This patent was found to fail to meet the requirement of European patent law of requiring a software innovation to "solve a technical problem with technical means." Because the slide-to-unlock feature is largely cosmetic, it was not deemed to be a technical innovation. However, U.S. patent law would likely enable the existence of the slide-to-unlock patent, because U.S. law is more lax and lacks the technicity requirement. In February of 2012, the Munich I Regional Court previously granted an injunction against two of Motorola Mobility's slide-to-unlock implementations.
Additionally, Apple's attempt at asserting a slide-to-unlock utility model is also expected to fail.
The 'slide-to-unlock' case has not fared well in Europe at all for Appl. But I am willing to bet that had the case taken place in the US Court System that Apple would have done better and possibly won. The less stringent requirements for patents here means that Apple would do better here.
ReplyDeleteI wonder why Apple chose to apply the slide-to-unlock patent as a technology patent rather than a design patent? Besides the advantage of getting more years in the patent, a technology patent on something that is hardly tech related may make its legal power weaker.
ReplyDeleteInteresting to see that the patentability of inventions could vary this much as we move across different continents and countries. If something so famous like Apple's slide-to-unlock user interface patent can be invalidated in Germany, a country that arguably is just as developed and technologically advanced as the US, does this have any implications for the effect of a country's IP laws on its technological innovation? Would you say that the harder it is for something to be patented, the worse it is for the country's economic growth?
ReplyDelete