Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Receives Patent For Double-Click

simoniker posted more than 10 years ago | from the patents-patents-go-away dept.

Patents 836

kaluta writes "The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that Microsoft was granted a patent for double-clicking on April 27. The patent in question is 6,727,830 and says, amongst other stuff: 'A default function for an application is launched if the button is pressed for a short, i.e., normal, period of time. An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double click'. So this is what we have to look foward to in the E.U. now?"

cancel ×

836 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

April Fool's (5, Funny)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320654)

Surely it's April Fool's day somewhere in the world for this to happen.

Hmm... (5, Funny)

peterprior (319967) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320658)

This is just twice as stupid as Amazon's 1-Click patent...

...I'll get my coat..

Re:Hmm... BUT!!! (5, Funny)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320692)

Triple Click...
Quad Click...
Qunice Click...

Are still available!!

Re:Hmm... BUT!!! (5, Informative)

thestarz (719386) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320809)

Triple Click...
Quad Click...
Qunice Click...

Are still available!!


Not quite...

"Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time..."

Re:Hmm... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320707)

Quick register the 3 click patent whilst it's still available !!!

Dear Lord... (3, Insightful)

Sxooter (29722) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320659)

Suddenly all those "I'm patenting peanut butter and jelly sandwich" posts are seeming more and more prophetic...

I'm hoping that such insane uses of patents will result in the USPTO and Congress waking the hell up and fixing this mess.

Re:Dear Lord... (3, Funny)

gphinch (722686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320695)

Hey quit stealing my ideas, you insensitive clod! Peanut Butter & Jelly Sandwich - Patent Pending Apple Pie - Patent Pending Walking - Patent Pending

Re:Dear Lord... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320748)

Sex: Patent pending (I may never use this but what the hell.

Re:Dear Lord... (1)

Edward Teach (11577) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320747)

Not me! I'm patenting the smashed chees sandwich!

Re:Dear Lord... (1)

pankajsethi (212117) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320772)

Worse... they are very much on topic ;)

LOL (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320662)

I'm breaking patent laws right now...and again...whoops I did again :p

Re:LOL (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320743)

whoops I did again :p

Britney....is that you??

Xerox and Apple (2, Informative)

nvrrobx (71970) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320665)

I think Xerox and Apple defintely qualify as prior art.

There are days when I think the USPO really needs to wake up.

Re:Xerox and Apple (4, Informative)

justMichael (606509) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320740)

I'm not saying I agree with the patent, but it is for a PDA not a PC.

It's almost funny to see them referring to it as a palm-type device all over the patent app ;)

Re:Xerox and Apple (5, Informative)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320800)

Absolutely, although reading the patent, I was interested to find it titled:

"Time based hardware button for application launch"

Interesting, as it seems to be getting at the idea of launching different applications based on how long you hold down a hardware button, rather than how long you click and hold on the screen. This ties in with the sentence further on which pertains to it being relevant to devices with limited resources, i.e. not very many buttons.

While I can see that this will get people's backs up if it impedes on double clicking, I don't think it does. I think it's aimed more along the lines of Apple's iPod interface controller patent - it's trying to carve out a control method for mobile devices.

I can see how this would be useful on a PDA for instance when the start menu is longer than the screen size (as in PocketPCs), but personally I'd prefer a jog dial...

On a side note, the story does seem to be scaremongering to a degree - this certainly isn't about patenting double clicking.

Re:Xerox and Apple (1)

jm92956n (758515) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320820)

There are days when I think the USPO really needs to wake up.

I, too, share that thought. I call those days "weekdays" (friday evening through monday morning is generally spent either drunk or asleep).

Re:Xerox and Apple (1)

Pheonix5000 (661842) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320833)

Of course, look at the filing date:July 12, 2002. You can't tell me that there isn't a single instance of prior art. Here's an EXACT EXAMPLE of prior art. If people are talking about it before this was patented and was already implemented in Apple computers, etc. that means that there is PRIOR ART! Maybe the people at the patent office should require something higher than a second grade education

Quick! (1, Redundant)

arabagast (462679) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320666)

Run for it, gotta get the trippelclick patent before microsoft gets it!

seriously, this is really ridicilous, the patent system as it is is really just a giant joke. The system desperatly needs a remake or makeover, making the important patents pass, and the ridicilous ones take a loong vacation in .. the trash bin.

Re:Quick! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320702)

or... is that a double double-click?

Re:Quick! (1)

thestarz (719386) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320757)

Run for it, gotta get the trippelclick patent before microsoft gets it!

Seems like, rather than patenting double clicking, they patented double, triple, quadruple, etc clicking, all in one move. Damn clever bastards...

"Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time..."

Re:Quick! (1)

JonLatane (750195) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320761)

The system desperatly needs a remake or makeover, making the important patents pass, and the ridicilous ones take a loong vacation in .. the trash bin.

Well, as long as it's not a Trash Can on a non-Apple system, I'd say I agree.

Absurdity (5, Insightful)

weekendwarrior1980 (768311) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320667)

Now here we have the powers that be granting patents based on how we move or interact? One more reason Patenting process should be thoroughly revised.

Re: Absurdity (1, Redundant)

orthogonal (588627) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320779)

Now here we have the powers that be granting patents based on how we move or interact?

Well, I don't think any Slashdotters will be getting those patents on moving and interacting.

And certainly not the patents on moving and interacting with women.

(Well, maybe with one woman: the patent on moving back into the basement and interacting with Mom.)

:)

first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320668)

fuck micro$oft

Prior Art? (2, Interesting)

metallicagoaltender (187235) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320670)

Surely there's prior art for this...while I'm not old enough to remember the earliest GUIs, I would think someone other than MS invented this.

Anyone have specific examples?

Re:Prior Art? (1)

haute_sauce (745863) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320762)

Apple came out with Lisa (per Mac flop) before MS came out w/ windows. and w/ only one button, it requires a 'double click' to select and launch an application. PS:you can measure the strengh of the O/S by the number of buttons on the mouse. Mac with one, Windows has two, and *nix has three !

Re:Prior Art? (1)

HonkyLips (654494) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320790)

Definitely the Amiga... it was launched in 1986 I think, and I'm sure the Atari STs used double-clocks too. If only this was a joke.

prior story (1)

blamanj (253811) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320812)

Slashdot covered this story [slashdot.org] already. Note that the Aussies are a few months behind in following the USPTO.

Triple Clicking (1)

wwcsa (315512) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320673)

I guess linux will have to be updated so that everything opens with a triple-click.... that, or suffer the wrath of the $699 licensing fee (or am I mixing stories up now)?

For the millionth time... (5, Insightful)

the_mad_poster (640772) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320676)

WHO CARES?


They can have so many patents that they have to start holding them in their asscracks. Exhibit 1: IBM, the Little Linux guy's friend on Slashdot.


They problem is not that they GET them. The problem only occurs if they can actually ENFORCE them. Which, in any sane court (yes, I know those are in dwindling numbers these days) won't happen.


By all means, let them run amok and waste money on BS patents. Just make sure that the first time they get challenged they actually go down. If the challenge fails, THEN there's a problem.

Re:For the millionth time... (1, Redundant)

JamieF (16832) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320753)

The problem is not that someone has a loaded gun pointed at your head. The problem only comes when that person pulls the trigger. By all means, let them become a felon. The jail time will teach them a lesson.

Re:For the millionth time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320787)

Stop your whining about people shooting at your head at point blank range. The real problem comes when the bullet enters your brain.

Oh wait, that's not a problem either. The problem happens when you try and use the damaged part of your brain that's splattered on the wall behind you.

So until you actually need the part of your brain that is splattered on the wall behind you, STOP WHINING! The person pointing a loaded gun at your forehead isn't anything to worry about.

Re:For the millionth time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320773)

Big corporations can have a big pull in court. For example, if the lindows name doesn't fly they could fall back on one of many patents. Maybe they'll all get rejected but companies have deep pockets and it could take a while.

Re:For the millionth time... (1)

jdrogers (93806) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320791)

Well, I agree with your sentiment, but I think there is a real problem with granting patents that aren't enforcable. Mainly it eats up patent office resources and makes the process more expensive and slower for those who have legitimate patentable ideas.

I cannot believe this crap... (5, Funny)

AcquaCow (56720) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320680)


Next up:
Microsoft tries to patent the Internet.
Al Gore files suit.

Re:I cannot believe this crap... (1, Redundant)

SilentChris (452960) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320802)

Nah, next is someone trying to patent the patenting procedure. Then the world explodes.

Prior Art (0, Redundant)

doneagain (551501) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320682)

There has to be prior art for this!! Or has the world gone totaly mad

Re:Prior Art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320744)

I can't think of another device where you push a button twice in rapid succession to achieve an outcome.

While They Are At It... (1)

machocomacho (760106) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320683)

Microsoft Should Patent The "on" button, the computer screen, The "QWERTY" keyboard scheme, hmmm.....perhaps the world?

Double-click patent? (4, Funny)

daeley (126313) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320685)

Well, double-dumbass on you! </kirk>

The news is wrong. (2, Insightful)

lazy_arabica (750133) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320689)

It's not April 27, it's April 1st. =)
Hey guys, don't worry... I don't think this patent can be used by Microsoft to destroy Open Source. So, it's better to laugh at it.
Now, we have got one more example to show people how ridiculous software patents are.

First Post!!! W00t! (5, Informative)

thewldisntenuff (778302) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320690)

Well, before we pull out our tinfoil hats and scream random obscenities at MS, let's RTFA, okay?

TFA states that patent revolves around giving other options when holding the click, and uses the default program when double clicked...Smells like Apple, anyone?

Furthermore, it's not as if they patented the motion of clicking a mouse button twice, as the poster makes it seem....Don't sound the alarm yet people....

If you want to get scared, worry about that last part of the article which states that MS wants to start charging for the FAT file system....How are they going to swing that one? Higher fees on XP (tough sh!t, I use SuSE) ? Online scans for people with FAT and a bill in the mail?

FAT fees (2)

tntguy (516721) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320730)

CompactFlash cards...

*sigh* (2, Funny)

TWX (665546) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320691)

Now I have to go back and look at my Pong machine to see if it qualifies as Prior Art...

reform (1)

sstory (538486) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320696)

They just gave the reform crowd a bright and shining example.

And slashdot posted a story about it April 28th (3, Informative)

PetoskeyGuy (648788) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320697)

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/28/198242 [slashdot.org]

I can't wait to see all the NEW comments on it.

Re:And slashdot posted a story about it April 28th (3, Funny)

nihilogos (87025) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320769)

No no, that was for a timed button press. Sure the patent numbers are identical, and they may in fact be the same patent, but people are far more likely to become hysterical if it's referred to as a double-click patent.

Re:And slashdot posted a story about it April 28th (5, Funny)

mikael (484) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320816)

It's time somebody patented double posting a story to slashdot.

I have some prior art (1, Troll)

GiveMeLinux (713432) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320698)

Now when I want my kid to do a chore like wash the dishes, verbally telling him to do it wont work, just like yelling at your monitor wont get the application to run.

So first I'll smack him. He'll still say no, so I'll smack him again, and this time he'll do it. Thus a "double click" will get the job going.

Seeing as he was born in 1986, I think I might have a case.

previous art... (1)

drgroove (631550) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320699)

guess no one @ MS has ever heard of xerox, or apple ...

This isn't to be enforced (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320701)

This was no doubt awarded to avoid crap like Eolas. Microsoft can just sit on the patent, and just in case some little company comes along trying to fleece them of money like Eolas did, they can say, "Sorry, can't do it, we already own it."

I guarantee this won't actually be enforced against competitors. It's an interesting patent, but I'm not worried about it. But it is an illustration of how silly the system is that anybody can be awarded a patent for anything, to the point where companies take out cheesy patents like this one just to keep even cheesier companies like Eolas off their backs.

Re:This isn't to be enforced (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320829)

Hoping that Microsoft is just using this defensively is pure crap. There is plenty of prior art out there so MS would have no problems in defeating any attacks on the "double click" front.

IMHO this is just another weapon for their FUD machine. With a patent like this they can yell that they have the power to shut down competitors. It makes people considering moving to, say, Novell desktops think twice.

The problem with patents is that they stand until challenged and are overturned by the USPTO. Until they are overturned they are legally binding - no matter how stupid they are.

only for "limited resource computing devices" (4, Insightful)

bizcoach (640439) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320704)

Hmm... each of the claims in the patent as it was actually granted [uspto.gov] refers (explicitly or implicitly) specifically to "limited resource computing devices".

Hence general-purpose PCs and bigger embedded systems are safe from this, but small devices such as handhelds are vulnerable?

Re:only for "limited resource computing devices" (1)

Roguelazer (606927) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320742)

Explain to me how a general purpose PC is not resource limited? If you have Infinite RAM, I'd be very interested to meet your supplier.

Furthermore, what about handheld OS's/environments such as Qtopia and Palm OS? I know that Qtopia uses tap-and-hold, and Palm OS uses it too in some apps. I'm also sure that those were pre-2002 applications of this tech...

Re:only for "limited resource computing devices" (1)

xoboots (683791) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320777)

Did you miss this then?

"This invention relates generally to computer systems, and more particularly to increasing the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device."

All its missing is an ", etc." at the end.

Re:only for "limited resource computing devices" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320821)

Our Ashtech Z-surveyor receivers use this trick. These things cost multiples of $1000 and have three buttons. One is power. The other two have multiple functions depending on how they are pressed (single, double, long, etc).

I think it's the worst user interface I've ever used. A couple more buttons and they could drop the overloading. I also don't understand why something costing this much has a 10 character LED display, when I can get a cell phone for $50 with a 100+ character full color LED display and a dozen buttons.

Rant off. . .

Maybe this patent is a good thing. If it really only applies to "limited" devices, maybe it's a good idea. I'd rather pay a few dolars more and get enough buttons to prevent this kind of mess. Too bad Microsoft is required to provide licenses.

My case included? (2, Interesting)

JFitzsimmons (764599) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320708)

Does this mean that the button on the front of my case that I hold in for 6 seconds to do a hard power reset (as opposed to a soft one/APM call if I just press it) is also subject to this patent? How far can this possibly extend? What kind of interface doesn't use a button with some sort of timing involved?

Re:My case included? (1)

Shdwdrgn (162364) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320824)

The cruise control on my '74 Pontiac has a single button. If you tap it, it sets your speed. If you hold the button for more than 1 second, it resumes your previously set speed. And a cruise control definitely qualifies as a "limited resource computing device."

So much for 2/3 of their patent. Now if someone finds true prior art on the actual 'double-click' portion, then this patent is sunk.

Prior Art... duh! (4, Interesting)

Roguelazer (606927) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320709)

Look, the patent was filed on July 12, 2002. If we can't come up with a single pre-2002 OS that used double-clicking, then we're really, really bad off. I mean, Microsoft itself has used it since about 1991 in Windows...

Um.... (2, Informative)

CyanDisaster (530718) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320711)

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Apple have a GUI before Microsoft, and if so, wouldn't one be able to open an application merely by doubleclicking on it? Next thing you know, Microsoft's going to try patenting the Start menu as 'a menu allowing a user to quickly find and launch applications.' or something like that...

Hope be with ye,
Cyan

How depressing! (3, Funny)

Nybble's Byte (321886) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320712)

Are they gonna sue DoubleClick Software [doubleclick.com] ? Or the other way around for trademark infringement?

MS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320714)

all your pantents are belong to us

14 posts, and nobody has read the patent? (5, Informative)

b0rken (206581) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320717)

The patent doesn't cover *mouse* clicks. It covers a way to get at least 3 different actions from the "application buttons" on your PDA --- short click, long click, and double-click.

I don't know whether this was being done back in 2002, though I know that Palm enhancements used application button chords back in 2002 or 2003.

Re:14 posts, and nobody has read the patent? (3, Funny)

xeniten (550128) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320813)

"14 posts, and nobody has read the patent?"


Welcome to slashdot.

In other news... (2, Funny)

darth_silliarse (681945) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320720)

...Apple are granted a patent for keypresses, and IBM are granted a patent for pixels

Might As Well Apply For A Patent... (3, Insightful)

CHaN_316 (696929) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320721)

for mouse movements. Any patent on mouse movements will supercede Microsoft's double clicking, and Amazon's 1-click.

Not impressed.... :|

Re:Might As Well Apply For A Patent... (5, Funny)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320760)

Might As Well Apply For A Patent ... for mouse movements.
For some reason this reminded me of a .sig I used to see here:
Windows has detected that your mouse has moved. Reboot now for changes to take effect?

but what gets launched... (4, Funny)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320723)

when the same story is pushed twice within a short time frame, like this one?

Keep 'em coming (2, Insightful)

karevoll (630350) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320727)

.. because if they continue to give patents on stuff like this like they've done the last few years, the system is bound to fail. Its just a simple matter of time.

(and now for the obligatory:) What next? A patent for interpreting presses on different keys into machine-understandable signals?

But what about... (1)

bprime (734645) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320728)

My mouse has 8 buttons. One of them is set to double-click. Technically, i'm not double clicking...i'm using a different button. This was fairly common at a company i work at - all of the drafting monkies have the scroll-wheel clicky set to double-click. Is that covered?

Not as all encompassing as you might think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320732)

I'm not a patent lawyer, but it mentions multi-clicking only on a "limited resource computing device". I guess as long as you keep your system on the bleeding-edge, you're ok....

Ahhh. My summer research project. (1)

sharkb8 (723587) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320733)

I'm starting monday as a summer associate at the Public Patent Foundation [pubpat.org] . Looks like I know what I'll be doing my summer research on.

Its quantity that matters (1)

mwandel (662680) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320828)

Working in the industry, I know that a good patent (one that is original) can be a big asset. But failing that, if you go after another company with 50 obvious patents that they may infringe on, it simply gets too expensive to defeat every one of them. Plus, the justice system is somewhat unreliable, so if they fail to defeat one, they are still screwed. Its like the corporate patent folks pride themselves of patenting the obvious. They take pride in patenting what nobody else thought was even patentable!

Prior Art? (1)

cammoblammo (774120) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320738)

Does anyone have any info on when MS claim to have invented the double click? I remember using it on a Mac before I'd even heard of Windows. That may just be a function of my memory though!

correct (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320739)

We are missing the point a bit here. Of course, you are all totally correct, this isnt anywhere near a new thing, but we are missing the whole patent issue. I know you all understand this as well as cookies, but ill say it anyway. Patents protect an IDEA. They dont protect the end result. Hell, imagine if Hoover could patent clean carpets, no one else is allowed to invent a sucky upy thing, since it's patented!

This is exactly the problem with a load of software patents. They dont patent HOW something is done, that patent WHAT is done. It's like trying to patent staying dry and warm, and therefore preventing anyone else building houses! I do believe there are some valid software patents, but that should NOT stop someone else getting to the same result by doing it differently. Just because some guy invented RSA security, does not stop some other guy inventing a totally differnt way to use the same algorithm.

Microsoft can patent the source they used to time this button, if it uses some cool new timing algorithm that works without needing the internal clock, but no way should they be allowed to patent the actual result, a timed button.

And honestly, i dont blame microsoft, i blame the fucking stupid patent clerks and judges who let things like this through. Microsoft are just using the system, we all would given half a chance. You patent people should wake the fuck up and engage brain!

sounds a little sensational (1)

beni1207 (603012) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320745)

without having read the article, this doesn't at all seem to be a patent on double-clicking. More like a system where double-clicking on an application icon does one thing, single clicking on it does another, and clicking and holding for awhile does something else. While I still think software patents are a dumb idea (although I don't have the balls to tell that to my boss, who has several filed and pending), this doesn't at all seem to fit the sky-is-falling title. I know I personally have never seen a system like the one described in the blurb.

Double-Click Here (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320750)

Double-click here to replace Windows with Linux.

Operation prohibited due to patent restrictions.

Possible prior art in HP48/Keyman (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320751)

Keyman thread [google.com] .

I'll leave it to the lawyers to figure out.

OK. (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320752)

I just notice that the same old jokes are getting modded up again and again. So here is something that will make all following slashdot jokes redundant:

in soviet russia, the mouse double clicks you.

1-double click
2-?
3-profit

I wonder how linux would run on a double click.

I for one, welcome our double click over lords.

I am a double click you insensitive clod!

imagine a beowulf cluster of double clicks.

Now RTFA you PHB before the FUD really hits the fan.

PS. IANAL.

Did I miss any?

I quit (1)

greywar (640908) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320758)

I am aghast. double clicking gets a patent? WTH? Im sure that the guy following me around will mod me redundent [whats up with that? im being stalked!] Anyways lets cover this-a patent must be: (a) novel - new, never having existed anywhere on Earth. I hardly think that double clicking is new. I mean to me it seems that some prior art must exist-for example some arcade games had you double vlivk a button inthe game for special purposes. (b) useful - it must "work" or accomplish something - the reason for the prototype. OK im game-it makes it on this. (c) non-obvious - if a clothespin exists, your invention of a clothes LINE would be "obvious". To me, the idea of double clicking IS obvious. why wasnt this denied? There must be some guy recently retired from the patent office enjoying some extra retirement funds from ol Bill at the moment. Time to sue apple....and..Oh My! doesnt Linux use double clicking?

An attack on OS X? (1)

dankney (631226) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320759)

The patent isn't on the double-click. It's on using different durations and repetitions of clicks to accomplish different tasks.

This sounds like Microsoft is gearing up to go after OSX, which uses the long click to emulate a two button mouse.

Re:An attack on OS X? (3, Informative)

Rick Zeman (15628) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320804)

This sounds like Microsoft is gearing up to go after OSX, which uses the long click to emulate a two button mouse.

My hazy memory says the original Netscape is the prior art for holding down the mouse and then getting a contextual/different action depending on the duration.

This is not a patent on "double-click"... (3, Informative)

borgheron (172546) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320765)

this is a patent on the idea of launching different functions depending on how and the length of time a user presses a button.

Now, of course, the patent is ridiculous, but it cannot be read so broadly.

GJC

More from the patent abstract (1)

Grrr (16449) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320770)

A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. ...as opposed, I said stupidly, to an unlimited resource computing device...

Filed: July 12, 2002

Other References:
Applications Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.

(hmmmmmm)

Later in the patent: ...based on the length of time an application button is pressed...

So - this doesn't really apply to mice . . .?

<grrr>

EU doesn't matter (1)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320775)

This does not effect the EU's position on Micorosft in any way.

The EU is the European Union. The patent question is a US patent.

That being said, the patent looks like it was more intended to cover some rudimentary system of mouse gestures than the double-click. Either way, it will never hold up in court; there's just far too much prior art. Not to mention that in the past, MS has not enforced their frivolous patents. Methinks this is just a precautionary measure to prevent some jerk from getting it and suing MS, Apple, Xerox, and the rest of the world.

Now, if Apple got a right-click patent, that would be news

read the patent (2, Informative)

wolfywolfy (107431) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320776)

it's not actually double clicking

One such palm-type computer is Microsoft's Palm-size PC. The Palm-size PC has a touch screen display. A stylus is used to input data into a user interface displayed on the touch screen display. The user interface is similar in appearance to a Windows user interface displayed on a desktop or laptop PC. A taskbar, used for launching application programs, is displayed at the bottom of the touch screen display. Applications are launched by using the stylus to select the desired application from a taskbar menu. Using a stylus can be cumbersome for users. Therefore, as an alternative to launching applications by using the stylus, the Palm-size PC contains a plurality of buttons (called application buttons) that are used to launch the more common applications installed on a Palm-size PC. Applications can be launched in a variety of states. In the past, the actuation of an application button caused an application to be launched in a particular state, for example a view state. The user was required to take further steps to invoke additional application functionality, such as opening a document. It is desirable to more easily launch applications in various states. The present invention is directed to increasing the functionality of application buttons so as to accomplish this result.

Sorry this isn't funny (1)

jonnystiph (192687) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320782)

The Onion [att.net] already did it, years ago. (Sorry I couldn't find the actual onion link. Same article though.)

Prior Art!!! SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320784)

What about:
Apple
Xerox
et al?
What next you patent scumwads?

**NEWSFLASH!**
Computer Monitor patented by Dell

Double...Triple....Quadruple...Quintuple (1)

psamty (749960) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320785)

WTF? WTF? WTF? Is this what the world's come down to?? Gates should now proceed to patent absolute disregard for common sense. Mwaahaahhaa

I'm crouching! (0, Troll)

coopaq (601975) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320786)

Waiting for any fucker to come in here and explain why MS deserves this patent.

Go ahead. We're all waiting...

Otherwise we're just posting jokes or complaining about the patent office.

Amazon: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9320792)

Fuck it, we're going to three clicks.

Perhaps the shave and a haircut 2 bits click... (1)

Kalbo (572550) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320794)

"click" "click" "click""click""click"... "click" "click"

Pro... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320795)

1: Patent obvious prior art that no one patented before and everyone uses.
2: Defend it with immense legal staff backed by the deepest pockets in the world.
3: Profit!

Some easy extra info (2, Interesting)

bfree (113420) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320798)

Filed: July 12, 2002 Dated: April 27, 2004 This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/226,031, filed Jan. 5, 1999 now abandoned. The entire subject matter of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/226,031 is specifically incorporated herein by reference. It also references material back to 1985, so who the hell is a patent lawyer who can figure out what the hell is going on here (I'm off to try and see what all those references are about).

heh (1)

arabagast (462679) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320817)

Inventors: Lui; Charlton E. (Redmond, WA); Blum; Jeffrey R. (Seattle, WA)

that must be nice, being known as the inventors of a bodily gesture probably known to man as long as man has existed...

It's not the money that matter, it's the stuff they buy.

I would be rich, (1, Redundant)

Tsiangkun (746511) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320819)

But my patent for a process to aquire technology in widespread use via deep pockets and infinite legal resources was turned down.

Hmmmmm. (1)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320825)

If Microsoft can get a patent on something as stupid as this maybe I could get a patent on wiping my ass. Just goes to show the patent office is severly broken...

Not mouse double-clicking (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 10 years ago | (#9320830)

Having read the patent (yes, I actually read the patent, rather than firing up the usual "I'm gonna patent breathing" posts), I can't claim to be thrilled with it, but it's not quite as obvious as the post makes it appear.

This isn't mouse double-clicking. They're talking about physical buttons on a PDA-type device. Click once to play your voice note; double-click to record.

This is obviously derived pretty trivially from mouse double-clicking (for which I could see no patent cited), but honestly I can't think of any devices except mice that use double-clicks. My cell phone doesn't; my VCR doesn't. They do reference patents on using the same button to scroll through options, but that's different from a double-click.

It's pretty obvious, but if it's so obvious, why didn't Palm do it? (I'm assuming that they didn't. I've never really used a PalmPilot. They do reference the PalmPilot user's manual.)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>