find Engadget has much more actual Breaking Apple news. I mean, TUAW is great for little things, but big news is normally carried by Engadget. I would be totally for "Engadget Mac" or something, actually, just keep the name but form a closer collaboration. As long as we don't lose the current TUAW Bloggers.

[james @ May 30th 2008 7:12PM]

flashpoint should add a comment...

[SureBut @ May 30th 2008 6:41PM]

Of course he's allowed his opinion and his comment. But using "we" just showed what an asshole he is.

[Mitch @ May 30th 2008 10:41PM]

Patent from a year ago about a well known device is not news.

[Chad @ May 30th 2008 11:21PM]

This kinda pisses me off, because some of these ideas are mine. Here's a list of product suggestions I sent to Apple on January 21, 2006.
http://www.chadupton.com/blog/index.php/2008/05/31/some-of-the-ipod-and-iphone-ideas-were-mine/

[Erik @ May 30th 2008 3:42AM]

Hmmmm.... interesting. Is this another patent or is this the first one done for the iPhone??

[Akshat @ May 30th 2008 3:44AM]

Is the iPhone patentable? I mean it's not an 'invention' is it? There were music/touch screen phones before this ...

[r3loaded @ May 30th 2008 4:43AM]

Shows you how ridiculous the patent system is. For new products made by a big company, they're handed out like candy.

I actually have a genuinely new product idea, but patenting it is going to cost me thousands - money which I simply don't have. On top of that, should someone steal my idea, the patent office don't help in any way for taking your money; you have to hire your own lawyers, fight your own battles.

The patent system needs to be more like copyright..

[chickenator @ May 30th 2008 4:43AM]

yes it is patentable

[dzhiurgis @ May 30th 2008 7:42AM]

And yes it blends!

[Gravy @ May 30th 2008 8:27AM]

@r3loaded (and engadget): This is not a patent; it is a published patent application. This document grants no intellectual property rights.

[Mikey @ May 30th 2008 10:16AM]

First, as others have pointed out, this is *not* a patent, it's a published patent application and grants no IP rights to Apple.

Second, (also as others have pointed out) this application was filed in Sept. 2007. Moreover, it also claims priority to applications filed in June 2007, Jan. 2007, and Sept. 2006.

Third, the claims of this application (which is all that matters when determining the scope of IP rights) seem to be directed at the iPhone's multitouch feature, which in Sept. 2006 probably was a new invention, particularly in a mobile phone.

@r3loaded Your little rant about the patent system adds nothing to the debate about IP. You seem to just be a bitter sole inventor who thinks he has a great idea, but doesn't want to be bothered taking the time to look for investors or venture capital. If you truly feel your idea is so great, why isn't it worth sacrificing for the few thousand dollars it would take to get it off the ground?

[andy @ May 30th 2008 10:58AM]

Render,

If the patent system was like copyright, then there would be TONS more ridiculous patents out there because there would be no patent office examiner making applicants narrow their claims.

It would cost you a LOT more money to enforce any patent rights as you would have to change the patent application before you could assert any rights to ensure validity.

As it stands, if you spend the 10k to get a patent application on file, you can acquire venture capital with the application rights as security. If someone infringes your later issued patent, you can go to a "patent troll" firm and they'll sue FOR NO MONEY DOWN. That's right, they only get paid if they win. You're probably one of those idiots that hates "patent troll" firms too aren't you?

You should research or just think before you espouse policy ideas.






Mikey,

Give up. No one here cares to know what the patent system is, how it works, or what changes could actually improve it. They want to remain blissfully ignorant shouting "down with the man, down with conformity" in unison (pun intended).

[RL @ May 30th 2008 3:48AM]

Anybody else notice the 'optical sensor' on the front there? Could that be for video calls? Or maybe I'm just being a tard, I want this damn thing to come out already!

[Gabriele @ May 30th 2008 4:08AM]

Surely that's the ambient light sensor?

[Joachim Bengtsson @ May 30th 2008 3:55AM]

That's probably just the ambient light detector that adjusts the backlight. Current model has that too (as do the MBPs).

[joe @ May 30th 2008 3:50AM]

The man's a dangerous megalomaniac.

And I'm still not fussed.

[mymaclife @ May 30th 2008 3:54AM]

And you know him how? Quite a serious allegation for someone who's not fussed!

[me @ May 30th 2008 4:04AM]

He always lists himself as primary inventor on all Apple products.

[Macfly @ May 30th 2008 4:53AM]

In his shoes, I would too.
They need someone at the helm, or they'll end up gasping for air like they were in the Amelio era.

[mymaclife @ May 30th 2008 3:52AM]

Is 'Steve Jobs takes a crap' going to be the next headline on Engadget?

[NickDG @ May 30th 2008 3:58AM]

You took time to write a response about an article you don't like. Looks like someone has a crush on Steve.

[Prokanda @ May 30th 2008 4:14AM]

@Nick

Yeah... because people never want to have their voice heard about a topic that they feel negatively about. Only people that have positive things to say should ever post a comment......

.....makes me sad to share the same name as you.

[mymaclife @ May 30th 2008 3:13PM]

@ Nick

looks like you have a crush on stupidity - cock!

[JohnPQ @ May 30th 2008 3:56AM]

Who cares about Steve Snobs anymore? More mini-notebook news please!

[neonblurb @ May 30th 2008 4:09AM]

woah, I wonder if snobs would ever contemplate some sort of eee pc killer

[y3k.nik @ May 30th 2008 7:03AM]

And go into a market where people can actually afford apple products on a mass scale? Yeah.. dream on!

[kakapo @ May 30th 2008 3:58AM]

Why is it so amazing that Steve Jobs would have his name on the patent. It is obvious by the article and the comments that you are not aware of IP filing and declarations. The USPTO and WIPO require that only individuals who had actual direct effort in the development and production of the item to be patented are listed on the patent. And if ever asked by the Patent offices (in any country filed) they must prove their participation and to what percentage their efforts can be attributed.

In addition to being a good speaker and marketing genius, Jobs is also a technically brilliant man.

The patent was pending when the iPhone was released. This is probably a final after addendum, which can follow up to 18 months after filing of the original patent.

[ben @ May 30th 2008 4:52AM]

It's not exactly standard for the CEO to be working on development teams. They usually have other things to be doing.

[mhochman @ May 30th 2008 11:06AM]

Perhaps that's what makes Apple different, that the CEO is involved on a technical scale.

[maveric101 @ May 30th 2008 10:28AM]

yeah, jobs didn't actually design the iphone at all...

[Tom Boucher @ May 30th 2008 10:38AM]

@ben

yes, it's not standard to have a CEO working on things.

Is Apple 'standard'? I mean sure people hate them but Steve and the way he runs the company seems to be a top down dictatorship, albiet benevolent.

Who's to say he didn't walk into a room, draw a bunch of stuff on a board and say 'make this'

That's a patentable idea, just because it took other people a year or more to make it doesn't mean he didn't have the original idea and deserve the name on the patent.

[ProfWiggley @ May 30th 2008 4:20AM]

Interesting - but a couple of comments and replies which (if you work with patents are well known). First - the order of the listed inventors has no real meaning however, usually, the lead inventor takes first place. In other cases this is usually also decided on an alphabetical basis. In other words.. if ego is at stake, first place..otherwise, no one really bothers..

The date that was referred to above is the publication date of the patent. The filing date is Sept 07. This is normal - all patents are made public approximately 18 months after they are first filed. Although depending on the work load in any given patent office - this does drift from time to time..

Just hoping to clarify..

[supermeerkat @ May 30th 2008 4:29AM]

GIVE STEVE A NOBEL PRIZE AND MAKE HIM POPE!

Such awesomemness needs recognising and rewarding.

[supermeerkat @ May 30th 2008 4:30AM]

Correction, 2nd line. Instead of "awesomemness" read "awesomeness".

[Bad Beaver @ May 30th 2008 4:30AM]

Man, in the time you've wasted frothing over the minor details of this non-news you could have planted a tree. Or two.

[Chris @ May 30th 2008 12:29PM]

Did you plant one while writing that?

[Bad Beaver @ May 30th 2008 12:33PM]

Once you hear the flush you'll know I'm done.

[dan davies @ May 30th 2008 6:14AM]

What does 'Jobs et al.' mean?

[Darkroom @ May 30th 2008 6:38AM]

don't you know anything about Apple? Steve jobs has a marionette named Al. he carries it around everywhere, to board meetings, trade shows, even backstage at WWDC and MacWorld... Steve speaks french to Al, that's why it says Steve et Al.

[Hancock @ May 30th 2008 8:19AM]

darkroom is absolutely correct. people who speak latin will insist that it's the abbreviation for et alii ("and others"), but they're just wrong.

[puhsitch @ May 30th 2008 8:20AM]

"Jobs and others"