Apple Submits Software Patent For Other Developer’s App, Including Title And Design

John Brownlee ()

Apple Submits Software Patent For Other Developer’s App, Including Title And Design

An uncanny resemblance, don’t you think?

On the left, an in-app screenshot of Where To?, an iOS app nudging travelers along a GPS trail to local points of interest. “Where To? makes it incredibly easy to locate the closest steakhouse, bank branch, billiard club or anything else you may be looking for, at the drop of a hat!” That in-app homescreen has not changed since version 1.0, which was a Day 1 download on the App Store.

On the right, Where To’s eerie doppelnganger, plucked from the Aha-like inner mindscape of an Apple patent attorney. The patent is dated December 18, 2009 and describes “systems and methods for integrating travel services in a single application available to a portable electronic device,” allowing users to easily be directed to local restaurants, banks or nightspots. Sound familiar?

In other words, Apple seems to have patented the functionality of another company’s app, right on down to that app’s physical design and title.

Needless to say, the original developer, Futuretap, is none too happy about it. If the patent is granted, they might find themselves infringers as the creators of the same app cited in Apple’s patent.

Software patents are bullshit, but looking at the evidence, this is particularly shameless. What is going on here? Even if this is just an example image of such an app, it looks bad. Apple appears to be prowling the App Store, looking for existing applications for inspiration, then claiming ownership of the idea behind them with the US Patent Office.

DON'T MISS
Apple Readies For War Against Patent Troll Lodsys, May Be Paying Sued Indie Devs Legal Fees

That’s just patent trolling. It’s perfectly legal, and it appears that Apple’s own Developer’s Agreement might cover exactly this scenario, but how does Apple expect developers to be comfortable working on the App Store if they employ questionable ethics like this? No one likes a hit-and-run.

Update: Excellent point by Dan Wiseman, who thinks the use of “Where To?” as an image in a patent application was probably innocent, but stupid nonetheless.

I think it’s more likely that the people involved in drawing up this patent simply didn’t think about the message it would send to developers. I’m sure it’s not Apple’s practice (or intention) to plunder the App Store submissions bin for new things to patent. But there remains a conflict of interest in Apple acting as the sole steward of the iOS software universe while also filing patents in areas that have long been staked out by third-party developers.

15 comments »

About the author

John BrownleeJohn Brownlee is news editor here at Cult of Mac, and has also written about a lot of things for a lot of different places, including Wired, Playboy, Boing Boing, Popular Mechanics, Gizmodo, Kotaku, Lifehacker, AMC, Geek and the Consumerist. He lives in Cambridge with his charming inamorata and a tiny budgerigar punningly christened after Nabokov's most famous pervert. You can follow him here on Twitter.

(sorry, you need Javascript to see this e-mail address)| Read more posts by .

Posted in iPhone Apps, News, Top stories |

  • Matt

    Then the original developer should have patented the app in the first place! If they can’t be bothered to protect their IP in the first place why should others avoid using it?

  • MacRat

    Try a little research first. The image is just a place holder for a user facing app. The patent is for back end location based push services.

  • Matt

    Also, the link the to Patent App looks busted? You have the same link as your A-Ha reference.

  • John Brownlee

    Thanks for the heads up, Matt. Fixing.

  • http://www.technovia.co.uk Ian Betteridge

    John, this isn’t a design patent. It doesn’t cover the “ornamental design”, as the legalese puts it. Neither does it establish Apple as the copyright holder on the look and feel. So it doesn’t attempt to patent everything “right on down to that app’s physical design and title.”

    Easy mistake to make, though – IP law, especially concerning patents, is ridiculously complicated. One of the best things any government could do for business is clean up the process of what can and can’t be patented so it’s more easily understandable.

    Having said that, the patent is still ridiculously broad. What it looks like Apple is attempting to patent is electronic devices which provide some kind of location-based notifications when you’re engaged in the process of travel, utilising an itinary and your address book. It’s not, as MacRat is saying, simply patenting the push notifications back end method: it’s pretty clear that the patent covers the broader system, involving location services and devices.

    I have no idea why they’ve used WhereTo? as the indicative interface, because WhereTo? doesn’t actually do what they’re claiming a patent on. As far as I can see, WhereTo? wouldn’t actually fall under the patent at all – they’d have to do a lot of work to get anywhere near what Apple is applying for.

    Still, a massive PR own-goal from Apple. Someone needs to start kicking some ass internally on that front, fast.

  • Ian Worseridge

    Yeah, just like my man stated before! Go get’em Ian.

  • Tim Rosencrans

    Brownlee blows another one. This is a non-story the patent application has nothing to do with the app. Its just shown as an example of the kind of app that would use the service. The patent has nothing to do with finding local points of interest thats just something John made up in in effort to pretend to be a journalist.

    This is no different the a iPod charger patent showing an iPod. Its just an example of its use and is not part of the patent. this story should have never been written.

  • haymoose

    I’d like to be able to ‘vote up’ the comment above by Tim Rosencrans. Where is the “Update” follow up story?

    The “exampled” App dev’s blog is offline right now due to comments generating similar “Can you read?” comments.

  • e.phemera

    two quick points:

    • Assuming Futuretap was the originator of the concept, “prior art” would protect their company, and all other devs, that can show that they had an idea before someone else patented it.

    • Unless MotionX is connected to Futuretap, they are also using this idea in their gps apps. See here: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/motionx-gps-drive/id328095974?mt=8

  • bob

    Your comment – “even if its just an example images”. Read it back to yourself.
    There is nothing in a patent application such as “an example image”. There are only drawings of embodiments of the invention.

    They are not there to entertain the US patent office or to show how well you can draw they are there to visually delineate what is being patented.

    So if you patent a duck, and you draw the picture of the duck. You own that duck. If you sue someone over it, you know what they do in court?

    They hold up the drawing of the duck. This could not be more serious.

  • http://mackeeper.zeobit.com/ MacKeeper_Fan_Modua

    Apple didn’t even change the name of the app in the diagram. What does that tell you? People who steal things don’t advertise the fact.

    Look, Apple makes mistakes. The iPhone 4 antenna issue is proof of that. But they’re not stupid enough to start blatantly stealing IP from their own developers. Keeping developers on side and loyal to iOS is absolutely critical to Apple’s mobile strategy.

    What I don’t understand though is why Apple haven’t responded yet. These fires need to be put out quickly before they get out of control. Silence just looks bad.

  • http://retromaccast.ning.com/profile/JamesWages James Wages

    I strongly disagree with MacRat, Ian Betteridge, Tim Rosencrans, and haymoose who are bashing John Brownlee unnecessarily.

    Unless Apple had prior written approval by the developer of that particular graphic overlay (which it would appear Apple did not have), its presence in Apple’s patent is highly unethical at best. It doesn’t matter at all if Apple is not patenting “ornamental design.” Why copy it so closely? It makes no ethical sense whatsoever and is a slap-in-the-face to Apple developers worldwide.

    With that said, I also take issue with MacKeeper_Fan_Modua and others (including some Cult of Mac writers) who have mercilessly bashed Apple over the iPhone 4 over so-called “bad” antenna performance. I am sick and tired of that ridiculous discussion, which was touted in the media by none other than Gizmodo, who broke the law by paying money for a known-stolen iPhone 4 prototype. Let it die, folks, and instead focus your energies on stopping Software Patents. Software Patents are our greatest enemy.

  • http://www.we-rate-stuff.com Ben

    Get with the times, people.

    This is not new behavior for Apple. They’ve been ripping off third-party OS X developers since their kitty was born almost a decade ago, and I’m sure the “unethical behavior” extends beyond those days. Take the Dashboard, for example – originally a third-party app. The same goes for Exposé and Spaces. Apple includes just enough functionality in their software systems to barely push the envelope; then they wait for third-party developers to tackle the platform and introduce software that really shines. Once they’ve keyed into which apps are most popular, they “perfect” the software and deliver their own proprietary version.

    It’s a great strategy for Apple that unfortunately screws over the developers who work hard to come up with original software, but again, it’s hardly new behavior and unlikely to stop any time soon.

  • William

    “Prior art” is something the USPTO tends to ignore, leaving it to the courts to determine. Most small developers can’t afford that.

  • Peter Johnson

    They wouldn’t be infringers, surely, they would actually be a prime example of “prior art” :)

    I think this was probably an accident (or, at least, the copying of that artwork was) maybe from someone who thought it was Apple’s, or they would have made more effort to hide the source.

    As a developer I think the software patent system needs overhauling, or scrapping. The system as a whole is harmful, not protective, of innovation.

    Peter
    Solubleapps.com
    Developer of MailShot, the unique group email app that works from all your favourite apps.