Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Novelty is a reasonable requirement to prevent people from registering other's ideas, but nonobviousness is not, per my previous example.

Back to the main thread, I don't have access to the full patent text, it depends on what exactly Apple has claimed. iBooks certainly doesn't look exactly like any other app.




So, to be clear, both wikipedia and that paper are wrong?

I am not sure how your example does anything more than explain what you think should be. The relevant question is, "What is?".


I think I'm allowed to have an opinion. As I said, I don't have access to the patent, how could I tell if this patent's claims are novel/obvious or not? Even if I had, you'd probably need to go to court to get a definitive answer.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: