|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 07:55 AM EDT |
Has the Patent Office gone totally insane?
No. They were so conceived.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 10:13 AM EDT |
Lira is about:
Viewing an electronic document in a display window of a display may include
detecting a layout of the electronic document (505) and comparing the layout of
the electronic document to a width of the display window (510). The electronic
document may be reformatted into at least two columns, with each of the columns
having a width that does not exceed a width of the display window (515).
Navigating on the display may include tracking motion of an input tool on a
display, comparing a motion of the input tool to a threshold, and changing a
position of the visible portion of a page of information on the display if the
input tool motion exceeds the threshold. The position of the visible portion of
the page of information on the display may be constrained if the motion does not
exceed the threshold. Navigating on a display also may include tracking
coordinate information of an input tool on a display and moving a visible
portion of a page of information on the display a distance equal to a change in
the coordinate information of the input tool multiplied by a multiplier.
Navigating on a display also may include providing a navigation control operable
to change a viewable portion of a page of information on a display from a first
view to a second view. In response to operation of the navigation control, the
display may be animated to create an appearance of motion as the viewable
portion of the page of information changes from the first view to the second
view in response to operation of the navigation control.
As you can see, Lira isn't really focused on "Snap-back". What
happened here is what almost always happens. The examiner went looking for a
gist of the Apple patent in the prior art, found a document in the general
vicinity, a document describing moving doucments around on a display, and then
over "interpreted" the document until he came up with an argument, how
ever weak, that the claims could be interpreted as "reading on"
something in the document.
Then, when faced with a reasoned rebuttal, that the document didn't include
various aspects, the examiner agreed and we are where we are.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 11:07 AM EDT |
This affects a lot of patents. Think Myriad for genetics as one.
Wayne
http://madhatter.ca
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|