FutureTap
Latest
Developer gets crash report from device running iOS 5
iOS app developer FutureTap has received a crash report from a device running iOS 5. FutureTap notes the crash involved MKUserLocationBreadCrumb, which 9to5Mac notes is related to the maps/location functions in iOS and could mean these APIs have been altered in iOS 5. Since Apple is now testing third-party apps with iOS 5, it likely puts the next version of the iPhone's operating system on-track for a public unveiling in June at WWDC. It's still not clear if we'll see iOS 5 released in mid-summer as we have previous major iOS updates, or if Apple will wait until the fall to release iOS 5 alongside updated hardware.
Why Apple's patents might show screens from third-party apps
This is a weird one. FutureTap was surprised to recognize one of their app's screens in a strange place: a recent Apple patent outlining how a possible travel application could work. The company wasn't quite sure what to do next -- as you can see above, it's a straightforward copy of the Where To? screen. Without any contact from Apple on the issue, FutureTap was puzzled -- the company calls Apple its "primary business partner." Having your app show up in an Apple patent filing Not that Apple is above cherry-picking UI and functionality from third-party apps -- the iBooks interface was more or less borrowed whole from apps like Delicious Library and Classics, and further back there was the homage of Karelia Software's Watson reinterpreted as Apple's revision to Sherlock. In those cases, both developers just sort of shrugged, felt flattered, and let it go. That's not the situation here -- these screenshots probably aren't illustrations of a product Apple wants to make, they're explanations of how the patent would work. As Engadget's Nilay Patel clarifies for us (so nice to have an attorney around), not only is this merely a patent application (which could possibly still be denied), but Apple isn't trying to lay claim to the actual screenshot; rather the company is using an example application which illustrates the to-be-patented functionality (in the case of Where To?, the ability of an iPhone to auto-detect when a user has been traveling). As Nilay puts it: ...the only operative parts of a patent are the claims -- not the drawings, and not the description, which are technically known as the "specification." (We've now repeated this basic axiom of patent interpretation so many times we're considering making T-shirts.) The only reason the drawings and description are there is to explain the claimed invention in sufficient detail so that someone else can make it. Remember, patents are a trade: in order to get protection, you have to give up the full details of how your invention works. (The other option is to keep your invention a trade secret, but then you can't prevent anyone else from figuring it out and using it if it gets out.) Bottom line? If it's not in the claims, it's not in the patent. We'll have to see what FutureTap does -- the company might request that Apple remove the Where To? screenshot from the patent application, but at this point it's not clear that Apple wants to lay claim to that particular app. What is clear is that Apple could have avoided a lot of hassle and furor if it had simply sent FutureTap an email asking to use a screenshot in a patent filing. In the meantime, FutureTap execs are huddled with their lawyers, trying to make sure they understand what's going on.
Apple uses third-party app screenshots in patent applications, world erupts in hysteria
There's been a bit of a furor in the past couple days over Apple using third-party app screenshots in several patent applications that were just made public -- the most talked-about example is a screenshot of an app called Where To? that appears in a travel-related patent, but other apps like a Ralph Lauren app appear in a shopping-related patent as well. And, since it's Apple, there's been the usual blind panic of hysterical reactions, with some claiming that Cupertino's trying to patent third-party app ideas and pull the rug out from under its own developers. At this point, we hope you know better -- let's take a look at what's really going on. First of all, all of the patent applications in question are just that -- applications. None of them have been granted, and since all of them are still so new, it's a virtual certainty they'll be narrowed in scope as Apple's attorneys and the Patent Office continue through the patent prosecution process -- a process that typically takes years. Second, the only operative parts of a patent are the claims -- not the drawings, and not the description, which are technically known as the "specification." (We've now repeated this basic axiom of patent interpretation so many times we're considering making T-shirts.) The only reason the drawings and description are there is to explain the claimed invention in sufficient detail so that someone else can make it. Remember, patents are a trade: in order to get protection, you have to give up the full details of how your invention works. (The other option is to keep your invention a trade secret, but then you can't prevent anyone else from figuring it out and using it if it gets out.) Bottom line? If it's not in the claims, it's not in the patent. So... let's look at the claims, shall we?
