A Creative Patent Dispute

I read a silly article today - I’m sure you’ve probably seen the brand name “Creative” in the electronics section of your local Best Buy or Target. Hopefully you’ve just seen it, and not actually bought it. If you have bought Creative’s products, I’m sorry for you.

An excerpt from the article:

Apple could be in for a bruising legal fight with rival Creative over the technology used in iPod music players.

Creative boss Sim Wong Hoo has told the BBC he plans to “pursue aggressively” a US patent it owns on a system used to navigate music on digital players.

Mr Sim was speaking at the launch of Creative’s latest rival to the iPod video, the Zen Vision: M.

Creative was one of the first to market digital music players in 2000, but has since been overshadowed by Apple.

For a company named “Creative,” it’s a bit ironic that they have to rip-off Apple on absolutely everything they claim to “invent.” Then they have the audacity to sue the very people they’ve ripped off? How asinine is that?

I mean come on… It’s called prior art, Creative. You don’t have a chance. Apple’s had the same file organization system in question since the turn of the century in their Macintosh operating system.

If Creative were to win this ridiculous lawsuit, would we lose column view in Mac OS? What about Windows Explorer and Folders view? Will they be next? C’mon. They’re really grabbing at straws here. They’re whining about how files are organized and Creative has become the official “ambulance chaser” of the tech world.

It’s a wonder that Apple doesn’t file a counterclaim against them over the industrial design of the Creative players, as the Creative player has some pretty striking resemblances to the iPod.

I’m not quite sure how Creative managed to patent this navigation system - because it sort of contradicts the famous Apple vs. Microsoft lawsuit from back in the day when Apple sued Microsoft, alleging that Microsoft Windows infringed on Apple’s rights to the point-and-click desktop interface that we’ve all come to know and love. I think we all know how that turned out seeing the success of Microsoft. The court ruled in that case that the desktop point-and-click metaphor was an unprotectable idea. The court also found that most of the individual elements that made up this desktop metaphor were not protected by copyright because they were functional rather than original expression. But it was useful - so I don’t know why a utility patent could not have been granted.

Software-based inventions rarely qualify for a patent, which is why it was legal for Microsoft to take the point-and-click desktop interface concept from Apple. Apple was only able to copyright the concept, but then the court ruled that a copyright wasn’t justified either. Now Apple is getting sued because someone was somehow granted the type of patent that they were once denied. It’s an unfair world for Steve Jobs’ Apple Computer, no wonder the guy has gone bald.

Most software-based inventions have historically been disqualified from a patents because they are considered obvious over the prior art, and must therefore be protected in another manner such as trade secrets or copyright law. As I just mentioned in the Apple case, that doesn’t always work either. Basically all patents that have been obtained on software are utility patents, which is a patent that is based on usefulness. This is likely the type of patent Creative has, but if Creative was able to obtain a utility patent, I don’t see why Apple wasn’t able to obtain one on point-and-click. Apparently the USPTO didn’t know anything about computers back in the 80’s.

So who does Creative think they’re kidding claiming that the design for the new Creative player was not heavily influenced (if not stolen) from the iPod design? Then they have the nerve to turn and claim that Apple stole their navigation? As of today, I officially will never buy any products with the Creative name on it. Not that I would have anyway, since it’s fairly common knowledge that all of their stuff is cheap junk rip-offs of something else. But at least my boycott is now official.