Apple granted patent on capacitive multitouch displays

It's not the mythical pinch-to-zoom patent, but the USPTO just granted a fairly broad Apple patent on capacitive multitouch displays. US Patent #7,663,607 describes a "transparent capacitive sensing medium configured to detect multiple touches" by way of two sandwiched layers of conductive lines hooked up to an appropriate circuit, and also covers a specific type of multitouch display with a similar two-layer capacitive sensor made of glass. Now, there are certainly other types of capacitive sensors out there, so this isn't a total lockdown, but it's certainly one more arrow in Apple's patent quiver, and at the very least it should spur some interesting developments as competitors try to design around it. We'll see how it shakes down.

[bhtooefr Posted Feb 17th 2010 2:49PM]

Pretty sure both Alps and Synaptic have prior art.

[SolonLysander Posted Feb 17th 2010 3:22PM]

I wonder if in this environment if Ford could have gotten a patent for the steering wheel, break pedal, gearshift knob, etc. Granting a patent fro genuine innovation is fine - but when something is this obvious it shouldn't get a patent. Did apple invent capacitive screens? No. Did they invent touch sensing technology? No. Did they invent a touch sensing technology capable of recognizing two simultaneous inputs? No. They've just bundled these three technologies together and are trying to patent the idea of using them together. That's not the true technological innovation that the patent system was designed for - it's using the patent system as legal blackmail and a bargaining chip to extort licensing fees. Pay up or Apple will use it's resources and superior market position to bury you in legal fees. It's very indicative of what is becoming a serious problem across many industries in what is theoretically a free market system but has powerful entrenched interests with vast resources who favor the status quo and aren't afraid to use the legal system and the legalized bribery of campaign contributions and lobbying to preserve their status. This isn't technically patent trolling but it's pretty close.

[Punch Rockgroin Posted Feb 17th 2010 4:50PM]

@SolonLysander
Ford didn't "invent" the way car controls are layed out today.

[Harrison Posted Feb 17th 2010 7:13PM]

@Punch Rockgroin Now Cadillac, on the other hand, did.

[SolonLysander Posted Feb 17th 2010 8:35PM]

@Punch Rockgroin Yes I was aware of that. In case you missed it - that was part of the point.

[superaj Posted Feb 17th 2010 4:15PM]

I'm typing this on my macbook. Apple, quit being a dick. Pissin off the world. This is just like when EA bought exclusive rights to the NFL and we couldn't get anymore NFL Blitz games....anyone? anyone?... No?...fine.

[thehomelessguy Posted Feb 17th 2010 4:49PM]

Didn't corning actually develop the glass? How the heck did apple end up with the patent?

[HawtDawg Posted Feb 17th 2010 5:04PM]

Apple should have some sort of limit to the amount of patents they can apply for each year, coz some of them are seriously shit.

[Gib Posted Feb 17th 2010 6:20PM]

@HawtDawg

Is that limited by marketshare? Number of employees? Yearly revenue? Or just number of iHaters who make asinine comments on a blog site regarding patents?

[TechTerry Posted Feb 17th 2010 5:29PM]

For a patent to be issued like this, the company would have to design the entire screens hardware. Otherwise it would prevent the company that designed and manufactured the screen from selling to any company for their products.

Example, if I were to design and build a unique multi-touch surface and another company comes along and files for a patent that uses my product which I am selling on the open market. If they were to get the patent that would prevent me from selling my product to anyone else. How would that be fair limiting my ability to make a profit?

I am sure that the screen used on the Apple iPhone, existed long before Apple dreamed up the iPhone. It was a multi-touch screen from the start. Apple cannot stop the sale or use of multi-touch hardware unless they designed the specific implementation of the hardware.

Some patents still baffle me, as to their being granted. I think I should patent “commonsense”. Seems to be lacking in the patent office.

[TheNetAvenger Posted Feb 17th 2010 6:18PM]

I pray they go after Microsoft with this patent.

If they do, Microsoft will end up owning Apple by the time the patent wars are finished. Especially something as silly as this patent that pulls from prior art going back to the 60s even if the specific type of layered capacitive display is the crux of obtaining the patent.

[lookseehear Posted Feb 17th 2010 7:04PM]

Apple are basically trying to ruin everyone's fun. Glad I boycotted their products.

[Jack Posted Feb 17th 2010 9:52PM]

@lookseehear

You really don't understand how the US patent system works, do you?

[BigFatDuck Posted Feb 17th 2010 8:52PM]

you know, i'm all for patent reform in the US, but this is ridiculous. people will bash ANY patent, no matter how broad or specific it is. just as people sit here today and say "the iphone was never that great, capacitive touchscreens are so obvious everyone is using them", but none of your crappy phones had these screens before the iphone. if apple developed the tech, and here specifically the methodology to implement the tech, then they deserve the patent. if it was MS i would say the same thing. some things are granted patents that shouldn't be allowed, but this isn't that type of thing. this is genuine patentable technology. GET OVER IT.

[Weiman Posted Feb 18th 2010 1:24PM]

Whoa.. longfinger is long!

[taonK Posted Feb 22nd 2010 12:11PM]

I just checked the PAIR file of this patent on the USPTO website. The PAIR file enables anyone to track the whole process of a patent prosecution, from the original filing date to the final issuance. From what I read, this patent looks fairly strong. The USPTO examiner has reviewed tons of prior art patents - including patents from Synaptics, Cypress and many others - and rejected Apple's application 5 times. As a result, Apple was forced to amend its application so as to limit its scope to their specific implementation of the capacitive multi-touch technology.