Samsung Claims Apple Didn't Invent Pinch-to-Zoom

As the courtroom battle between Samsung and Apple to entered its final rounds, Samsung mounted an attack on Apple by arguing several iOS UI features being contested were developed long before the iPhone came along.

According to Apple's argument, the 2007 iPhone was the first to introduce features such as the pinch-to-zoom and double tap to enlarge gestures.

Yesterday, Samsung showed the jury several examples detailing the exact same functions long before the iPhone. The earliest of which, was the DiamondTouch device developed a whopping six years before the iPhone was revealed.

Developed in 2001 from the Mitsubishi Electronic Research Laboratory (MERL), the device is still available in the lounge for anybody to use. Samsung showed the court a DiamondTouch feature called Fractal Zoom, which allowed users to zoom in and out of photos using multiple finger gestures.

In addition, Samsung even revealed Apple's staff was given a demonstration of the DiamondTouch device back in 2003. Although Samsung's arguments focused on the fact that Apple saw the DiamondTouch before patenting and creating the pinch-to-zoom feature, further cross examination revealed many of the DiamondTouch features came in later on in the life of the device.

Hoping to challenge another one of Apple's patents in question, Samsung brought up the LaunchTile system created by Benjamin Bederson. Developed in 2004, the system was a tile-based UI for mobile devices that allowed users to navigate through tiles by swiping back and forth. Demonstrated on an HP iPAQ , swiping back and forth between screens showed a "snap-back" feature, where the screen snaps back into place if a certain threshold isn't reached. Samsung argues this effect is identical to Apple's patented "bounce-back" feature.

Challenging Apple's patents certainly won't be enough to win the trial, but if Samsung is able to have the jury's question Apple's originality to a few of the features it's accusing Samsung of copying, perhaps the company can swing the verdict in their favor.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Tuan Mai
Tuan Mai is a Los Angeles based writer and marketing manager working within the PC Hardware industry. He has written for Tom's Guide since 2010, with a special interest in the weird and quirky.
  • tomfreak
    Samsung do urself a favor, pull the plug from supplying parts to Apple, or just make it last only 1 year, since thats all required cover by warranty.

    it would be funny to see all iphone fail right after warranty lol.
    Reply
  • greghome
    9393025 said:
    Samsung do urself a favor, pull the plug from supplying parts to Apple, or just make it last only 1 year, since thats all required cover by warranty.

    it would be funny to see all iphone fail right after warranty lol.

    Here's the thing, It might be a trap

    As soon as Samsung stops supplying parts to Apple, Apple would have a strong enough case against them.
    Apple could sue them for being anti-competitive
    Reply
  • olaf
    there's just to much money in that for both sides, if Samsung drops Apple as a customer it will only create a temporary problem for Apple till he gets a new supplier, maybe even Intel since the two company's work together in there Mac business, even if Samsung loses i think they can still cover that loss by supplying apple. Also there is no news that some of the iPhone features are not original, its just the fact that Apple put them together with the greatest bang and fanfare and made the first high profile smartphone, that worked as intended.
    Reply
  • pharoahhalfdead
    TomfreakSamsung do urself a favor, pull the plug from supplying parts to Apple, or just make it last only 1 year, since thats all required cover by warranty.it would be funny to see all iphone fail right after warranty lol.
    No, then all the customers get screwed. As much as I dislike apple's tactics, I hate seeing people ripped off bcuz of third rate quality. Most people work to hard for their money to toss $500 down the drain.

    Now, if we're talking about Bieber's cd's automatically becoming unreadable and unplayable after a year, that's something I'll give two thumbs up :-)
    Reply
  • master_chen
    I lol'd. Looks like fapple really going to get it this time...
    Reply
  • bawss
    olafthere's just to much money in that for both sides, if Samsung drops Apple as a customer it will only create a temporary problem for Apple till he gets a new supplier, maybe even Intel since the two company's work together in there Mac business, even if Samsung loses i think they can still cover that loss by supplying apple. Also there is no news that some of the iPhone features are not original, its just the fact that Apple put them together with the greatest bang and fanfare and made the first high profile smartphone, that worked as intended.
    Intel is not going to make it for them.
    Intel actually wanted to take Apple down.
    That's why Microsoft is making those WP8 tablets.
    I remember the news from some months ago that Microsoft and Intel are working together to take Apple down.
    Reply
  • Pinhedd
    TomfreakSamsung do urself a favor, pull the plug from supplying parts to Apple, or just make it last only 1 year, since thats all required cover by warranty.it would be funny to see all iphone fail right after warranty lol.
    The courts really don't like it when companies decide not to sell their products to a company that's competing with them, and shareholders really don't like it when their company decides to sacrifice billions of dollars in revenue.
    Reply
  • marcolorenzo
    Whoever came up with the idea of putting one foot in front of the other in order to walk should have patented that. They'd be making a killing now.
    Reply
  • Pinhedd
    marcolorenzoWhoever came up with the idea of putting one foot in front of the other in order to walk should have patented that. They'd be making a killing now.
    I think that patent would have expired several hundred thousand years ago
    Reply
  • house70
    "Samsung Claims Apple Didn't Invent Pinch-to-Zoom"

    Shouldn't the title say "Samsung PROVES Apple Didn't Invent Pinch-To-Zoom" ? After all, prior art was demonstrated here with a working device, no less. If that is not proof, IDK what is.
    Same goes for all the other "patents" in question, including the infamous square with round edges.
    Reply