Scribbling On Digital Photos 134
JagsLive notes a patent application filed in the US by Nokia for a way to 'scribble on the back' of digital photos. Nokia's approach is similar to the iPod's Cover Flow, except that Nokia users will be able to flip through their snaps, select one, and then turn it over and annotate the back just using SMS-like text entry. The scribble becomes an integral part of the saved photo.
How can this be a serious patent? (Score:2, Interesting)
How is this a novel invention? It sounds like little more than a graphical way to represent metadata.
Just checking... what's the primary anger here? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, this is crazy, but from reading the comments I think there are two things that need to be separated.
1) This is bad because there is massive prior art,
OR
2) This is bad because it is a patent on a software concept.
Which one is it? Number one seems to indicate legitimacy of the current patent system, and number two does not -- very different ideas, but I think slashdotters are conflating the two at the moment.
--
Hey code monkey... learn electronics! Powerful microcontroller kits for the digital generation. [nerdkits.com]
Re:Prior art de luxe (Score:3, Interesting)
We've had this for years. It's called EXIF data and file comments. I doubt my sloppy handwriting adds value to the data.
Exactly. Furthermore, I somehow doubt Nokia's photo flip/comment idea will be used by every device you view pictures on. What happens when you take a picture with your Nikon camera and then post it on Facebook, or send it to your in-law's email address? Will the comments show up as text below the image if the 'flip' function is not suppoted? EXIF is already wildly supported. This to me seems rather silly and pointless.
Note to application designers: just because you can do it "real life", doesn't mean you need to be able to do it on the computer. Please please please don't invent a "digital" Polaroid where I have to 'shake' the images with my mouse to have them show up on my screen...
Re:I thought we were past that (Score:3, Interesting)
Hey now, it's not directly the patent office's fault... yet. They do it wrong from time to time (I understate), but until it's more than just an application, don't go casting false aspersions.
Although one must note that the history of the patent office of granting shoddy software patents probably does contribute to the piles of dreck that show up at their doorstep. After all, companies basically have to file for stupid patents in order to remain competitive against other companies with stupid patents.
You know, I am usually a big defender of IP (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:You know, I am usually a big defender of IP (Score:4, Interesting)
PalmOS (Score:1, Interesting)
The very first thing which came to my mind is PalmOS. Its media viewer allows one to add a comment to the picture (saved in an annoying non-standard format; why can't it use EXIF?), by simply chosing "Info" on the menu while viewing it and filling the comment field. And you can even say it's "scribbling", since it's Graffiti 2.
It doesn't have a flip effect, but adding a flip (or worse, rotating cube) effect to something shouldn't be enough to make it original.
Re:Exif? Flip? Software Patents Suck. (Score:3, Interesting)
An integral part of the photo, like Exif? Why didn't I think of that?
Perhaps they are patenting the GUI flip? No one has done that before, except a GUI for every OS years ago.
I know, it's a patent for a computer system that does all of the above! Brillian1.
Someone please end software patents.
First off, this is a patent application. That means it has not been granted yet. Second, I don't believe the problem is cause by software patents. The problem is that the examiners at the USPTO have very little time (I think less than a day per application) to decide whether to grant it or not. That usually isn't enough time to decide if there is prior art. Of course, this "invention" seems pretty obvious to everyone here. But who knows what kind of background the examiner has...
So my point is that there may be other issues with software patents but your complaint that this is obvious isn't a problem with only software patents. It's a problem with the entire system that can be fixed only by giving the USPTO more resources.