Feeds

PalmOne overturns Xerox Graffiti patent

Unistroke 'not unique'

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Security for virtualized datacentres

A Xerox pen-based text-entry system patent - ownership of which forced Palm to ditch its Graffiti character-input technology - is invalid, a US District Court judge has ruled.

The patent, number 5,596,656, details Xerox's Unistroke system, a series of 'shorthand' symbols drawn instead of real character glyphs. The symbols are recognised by the software more easily that real handwriting, making the faster to convert into text data. The patent was granted in 1997, but filed some years earlier.

In April 1997, Xerox said that Palm, then owned by US Robotics, had infringed that patent when it released Graffiti, a series of 'shorthand' symbols drawn instead of real character glyphs.

The Court concurred, and in December 2001, Palm was ordered not to offer products using the infringing technology. The handheld maker - by now operating as Palm and PalmSource - achieved that by licensing CIC's Jot software, the text-entry system already used by Microsoft's PocketPC OS. PalmSource re-branded Jot as Graffiti 2.

Ironically, PalmSource's tweaking of the Graffiti 2 symbol set resulted in a character-entry system that was less like Graffiti 1 than the PocketPC's symbol set is.

Skip forward to 2004, and PalmSource and Palm - the latter now called PalmOne - are separate entities. PalmOne retains liability for the infringement. It has always maintained - in all of its guises - that the Xerox patent is invalid, and now a judge has ruled in its favour.

Judge Michael A Telesca of the US District Court for the Western District of New York said simply: "Prior art references anticipate and render obvious the claim [made in the Xerox patent]." In other words, Unistroke wasn't unique, and Xerox has no right to claim ownership of the technique through its invention.

Xerox may yet appeal against the decision, primarily by attempting to show the prior art doesn't cover as much of the technology as PalmOne reckons it does.

In any case, the decision comes to late for those of us used to Graffiti 1 and have problems adapting to Graffiti 2. Having made the transition, PalmOne is unlikely to go back to the initial implementation. ®

Related stories

Palm draws up plans for Graffiti 2
Xerox priesthood suffers Graffitti setback
Xerox wins Palm handwriting case
Xerox patent action over Palm Pilot casts cloud on IPO
Smart card company sues over Palm patent piracy claim

Intelligent flash storage arrays

More from The Register

next story
FCC, Google cast eye over millimetre wireless
The smaller the wave, the bigger 5G's chances of success
It's even GRIMMER up North after MEGA SKY BROADBAND OUTAGE
By 'eck! Eccles cake production thrown into jeopardy
Mobile coverage on trains really is pants
You thought it was just *insert your provider here*, but now we have numbers
Don't mess with Texas ('cos it's getting Google Fiber and you're not)
A bit late, but company says 1Gbps Austin network almost ready to compete with AT&T
HBO shocks US pay TV world: We're down with OTT. Netflix says, 'Gee'
This affects every broadcaster, every cable guy
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.