In the movie The Island a large multi-touch table is used by the evil Dr. Merrick to review the files of one Jordan Two Delta. It's a technologically thrilling scene where information is spread out and collated with the simple swipe of a glass pyramid (Video). Here is an interesting blog entry about its design. It looks great and to be honest it puts Minority Report to shame, but that's just my opinion (btw - I think the Minority Report gestural interface is inane - the subject of another post).What is really interesting is the use of that glass pyramid which is essentially a tagged object, something that's already available to Microsoft Surface developers. Tags are similar to bar codes but look like the side of a casino die with the dots in the wrong places. The idea is that you can place the tag on any object to give it an identity and then using that identity and the shape of the object itself you can create menus or other interactions that occur when the object is placed on the table. There is pretty cool video that illustrates the use of tagged objects on Surface.
Well it turns out that Microsoft has been awarded a patent on the concept of associating data with objects making it difficult for other multi-touch tables to incorporate similar functionality. By happenstance this is Microsoft's 100000th patent but what is more important in my opinion is the number of patents that surround the use of gestural interfaces in general including multi-touch.
If we are not careful, innovation in this new interaction paradigm will be difficult. I know some argue that patents encourage innovation because you have to figure out non-infringing methods to accomplish similar tasks but when it comes to fundamental capabilities like object recognition and gestures I find it difficult to see how the industry benefits.
As I said before I'm not an expert on patents or their interpretation but it doesn't take a patent lawyer to understand that the impact of these types of patents, while perfectly legal, are just bad for the rest of us.
4 comments:
Better Microsoft have the patent than anyone else. Microsoft has never sued first for patent infringment. It has of course sued in retaliation. When it has discovered patent infringment, it has worked with the other side to license the technology to them. While they can change course at any time, they have built a successful and lucrative business around licensing their technology.
I agree with what you are saying to a point. Microsoft other large vendors (e.g. IBM) have been good custodians of their patents, but that doesn't make the multitude of multi-touch patents good for the industry.
During the Cold War one could argue that it was a good thing that their favorite country had a nuclear arsenal in order to defend their country against all the other countries that had nuclear weapons. Other than the US none of the nuclear powers ever used their weapons in war. So all the super powers were good custodians but that didn't make nuclear build up a good thing. Did it?
Hi Richard,
Reading Claim 1 of the patent carefully, the word ADJACENT sticks out to me.
To my very cursory read, the interaction you are referring to in "the Island" actually wouldn't infringe. The artifact isn't next to, but on top of, the display.
There is a broad range of prior art in this area...maybe even dating back the Starfire video that you so poo poo. :~P
Post a Comment