Not a joke, and it doesn't surprise me either, considering some of the wacky and crazy patents that have been issued to inventors through the last years. So here is the scoop: In patent US 6906701 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6906701.WKU.&OS=PN/6906701&RS=PN/6906701), PalmOne describes a method of interacting with the user through illuminatable hardware buttons of a handheld device. From the patent description:

A method and apparatus for indicating information to a user of a palmtop computer. Illuminatable hard buttons are disclosed that are operable for performing functions. The hard buttons are selectively illuminated to indicate information to a user that relates to the function performed when the bard button is pressed. The selective illumination of hard buttons to indicate information that relates to the function that is performed when the hard button is pressed conveys information to the user in a manner that is easily understood by the user. In one embodiment, whether or not the button is illuminated and the color of the illumination, convey information about the function that is to be performed when the button is pressed.
Some examples of what PalmOne has in mind:

A date book alert occurs. The hardware button is illuminated that directly brings you to the date book application.
You miss a call. The hardware button is illuminated that points to the address book and would directly bring you to the person whose call you've missed.
Navigation through an application. Illuminate those buttons in which direction you can scroll or navigate.

This would seem very helpful on small phone devices without touchscreens... the market PalmSource is looking to dive into. Maybe this is even a direct result of their Project Rome advanced UI work.

This patent is obviously illegal to me. If anyone remembers, RadioShack (among others) sells a remote control called the Kameleon. It selectively illuminates its hardbuttons (they are actually hardbuttons), and in some cases only part of the hardbuttons. Besides the color clause, which probably violates some other patent, this completely infringes on patents held regarding the Kameleon remote. Even if its inventors dont hold the patents, they can easily sue and get them back. I dont know what Palm is thinking.

Edit: It seems the first line of the abstract is missing. It does state that this patent only applies to Palmtop devices. Knowing this, there may sometime be a conflict with the technology allowing semi hardbuttons on a PDA screen by dynamically hardening portions of the screen. This would nearly accomplish the same thing, or would allow through simple software, the same function.

I've never been a great fan of patents - especially software patents (ougs!).

Edit: It seems the first line of the abstract is missing. It does state that this patent only applies to Palmtop devices. Knowing this, there may sometime be a conflict with the technology allowing semi hardbuttons on a PDA screen by dynamically hardening portions of the screen. This would nearly accomplish the same thing, or would allow through simple software, the same function.
Also note that it was filed long time ago... 07/30/2001 and only recently granted.

jjesusfreak01: Thanks, I edited my post to add the first line of the abstract. Note that the abstract isn't really relevant here, but the actual allowed "claims". But you are right, I think the patent speaks of "palmtop computer systems" specifically in its claims.

The application was actually rejected (http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_CH/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.getBib/.c/6_0_69/.ce/7_0_1ET/.p/5_0_18L/.d/8?selectedTab=ifwtab&isSubmitted=isSubmitted&dosnum=09918968#) first in 2004 and had to be revised accordingly. See attached snapshots.

jjesusfreak01: Thanks, I edited my post to add the first line of the abstract. Note that the abstract isn't really relevant here, but the actual allowed "claims". But you are right, I think the patent speaks of "palmtop computer systems" specifically in its claims.
So, maybe I should rip this out, and stick computer monitor in there, or PC interface device, or even tv. The point is that they should not be given the patent on the basis that they are trying to use an identical technology, just in a different application. As you say, patents like this can only hurt us.

This would seem very helpful on small phone devices without touchscreens... the market PalmSource is looking to dive into. Maybe this is even a direct result of their Project Rome advanced UI work.

Note that this was filed by palmOne, not PalmSource. It has nothing to do with PalmSource, and certainly not Rome. :)

Note that this was filed by palmOne, not PalmSource. It has nothing to do with PalmSource, and certainly not Rome. :)
I would have thought that PalmOne had still some close ties to PalmSource and henceforth would participate the forthcoming PalmSource system. On the other hand, given how long ago the patent application was filed, it seems even unlikely that PalmSource was aware of "Project Rome" at that time ;)

Just a quick note to let you know that we just linked (in Spanish) to this thread at:

http://www.canalpda.com/displayarticle475.html

Kind regards

Let me be the first to welcome our Spanish-speaking friends!
With the help of the various language translation tools on the internet, I visit some great sites like canalpda and tupalmx from time to time also. :)

albertc / location: Near Barcelona
Albert I went with my girlfriend to Barcelona last year. We ate so much Tapas that you could've rolled me back to the airplane... very nice and busy city ;)