Apple granted patent for "Cover Flow"

[SirBC]

From Engadget:

...it covers the look of the system and not its functionality; think of it as covering the distinctive shape of a Coke bottle and not how it works and you'll get it. That means Apple now has the ability to sue anyone using a system that looks "substantially similar" to Cover Flow...

Do you think Jobs is gunning for Calibre and its cover browser?

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by SirBC

From Engadget:

Do you think Jobs is gunning for Calibre and its cover browser?

I looked at the design patent. It's quite interesting in that it covers a particular sequence of images (18 in the sequence). It looks fairly narrow to me. Does anyone know how many images there are in Calibre's flip sequence?

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Starson17

I looked at the design patent. It's quite interesting in that it covers a particular sequence of images (18 in the sequence). It looks fairly narrow to me. Does anyone know how many images there are in Calibre's flip sequence?

Seven when the window pops up on my screen.

(Eight very briefly as the new one appears and before the one getting dropped off disappears.)

But I can widen the window and include more books. I can get it up to 13 with black space to either side.

Graham

[DoctorOhh]

Originally Posted by Starson17

I looked at the design patent. It's quite interesting in that it covers a particular sequence of images (18 in the sequence). It looks fairly narrow to me. Does anyone know how many images there are in Calibre's flip sequence?

The number of images in Calibre is customizable.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by dwanthny

The number of images in Calibre is customizable.

Ah yes, so it is. I hadn't spotted that before. Thanks.

Graham

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by SirBC

From Engadget:
Do you think Jobs is gunning for Calibre and its cover browser?

He can't. Calibre's cover browser substantially, verifiably predates it--patents can't be used to sue pre-existing inventions. (In fact, a good patent review process might've gotten the patent thrown out as being too similar to existing technology. One of the biggest problems with patents today is that there aren't resources to allow substantial review of each new patent attempt--they're only reviewed when someone tries to sue the owner, or the owner tries to sue someone else.)

If Calibre were an unknown, obscure program, there might be some claim of independent invention, but Apple can hardly claim that it created its entire ebook library system without awareness of the existence of Calibre.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Graham

Seven when the window pops up on my screen.

(Eight very briefly as the new one appears and before the one getting dropped off disappears.)

I wasn't asking how many books there are in view. I was asking how many images go into the sequence from having a book in the center to having another book in the center. For example, the Apple design patent requires an image that the center book is a vertical line when the image sequence is halfway through (the book has turned on edge.) Does Calibre have that image. It would need to be someone who is familiar with the code to answer, it probably goes by too quickly to see it by eye.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

He can't. Calibre's cover browser substantially, verifiably predates it--patents can't be used to sue pre-existing inventions.

Have you compared the date of filing of the patent to Calibre's date? What do you know about their date of invention?

(In fact, a good patent review process might've gotten the patent thrown out as being too similar to existing technology.

The Apple design patent appears to be extremely narrow in scope (as in it would be very hard for the Calibre cover flow to infringe it). I saw a Google design patent that issued on the Google search interface a year ago, and the day it issued, Google's own search interface wouldn't have infringed their own patent. Apple basically just wants to prevent exact copies of its iPhone and similar devices and to use these patents to threaten copycats.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Starson17

I wasn't asking how many books there are in view. I was asking how many images go into the sequence from having a book in the center to having another book in the center. For example, the Apple design patent requires an image that the center book is a vertical line when the image sequence is halfway through (the book has turned on edge.) Does Calibre have that image. It would need to be someone who is familiar with the code to answer, it probably goes by too quickly to see it by eye.

The Calibre flow works differently. When you move to the next book in the sequence to the right, for example, the centre book moves to the left turning its right edge away from the viewer to end up angled away, with the binding nearer the viewer.

The book to the right, previously angled away with its left edge in the distance, moves into the centre by bringing its left edge forwards into place.

At no point does the centre book turn into a vertical line. If the iPad does that, I'd say the Calibre method was better as you can clearly see the centre three covers at all times.

Graham

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Starson17

Have you compared the date of filing of the patent to Calibre's date? What do you know about their date of invention?

A quick look turns up--
Patent filed: 28 June, 2007
Calibre began: 31 October, 2006

The Apple design patent appears to be extremely narrow in scope (as in it would be very hard for the Calibre cover flow to infringe it).

That's what I'd expect. In order for the patent to be valid at all (it's not like there's any shortage of "animated viewers of icons of digital content"), it'd have to be very specific, and something else that uses the same basic concept with different display settings shouldn't be infringing.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

A quick look turns up--
Patent filed: 28 June, 2007
Calibre began: 31 October, 2006

And they can go back at least a year (June 2006) if they invented that early (prior to Calibre's public release), plus you'd have to show that Calibre included the design that Apple patented. (When did Calibre's cover flow get added to the interface?) All I'm saying is that it's not that easy to say - oh that's old without really considering all the details, some of which (Apple's date of invention) may not even be known to an outsider.

That's what I'd expect. In order for the patent to be valid at all (it's not like there's any shortage of "animated viewers of icons of digital content"), it'd have to be very specific, and something else that uses the same basic concept with different display settings shouldn't be infringing.

And you may well be right on the issue of validity- the patent may not be valid if there's enough similar out there that it would have been "obvious to one of skill in the art."

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Graham

The Calibre flow works differently. When you move to the next book in the sequence to the right, for example, the centre book moves to the left turning its right edge away from the viewer to end up angled away, with the binding nearer the viewer.

The book to the right, previously angled away with its left edge in the distance, moves into the centre by bringing its left edge forwards into place.

At no point does the centre book turn into a vertical line. If the iPad does that, I'd say the Calibre method was better as you can clearly see the centre three covers at all times.

Graham

I don't have Calibre on my work machine, so I couldn't directly compare, but by memory, I also saw lots of differences. Some of the image sequences in Apple's patent have the central book get larger and some have a lower edge of it off the screen - features I don't recall from the Calibre design. I really, really, doubt Apple would want to enforce it against an open source project (bad PR), even if they thought there was infringement, which I don't think there is, and I doubt their attorneys would either.

[banjomike]

According to this, the mafia were using Cover Flow in September 2006 in iTunes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Flow

also the creator of Cover Flow (bought by Apple) described his ideas in 2004.

http://web.archive.org/web/200512251...nnovation.html

[kovidgoyal]

A little bit of calibre history:

Cover flow was added to calibre (committed to the public repository) on 2008-05-23

The implementation of cover flow in calibre is based on another open source (GPL) cover flow implementation http://qt-apps.org/content/show.php/...?content=75348. When I implemented it, I had never even seen Apple's cover flow (I don't use Apple products).