Microsoft Seeks Patent On Virtual Desktop Pager

ihabawad writes "Microsoft has a patent on file for this really cool new technology called 'virtual desktops' where you see a 'pager' on the screen. Read all about it by searching under "Published Applications" for patent #20030189597 at the US Patent and Trademark Office. You know, I had a dream that I was using such a thing once; what was it called? -- yes, FvwmPager! Weird, eh?"

This has got to stop

[ralf1]

Someone at the patent office needs to wake up and smell the coffee. We are going to have a situation like the landrush on domain names as a few bottom feeders run off and patent every idea in the book, and if the past is any indication, the patent office will grant patents on whoever is the first to show up, regardless of prior developments or use.

So...

[Anonymous Coward]

...the patent can't be granted because there's another piece of software that used that same pager-thingy before the patent was filed?

CodeTek Virtual Desktop?

[The I Shing]

I use a program called CodeTek Virtual Desktop for Mac OSX, and the abstract in that application sounds an awful lot like it.

I'm sure there are differences, but is this patent, if it is awarded, going to allow Microsoft to send C&D letters to every company and organization that has been providing virtual desktop software for years, regardless of platform?

How could such a thing happen?

No references

[Refried Beans]

It is interesting that they don't cite any references in their application. But if you do a quick search for "virtual desktop" you'll get a dozen results with dozens more references. This patent application should be thrown out pretty quickly. This patent was filed in 2002, while a quick search shows references in the 1987 to 1995 time frame.

Thank you for your application fees. Don't call us, we'll call you.

enable Virtual Desktop

[lscoughlin]

I actually registered a copy of enable Virtual Desktop, one of the best vdm's and pagers out there for any operating system as far as i'm concerned.

Wtf, is there a way for us to comment on the patent by sending all this prior art somewhere?

-T

Anyone actually looked at the patent application?

[N4m0r]

It seems like Microsoft is claiming they have built a better mouse trap so to speak. They do not seem to be claiming they invented virtual desktops.
From the document:

[0013] FIG. 1A is a pictorial diagram illustrating a desktop of a graphical user interface according to the prior art.

The figure is a sketch that clearly shows a KDE desktop. So they seem to think they have somehow improved the idea of virtual desktops. Of course, I was not able to see anything in the application that looked very new to me.

I'm sure the patent will be granted, MS will sue someone, then the FSF [fsf.org] or some other body will get involved and 5 years from now some judge wil rule against MS and it will be the end.

GNOME/KDE Ripoff?

[Leoric]

I was looking through the patent application pdf at (http://www.dagsavisen.no/innenriks/apor/2003/06/7 39300.shtml)
On page2. Isnt that a gnome and KDE screendump? You can clearly see the foot and the KDE logo in the right bottom corner.
How is it possible to file a patent on someone elses technology, and use a picture of their product to describe it?

Sounds like Apple's Expose.

[G4from128k]

From the USPTO abstract:
A method for a user to preview multiple virtual desktops in a graphical user interface is described. The method comprises receiving an indication from a user to preview the multiple virtual desktops and displaying multiple panes on the display. Each pane contains a scaled virtual desktop having dimensions that are proportionally less than the dimensions of a corresponding full-size virtual desktop. Each scaled virtual desktop displays with one or more scaled application windows as shadows if the corresponding full-size virtual desktop has one or more corresponding application windows that are active.

This really sounds similar to Apple's Expose with its ability to display multiple windows. And it is Expose if you are running a bunch of emulators on a Mac and each "window" is an emulated desktop.

Re:Enlightenment?

[eamacnaghten]

fvwm was doing this in 1993!

There is a difference...

[cheide]

The way it's described in the patent, the 'preview' of all of the desktops is hidden until the user specifically triggers it, whereas all the other virtual desktops I'm familiar with have an omnipresent preview on your current desktop.

Of course, this is exactly the kind of trivial difference that disqualifies it from being 'new and non-obvious', so it still deserves to get laughed out of the Patent Office...

I already wrote one of those for Windows...

[yeremein]

Here [xmission.com].

I wrote it sometime during the fall of 2001; I don't remember exactly when, but it was last updated Jan 23 2002.

Of course, X pagers had been around long before this one... can the public submit prior art to the USPTO and get MS's patent denied?

Re:You may want to mention that

[Halo1]

Perhaps their latest rash of applications are more defensive than offensive.

If that were the case, then why are they lobbying so heavily in favour of software patents in Europe? They even went as far as going to individual MEPs and asking them what they wanted (things like free licenses for schools in their constituency etc) in return for supporting the swpat directive. They also went to governments (together with national member organisations from EICTA [ffii.org]), urging them to support the swpat directive, because excluding software from patentability would somehow be very bad for our economy.

I actually use MSVDM

[Farmboy]

I was browsing around Microsofts site awhile ago, and came accross this application.

It does have some nice features, though I don't think it is nearly as robust as the OSS version.

One of the biggest problems that I have using it is if I have any office application open and switch desktops, I lose all of my buttons/toolbars in the apps.

The other annoying thing is that you can't cycle through the desktops, it lets you cycle through applications on all desktops, but not the actual desktops. Strange and annoying, yet I still use it from time to time.

Anyone else actually use this product? I think it was grouped into the WindowsXP powertoys section.

Later,
Just another Farmer

Re:You may want to mention that

[Anonymous Coward]

Show me an example of Microsoft suing anyone for patent infringement.

Is C&D letter enough? I will point you to VirtulDub, GPL application for video processing and its ASF support.

Re:You may want to mention that

[dnoyeb]

The united States is a Nuclear power because we have nuclear weapons, not because we are forced to use them.

Any company fighting MS toe to toe is soon to find themselves a new CEO.

joke

[Mr. Underbridge]

this is a patent application, not an actual patent. All patents filed after the near end of 2000 are pubished 18 months after they were filed. This is a good thing, as examiners can now search this database of prior art, which is substantially larger than the current USPTO patent database.

I hope you're kidding. Not only is the USPTO generally incompetent, they're generally overworked to the point that they have something like half an hour to research a given application. They most certainly will NOT be spending 18 months researching this.

The number of ridiculous patents being granted is stunning, and given the crack MS legal team, I have no doubt this one will too.

If I had means of collecting bets from /. readers, I'd propose a bet.

Here's how we fix the system...

[shatfield]

When some tech company applies for a software patent, the USPTO should post the application to a specially created website, along with all relevant details. They should then post a reward -- $50 or whatever -- to each person who submits a unique instance of valid prior art, maybe up to 3 instances to keep it cheap. Then if after a certain number of days, like 30 or 60 or whatever, the patent review processor takes the information that has been submitted about the patent and uses that to *help* determine if the patent should even be awarded.

I think this could help avoid 99% of blatant patent abuse problems.

Re:Download the whole patent

[Anonymous Coward]

It's already hosted at pat2pdf [pat2pdf.com]

Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows

[Mandrake]

enlightenment supported these features back in 97 / 98. I'm trying to find a copy of the SuSE CD that was being handed out at linux expo (the donnie barnes one, not the IGN one) by bodo & co so we can have some documented proof, not just timestamps on a computer.

Re:Download the whole patent

[Weird O'Puns]

MS clearly states in the application that these figures show prior art.

Just Wondering

[Jameth]

Can you sue someone for getting a patent they know is invalid simply so that they can sue you?

I mean, if tit ever came down to Microsoft suing RedHat over a desktop pager, I have almost no doubt RedHat could prove, at least to the standards of a civil trial, that Microsoft had KNOWN, absolutely, that their idea was not original.

Then, they had intentionally gotten a patent they knew was invalid. I don't think getting an invalid patent is illegal (possibly defrauding the patent office?) but shouldn't it be illegal to do something like that for the purpose of a lawsuit?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Patent Abuse = Slander of Title?

[wonkavader]

A. Microsoft costs the patent office time on this, and that's our money.

B. They cost us, as a community, time.

C. They're gambling on getting it through under radar, and if that happens it'll cost lots of folks money to fight it.

So there's a monetary component to this.

Meanwhile, Microsoft KNOWS they don't have actual title to this, and are submitting it in effort to take title to this idea FRAUDULENTLY, as they KNOW they don't have title.

That sounds to me like slander of title, and is ACTIONABLE, correct?

And while it's hard to figure out who needs to do the actual suing, damages to the community could be set as a fraction of legal fees expected as an average of Microsoft's expenditures on patent actions.

And it would put the fear of God into some of these slanderers of title we've been talking about for the past year(s).

Re:Stop whining and just write to the USPTO

[Anonymous Coward]

the right to protest a pending application

SquarePatns is exactly right. I'm certainly no patent lawyer, but as I understand the new USPTO process, MS must have opted to make their application public. This means they can start to contact infringers even though the patent hasn't been awarded, but it also means that the patent is public before it has been awarded. Making it pulblic before award allows interested parties to do exactly as suggested here -- dispute it with relevant patents or prior art. Doing so will force MS to acknowledge the prior art and explain to the USPTO why and how their idea is different.

Yes, the whole thing could end up in court anyway, but chances are that if there is significant enough dispute, it won't be awarded until that is resolved.. which is probably better than allowing it to be awaded and then trying to defeat it with prior art. When all is said and done, if it isn't different enough, then they don't deserve the patent, but if they indeed came up with something that nobody has either already patented or implemented and released, then don't they deserve their patent?

Just getting the prior art mentioned and explained fixes a lot of problems with the USPTO in my opinion -- as it stands now, the USPTO has created a situation where they want to rely on the filer to give them a clue about what might be related, yet at the same time they've created a disincentive for the filer to do that.

So, those of you who know there is prior art, please take advantage of the process.. and try to contact the authors of that prior art and get them to talk to the USPTO as well (they, being a creator, will probably be listend to more seriously by the USPTO).

Yeah, I'm feeling cowardish today :-)

Microsoft had a pager since 1988

[PeterHammer]

If you look at the NT 4 resource kit from Microsoft itself, you will notice a little app called TopDesk (copyrights held by MS and Sanford Staab) and originally created for Windows NT 3.1 (I thought NT started at 3.5 but I have not kept up with my Ancient History).

It seems like it does all that is described by this new patent. Funny it took them 15 years to get around to filling for the patent.

Re:There is a key difference

[KjetilK]

Hm, I'm not so sure I agree with you there... I read the claims, and while I'm always getting confused by reading claims, the only thing they could have done, that hasn't been done here is that you could scale each desktop and actually use it... Say you had a bunch of applications open, 2x2 matrix for example, and normally you'd like to work with only one desktop open, but suddenly you want all four. So you scale the whole thing in, get all four desktops on your desktop, and you can use all applications open. That I must admit I haven't seen before. I was too confused by the patent application, but I didn't see that there. Anybody?

Come to think of it, that could be useful... :-)

Another thing I've been thinking about when using virtual desktops with Xinerama, is the ability to connect any arbitrary virtual desktop with any screen. Rather than having them side-by-side (or whatever), you use the pager to click on the desktop you want to appear in which screen. Anybody know of a WM that does this?

Besides, isn't it common to have references to previous relevant systems in a patent application...? I mean, if it were real, they should at least give a reference to the old FVWM pager.... (Actually, the FVWM pager was a killer app for me when I first discovered UNIX 10 years ago).

Re:its not a joke

[miu]

if someone submits a patent that has obvious prior art dates back more than 10 years, the patent application is immediately rejected, AND the entity filing the application is permanently banned from ever filing any more patent applications.

That is so extreme that it will never be considered. I do think that a "bad faith application" should carry a penalty. It sounds as if companies are currently gaming the uspto; they must hope to get an examininer who, for whatever reason, lets something through with a lot broader scope than be should be allowed.

So maybe a bad faith application shuts down the application process (with loss of all filing fees) and a penalty, based on the number of previous offenses by the filing entity, is charged to the filing entity.

Supposedly that the problem is that the uspto needs money and that refusing patents does not make them money. Here is a way that they can get paid for granting patents and sometimes get paid for shooting down patents.

X virtual desktop window managers much older

[Baki]

ctwm and tvtwm were one of the oldest window managers with virtual desktops, derived from one of the oldest X window managers twm (uwm was older).

Here [visi.com] is an interesting family tree of twm descendants, showing the first virtual desktop window managers appearing in 1990/1991.

Bogus patent applications

[STFS]

I heard from someone who works for a company that files for many patents that the company intentionally files for patents that they know they're not going to pursue. They do this to protect themselves from other companies filing for that patent because a previous patent application constitutes prior art.
Maybe that's what M$ is doing? Maybe they knew that there is not a snowballs chance in hell that they're gonna get this one but decided to file for it anyway just in case? Does any /. reader have experience with this patent filing for the sake of disabling competitors from getting that patent?
Even so, I am absolutely baffled why on earth they are using the Gnome taskbar... I mean, it's not even a screenshot!!! Someone actually went through a considerable amount of trouble sketching up that foot!?!??!

Here's what we're talking about, you IDIOTS!

[ScottKin]

Just to "enlighten" (heheh - pun intended) the obviously uninformed, here's a look at what we're talking about.

Note: This represents a FULL Screen, not some cute little VWM sitting in the lower right of your desktop.

Desktop Manager screenshot [adelphia.net]

When you click on the leftmost button on the Desktop Manager, your current Windown zooms-out to occupy it's appropriate spot, and the Manager zooms-out to show all of the defined workspaces/desktops.

This is not like fvwm, Starfish/HP Dashboard or any other kind of workspace manager.

Get a clue and get educated about a topic before you shoot your collective mouths off.

--ScottKin