Analysis: Neonode Patented Swipe-to-Unlock 3 Years Before Apple
February 20, 2012 12:49 PM
Sorry Apple, you did not invent swipe to unlock
This is an editorial/analysis piece.
When I initially searched the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
, I missed something very interesting in the war [
] between Apple, Inc. (
) and Android's "Big Three" -- Google Inc.'s (
Motorola, HTC Corp. (
), and Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (
) -- regarding
Neonode Inc. (
) appears to be the first to patent this technology, holding a claim I missed.
I. Neonode Beat Apple to the Patent Punch by 3 Years
As I pointed out in an earlier piece, Neonode -- a small Swedish phone manufacturer -- was the
first to deploy the technology commercially
. And it also appears to be the first to have patented swipe-to-unlock.
I initially missed this, as it was buried in
U.S. Patent No. 8,095,879
But there it is -- in "User interface for mobile handheld computer unit." Fig. 11 and Fig. 12 (pg. 5).
And the interface element is covered by Claim 12:
12. The computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the user interface is characterised in, that an active application, function,
service or setting is advanced one step by gliding the object along the touch sensitive area from left to right
, and that the active application, function, service or setting is closed or backed one step by gliding the object along the touch sensitive area from right to left.
Now Neonode is perhaps
suing everyone because it kindly limited its own patent, writing
In the case that the patent was deemed non-novel at some point and redundant with existing drag-and-drop IP, Neonode attempts to strengthen it with a secondary claim:
12. The computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the touch sensitive area is 2-3 inches in diagonal dimension.
What a novel notion -- a company narrowing its own patent to cover only what it actually has designed! While we'll never know if this narrowing was intentional or inadvertent, either way.
Despite the apparent strength and broad scope of its patent, Neonode declined/missed its opportunity to try to cash in on its user interface innovation at the expense of stalling the mobile market with crippling lawsuits (as Apple is currently doing).
II. Is There a Difference Between These Patents?
Now let us review the matter at hand:
Neonode filed for a patent on swipe to unlock 3 years before Apple did.
Neonode's swipe to unlock gesture is identical to that found on the iPhone -- a fluid left-to-right motion.
Apple is now suing people over the technology it "borrowed" (presumably without permission) from Neonode and applied for two patents --
U.S. Patent No. 7,657,849
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721
Let me address a point of contention I received in an email. Yes, Neonode's display is resistive (diodes-based) touch design, where as Apple's screen is capacitive touch. But ultimately this does not have any major affect the algorithm, as we see it on the original iPhone. And bear in mind, Apple is not patenting capacitive multi-touch. Other people have already done that.
Indeed Apple's patent
doesn't even mention
capacitive touch in its claims. It claims the invention of the gesture on "a touch-sensitive display" (See Claim 1 of first patent) -- a term which encompasses both resistive and capacitive touch displays.
So is there any difference between Apple's claim and Neonode's?
It would be tempting to state that there is some sort of graphical difference looking at the iPhone versus the Neonode n1, which featured the slide-to-unlock. But the patents are ambiguous enough they don't confine themselves specific look to the unlock mechanism (that would be more appropriate for a design patent, anyhow).
So if the difference is not graphical, what is it?
Apple's algorithm appears to have two unique claims, compared to Neonode's. But they're actually not unique at all. Let's discuss why.
First it claims dragging a graphic. But let's see -- this has been done for over two decades before the filing via the ubiquitous "drag and drop".
Apple's only other seemingly unique claims is that its algorithm mentions that if the finger is removed during the swipe gesture, before the end point is reached, to cancel the result. But ultimately, the Neonode patent simply did mention this. If you swipe halfway across the Neonode phone (reaching the middle diode) and stop, you can't just click the endpoint several seconds later. Neonode's algorithm was less explicit, but it appears to have the same mechanism as Apple's. (See videos below.)
Whereas Apple relied on the capacitive touch display to implement its "contact" detection (but does not mention in the patent exactly how it determines "contact"), Neonode used timing to determine contact.
Thus Apple and Neonode's patented claims are virtually identical, other than the graphics drag, which is covered via ubiquitous drag-and-drop prior art. The difference? Neonode filed three years before Apple.
Apple's patent applies to all screen sizes, so it in theory overlaps with Neonode's. And even if it was narrowed to apply to large screen sizes, copying Neonode's UI innovation and then applying it to a larger screen does not seem novel or patentable
Again, don't try to debate this on the grounds of graphical look or the difference in touch technology, as the patents are both broad enough to not confine themselves to these finer points. You're just making yourself look silly if you do this.
III. Apple's Patents are Completely Invalid
I have to admit; even I am taken aback by this development. I thought Apple's patent to be overly obvious and covered by prior commercial work, but I did not expect Apple to have lifted a predecessor's patent so blatantly.
Perhaps I shouldn't have been. Late Apple CEO and co-founder Steven P. Jobs famously bragged, "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
In retrospect, I now think the evidence is compelling and overwhelming that Apple's patents on swipe-to-unlock are completely invalid. If anyone owns this technology it is Neonode. And Neonode
has narrowed its scope of
strengthened its potential litigation by declaring a second claim that the technology be applied to 2-3 inch devices. Apple's iPhone is a 3.5" device, so Apple might be required to pay licensing fees, should Neonode sue, and should the patent be upheld.
The Neonode n1 [Image Source: Engadget]
Hopefully the court/patent office should soon realize this, when they review the Neonode patent -- assuming a lack of bias and sufficient technical knowledge. And let's hope they get it right this time around.
"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007
Analysis: Apple's Unlocking Patents are Invalid or Should be Narrowed
February 17, 2012, 6:10 PM
German Judge Bans Androids for Swipe-Unlocking, Despite Prior Art
February 16, 2012, 7:11 PM
Google is Now (Almost) the Proud Owner of Motorola After EU/U.S. Approval
February 14, 2012, 11:40 AM
Master of Unlocking: Apple Patents Swipe-to-Unlock Despite Prior Art
October 26, 2011, 3:27 PM
UPDATED: Netherlands Judge Finds Samsung Guilty of Infringement of Apple IP
August 24, 2011, 10:19 AM
How Apple watch Series 2 differ from the S1
February 18, 2017, 5:37 AM
Can your smartphone make you a safer driver?
February 15, 2017, 6:20 AM
What do you or do not know about Apple iPhone 7 &7+
February 8, 2017, 9:27 AM
February 6, 2017, 6:49 AM
LG Watch Style
February 5, 2017, 8:00 AM
New iMac and Release Date
February 4, 2017, 9:30 AM
Most Popular Articles
How Apple watch Series 2 differ from the S1
February 18, 2017, 5:37 AM
February 17, 2017, 6:01 AM
Samsung Notebook 9 vs Acer Aspire S 13
February 17, 2017, 7:23 AM
Seagate FireCuda – 2TB of Fast Gaming Solid State Hybrid Drive Storage
February 6, 2017, 8:24 AM
Comparison: NuVision vs Kindle Fire HD
February 18, 2017, 6:25 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Feb 23, 2017, 6:30 AM
Feb 21, 2017, 6:12 AM
Here is how startups are helping new parents in raising children
Feb 20, 2017, 6:45 AM
Around the World
Feb 18, 2017, 5:48 AM
News of Future
Feb 17, 2017, 6:30 AM
Amazon parachutes May Float Packages to Customers
Feb 16, 2017, 8:00 AM
Now you Can Watch Facebook on Your TV
Feb 15, 2017, 7:42 AM
Feb 14, 2017, 5:36 AM
Razer Blade Stealth – Little Kaby Lake Powerhouse
Feb 13, 2017, 7:50 AM
Android 7.0 Nougat 7.0 Update Bring Less Battery Life for Samsung Galaxy S7 & S7 Edge
Feb 12, 2017, 7:45 AM
Apple iPhone 8 – OLED Display & Wireless Charging
Feb 11, 2017, 8:09 AM
Feb 10, 2017, 6:15 AM
Feb 9, 2017, 6:00 AM
Eye catching news
Feb 8, 2017, 6:16 AM
Some World News
Feb 7, 2017, 6:15 AM
Feb 6, 2017, 10:11 AM
Feb 5, 2017, 7:27 AM
Notes and News
Feb 4, 2017, 5:53 AM
Feb 3, 2017, 5:30 AM
Feb 2, 2017, 7:00 AM
News Around The World.
Feb 1, 2017, 7:20 AM
Jan 31, 2017, 7:57 AM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2017 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information