Put this in the category of “you gotta be kidding me.” Microsoft has applied for and received a patent (U.S. Patent #7,415,666) that essentially patents “Page Up/Page Down” functionality. The patent (Timothy D Sellers, Heather L. Grantham, Joshua A. Dersch) that was filed in March 2005 is yet another proof that our patent system is as (if not more) dysfunctional as Britney Spears.
Method and system for navigating paginated content in page-based increments
A method and system in a document viewer for scrolling a substantially exact increment in a document, such as one page, regardless of whether the zoom is such that some, all or one page is currently being viewed. In one implementation, pressing a Page Down or Page Up keyboard key/button allows a user to begin at any starting vertical location within a page, and navigate to that same location on the next or previous page.
For example, if a user is viewing a page starting in a viewing area from the middle of that page and ending at the bottom, a Page Down command will cause the next page to be shown in the viewing area starting at the middle of the next page and ending at the bottom of the next page. Similar behavior occurs when there is more than one column of pages being displayed in a row.
Just like when Microsoft patented ones and zeroes!
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29130
while looking at the patents cited by this dysfunctional patent, i found
U.S. Patent 5,463,725 issued to IBM in 1995
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5463725
Abstract:
An interface for making information available to a user provides a display similar to a printed book or magazine. In order to “turn the page” of the displayed book, the user touches the screen with his hand or a pointing device, and moves it across the screen. Movement across the screen, while touching the screen, causes an animated turning of the page of the displayed printed material. This page turning technique is very similar to the turning of a page with an actual book or magazine.
Seems like Apple’s cover-flow and other photo/page browsing widgets on iphone are in violation of this one…
What is the patent office thinking with some of the stuff they let through
@rs… I would love to do a post on stupid patents. Any recommendations are more than welcome :-)
Can’t wait to hear Molly Wood rant on BuzzOutLoud over this one–ha!
prior art anyone???
Microsoft (again) got a patent on isNot in Basic like languages, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Basic_.NET#.27IsNot.27_operator_Patented
This was to prevent compatibility from RealBasic as far as I understand it.
I’m sure a search for “silly patent microsoft” will come up with lots of other examples.
CRAP!!! Right click is owned now too!!
@ All. One should check out the giant patent database and see how many pointless patents our friends at AT&T and IBM have. I bet you there are some that are going make you go hmmmmm!
Had not they tried patenting on ‘any computer user can work with the computer by placing the monitor right infront of him/her horizontally with ease” !!! That’s strange right ?
Crap !!!
Is that why mac mice only have one button? jk
Thie page up/page down buttons move contents by a screen rather than a page. This truly is innovation!
Oops forgot the opening tag.
For someone not leaving in the US, the numerous patents being filed is always fun stuff to read. Seriously, some things is just common sense/knowledge, I really can’t understand why it even is considered someone’s property! But as I said, I’m not American…
I find value in the Misery Inc. …I mean Microsoft Page Up/Down patent. It will be my go reference every time I spar with opponents of Open Source.
Linked to this over at DU, today, btw, Om.
finding stupid patents – sounds like a job for Mechanical Turk @ Amazon. I am sure if gigaom pays out a few bucks ($100 ?) for each selected entry, there’d be takers.
I bet you there was bribery involved. Either that, or something is wrong with the patent system. btw is this a april fool’s joke or something?
good question, frank: “prior art, anyone?”
since “the name of the game is the claims”, it’s not the abstract that is examined for patentability. did any of the posters read the claims before jumping the gun?
“did any of the posters read the claims before jumping the gun?”
No. The general public doesn’t have a clue about patents. For this patent, the claims are actually quite specific to a particular algorithm.