Microsoft, Samsung each attempt to patent Apple’s ‘Pinch-to-Zoom’ feature

“Yesterday we covered a patent filing form Microsoft that clearly demonstrated their intentions of copying Apple’s Pinch and Zoom feature. Samsung, who is trying everything in their power to invalidate Apple’s Pinch & Zoom, is now trying to patent this all-important touchscreen feature as well,” Jack Purcher reports for Patently Apple.

“A new patent application published last week by the US Patent Office clearly demonstrates this fact,” Purcher reports. “With published applications from Microsoft and Samsung surfacing at the US Patent Office in the same week claiming that the Pinch & Zoom function is their own original invention is testament to how critical a feature this is for modern day touchscreen devices.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
USPTO tentatively – and likely temporarily – declares Apple’s ‘pinch-to-zoom’ patent invalid – December 20, 2012
2011 Leahy-Smith America Invents Act made it easier to tentatively review Apple’s patents – December 20, 2012
The Apple patent Steve Jobs fought hard to protect, and his connection to its inventor – August 7, 2012

64 Comments

      1. Oh, puh-lease. Try to keep the bombastic stupidity in check. All countries have judges. I think you need to look elsewhere for the reasons the US legal system is sooo broken. 95% of the world’s lawsuits! This is not due to US judges being, somehow, spectacularly different from the rest of the world’s judges.

        1. Stupidity? All countries have judges so therefore they must all be the same? You have no clue about the US legal system based on your remarks. When Judge Koh unilaterally slashed Apple’s judgment by almost half while another judge in TX upheld another judgment against Apple in favor of a patent troll almost equal to the reduced Samsung judgment you don’t think stupid judges wield extraordinary power here? Your remarks my sir are stupid!

          1. Judges in America don’t even need to understand law like lawyers do to practice so they often end up making wildly illegal judgments. There isn’t really the bar like there is for lawyers.

      2. billyjackblack, you reveal your profound ignorance when you attempt to use Lucille Ball as a negative character example. She was an amazing, incredibly talented woman and does not deserve to be disparaged by the likes of you.

    1. Microsoft actually has patent sharing in place with Apple and only has to not substantially copy the trade dress of Apple’s products and with the exception of their stores which are direct copies, and Windows which Apple gave them legal permission to steal with a bad contract, they have done a good job of that.

  1. Apple already has this patented and they are trying to patent it for themselves? Isn’t this like the Borg – futile? What are they thinking? Or wait I think I read that Apples patent was invalidated? WTF?

    1. The crazy illogical injustices found in our current judicial system is mind boggling in most cases. Between the judges and some of the juries you just hope you’re never caught up in some judicial mess yourself someday. Don’t count on logic to prevail.

  2. What a bunch of piss-ants. (Don’t ask me what Piss-Ants are, but it doesn’t sound good.) When Apple was up-and-coming it brought good solid, high integrity, original competition – conceptually and marketing-wise. Now that Apple’s at the top they provide their competition with the ideas that their competition tries to compete with them – with.

    I’m ALL for capitalism, but there’s something fundamentally wrong here.

    1. Piss-ant: One of the more common species has the scientific name myrmica rubra. In some regions they are a true nuisance, so your use is apt and appropriate.

    2. @ Peabody, perhaps I am reading your comment incorrectly?

      Yet simply put, after Windows robbed Apple of the UI – I believe Apple NEVER intended to allow competition to ever come so close in coping iOS.

  3. A piss-ant or pissant is a 14th-century term for ant and you are right, ants aren’t very good news for if humans unleash all their nuclear weaponry they still won’t be able to wipe them out.

    I don’t think it’s relevant to compare Samsung to ants, it’s really derogatory to the ants, they work hard, have an evolved society, have been here long before humans and the odds are likely they will be here a lot longer than humans.

    Now comparing Samsung to dodo birds, well that’s a different story…

    1. “Now comparing Samsung to dodo birds, well that’s a different story…”

      That’s derogertory to the dodo birds, whose demise occurred due to human intervention…better to compare Samdung to bottom feeders like parasites, slugs, etc.

      1. Yes it is derogatory to the dodo birds, but they can’t do anything about it, and like Samsung their demise will occur due to human intervention.

        Bottom feeders like parasites, slugs, etc. do serve a recycling purpose in the overall ecosystem of things, so I’ll stick with dodo birds.

  4. Shameless! They are like the school kids that cheat to win and try to copy the answers from the kid that actually does all the work to study.

    I boycott them both. In fact, I’ve not installed any MS software on my computers for over 10 years. I’m highly productive without it.

    When it comes to spending my money, mine goes to the company that deserves it. I don’t sell out. I’d rather not have than to sell out.

  5. In the article it says Apple’s application for ‘pinch to zoom’ was originally filed on August 30, 2012 and wasn’t granted until a few days ago.
    Why would they delay the application so long? Wasn’t this already being contested in court by that date?

    1. Hi Greg, Of course Apple has an original Pinch & Zoom patent. I was making reference to the most recent granted patent last week that precedes Samsung’s current patent application. It’s just more proof that Apple owns this function.

      1. Apples original pinch to zoom patent was Patent #7,812,826 was first applied for on December 29, 2006. And was granted on October 13, 2010. The one your referring to is the updated one.

            1. better expressed: “I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

              I consider your kind my enemy. Politely said, that is my morality.

            2. Nothing like a fine-upstanding christian right-winger.

              “I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”
              Would that include the tyranny of religious belief?
              A lovely double-bind/catch-22.

              And I never cease to marvel at how the supposed teachings of god are turned to such frothing hatred.

            3. Hatred for statism and tyranny? Not only frothing, but hydrophobic, rabid hatred. Jefferson applied the term God, but any rational individual can use the term truth. You might consider that alternative, Seamus.

      1. “fsck” df:

        “Before the rise of journaling file systems, it was common for an improperly shut-down Unix system’s file system to develop a corrupted superblock. This possibly-serious problem could only be resolved by running fsck, which could take anywhere from a few seconds to hours, depending on the volume’s size and disk I/O throughput. Because of the severity of fsck not being able to resolve this error, the terms “fsck” and “fscked” have come into use among Unix system administrators as a minced oath.[2]
        It is unclear whether this usage was cause or effect, as it has been anecdotally reported that Dennis Ritchie has claimed “The second letter was originally different.””

      2. I’d rather see the sexual related filth than some wannabe tyrant trying to censor, limit or restrict freedom of speech with guilt or power filth.

        But buy all means, please continue to excerpt your right to express yourself the way you want to. Many have died so that you can have that simple privilege.

      3. Let up on being the new moral police here. Sometimes you have a point when it’s over the top, but Cubert’s statement wasn’t that bad. Fsck is a legitimate Linux check and repair command and asshat isn’t that profane, it’s rather humorous.

Leave a Reply to peterblood71 Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.