Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
USPTO neglects to hit the "obvious" button on Google's newest patent
Patent number D533561 was granted to Google on Tuesday, after a 5 and a half year battle. The examiner is also responsible for such deep and philosophical patent examinations as "Foot and toe washer", "Combined ice scraper and brush" and, "H style harness doggie vest."
Depending on the angle at which you hold this patent up to the light, Google may own the ticket for having a search box smack-dab in the middle of a page, or the concept of having two buttons under the search bar. Really, given the state of U.S. patent litigation, what you have here is a license to annoy, molest, harass and waste the legal fund of any company who dare tick off a Google lawyer. If asked for comment, I imagine even the guy who "invented" the combined ice scrapper and brush would think this one is a little over the top. Whatever happened to, "Don't be evil"?
Now, if you'll excuse me; I'm very busy working on my own design for a search box with *three* buttons below. Soon, I will build a third search button powerful enough to enslave you all! Muahahahahaaahahah, cough, ahem.
Comments
16
Subscribe to commentsAnwinSep 3rd 2009 1:12AM
Hahahaha... that's the Indian way of saying lol.
AndySep 3rd 2009 1:58AM
Well, D533561 is not a patent! D stands for design!
How about the author get a real job instead of writing this bs.
ahbiSep 3rd 2009 2:08AM
Oh, pauh
It is a DESIGN patent, not a real Utility patent.
Design patents are used for stuff like making your special designer furniture protected.
Who the F cares?
The big thing is that it took Google 5+ years to get this.
I assumed for Design patents they just gave them to you as soon as you paid your money.
There are near worthless.
BrianSep 3rd 2009 2:08AM
What a terrible article. Where does it say Google owns the patent to: "...having a search box smack-dab in the middle of a page, or the concept of having two buttons under the search bar."?
You failed to provide a link to a PATENT APPLICATION that clearly states this. I recommend reading the original article that gave you this information and put a little more effort into paraphrasing it.
This smells like Grade D linkbait, to me.
cmsb55Sep 3rd 2009 2:55AM
It looks like Grant Robertson has found one more stupid way to write a blog post.
Grant RobertsonSep 3rd 2009 10:16AM
Comment Hate; When you care enough to send the very best.
BiomechSep 3rd 2009 1:14PM
Dude, don't get started again...
RocketboySep 3rd 2009 6:47AM
Whoopie-do-da. Google is doing nothing but refreshing the Design Patent on the way their site looks, an update to the one they did in 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent
Oh Noes! Fonts and The Statue of Liberty are also covered under Design Patents. I guess nobody can use letters or make statues of women either.
Oh and Brian... yes, there is a link to the application, but there is no traditional "Read" link.
RocketboySep 3rd 2009 10:11AM
Nevermind, it looks like someone removed the link... I guess someone doesn't want to know how wrong this article is... Here's a link to one of Google's design patents, that was granted in 2006, which is similar to the one Grant's all giggly about.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=rqR9AAAAEBAJ
RocketboySep 3rd 2009 10:12AM
Doh! Sorry, my mistake. I thought the link in the article was to a different patent.
skerns1Sep 3rd 2009 12:33PM
Scrap-per is one who scraps. A scra-per is a thing for scraping.
jay4Sep 3rd 2009 1:00PM
Does anyone else thing that the Google homepage looks dated now? Especially with Bing having a large picture there?
KevinSep 4th 2009 12:15AM
No, I think the exact opposite actually. The big picture on the Bing page makes it seem like it's from the 1999-2000 era. Who wants pseudo-eye candy when all you want is to search? It's distracting in my view.
sitrucSep 4th 2009 1:21AM
Who cares about searching when you can have decisions made?
JamesSep 3rd 2009 1:29PM
So does this mean they can go after LMGTFY?
glaciaSep 5th 2009 2:07PM
As someone else pointed out it's a DESIGN patent and meaningless. To infringe someone would have to make their interface EXACTLY like Google's. Even minutely different and Google would be laughed at.