Google's home page is very well known around the Internet, because it's simple, clean, and easy to understand. It may not seem as though much work has gone into it, but that doesn't mean it's any less effective; apparently, it's such an icon that Google has now managed to patent it, preventing others from using the layout. According to Valleywag, the patent was submitted a hefty 5 and a half years ago, back in early 2004, and it has taken this long for it to be approved.The patent, described as a "graphical user interface for a display screen of a communications terminal," was approved just yesterday, meaning that Google now owns the idea of having a search box in the middle of the page, with two buttons underneath (including surrounding text, naturally). The patent document depicts the simple box-and-two-button arrangement, as well as the Google logo (with a dashed outline to show that it's not an essential part of the submission), meaning that it could potentially land some competitors in a bit of trouble. It's unclear as to whether or not Google will take action on those that could potentially be accused of unlawfully using the design, but many people suspect that it'll mainly be useful in warding away start-up companies from using Google's idea.
At the same time that the patent was submitted, Google also submitted a separate one for their search engine results. There was much more luck with this one, as it was approved towards the end of 2006. Google's homepage has changed slightly since the patent was originally submitted, but the company is apparently confident enough that it's good enough to cover it.
There's an image of the patent included below, courtesy of Valleywag, and the original patent can be found here.
It's over the top. That's all that can be said. I never used Google, and now I will drastically avoid them! Time to find a good ad blocker...(AdSense is Google)
Kewl, I got my ad-blocker in IE 8 set up! Now I don't have to see any Google Ads either!
What do you use?? I trying to find some ad-blocker.
Bing has no visible buttons under the search box.
apple tried one button
that didnt get their PC market share up
They even copied the I'm feeling lucky button
But normally, companies submit patents world wide (especially with Google's size) so you could assume is world wide.
Seriously ALL companies these days patent everything. Someone just patented Instant Messaging (can't recall which companies did it) it's not any better.
Only now?
Yahoo also has a minimalistic search page.
There is nothing wrong with having a minimalistic version or not, its just more choices for users. I like my yahoo home page just like neowin's home page, if there is a story I like then I will click it.
Never seen the original yahoo home page did you? before the "portal" world came into existance yahoo was like google also
I wonder what the people that approve these think. Are they sitting in their offices laughing at these dumb patents and approving them for lolz?
Seems it's a lost cause, 99% of Neowin readers are blind and deaf. It's like talking to a wall.
Even if it pertains only to their 2004 frontpage tweaking, those changes were small such that frankly I doubt the patent would stand up to the newness test...
This filing doesn't meet any of them. In fact, there doesn't appear to be any text to the patent other than
Claims
CLAIM The ornamental design for a graphical user interface for a display screen of a communications terminal, as shown and described.
A. Identify and Understand Any Utility and/or Practical Application Asserted for the Invention (Does it produce a useful, concrete or tangible result?) Nope.
B. Review the Detailed Disclosure and Specific Embodiments of the Invention To Understand What the Applicant Has Invented - Nope, there is no written description.
For processes, the claim limitations will define steps or acts to be performed. For products, the claim limitations will define discrete physical structures or materials. - Nope. No process steps, and it's not a tangible product.
And the biggie: "claims directed to nothing more than abstract ideas (such as mathematical algorithms), natural phenomena, and laws of nature are not eligible and therefore are excluded from patent protection"
And yes, if Microsoft filed a patent for the Bing home page I'd think it was dumb, too.
John Land (Patent Attorney)
Ah. That changes, well, everything. FWIW, outside the US such IP is generally referred to as a "registered design". "Patent" is really quite a bad word for the concept.
I would like the people at the patent office fired.
Exactly, a trademark or copyright is the correct way to go in this case. A patent is rather foolish.
Patents were intended to provide information to the public about new inventions so that they might spark more innovation in that area. However the protection laws around patents in the U.S have done the opposite and restricted innovation.
Patents themselves don't need to be abolished, the laws that restrict further innovation around them need to be.
The question is would google really want to sue them becusae they are providing a service directing traffic back to the google network not making their own means of search?
Very valid!
This is not about protecting their design so to speak, is to prevent Google wannabes and confuse consumers. Likewise, it gives them more leverage to sue phishing sites
OK I patent a webpage with a title, a frame below the title with paragraphs of text, and then a footer with copyright info, etc.
Profit??
So now will everyone on the planet with a car please start sending me my royalty checks before I send out ex-RIAA and ex-MPAA dogs out to collect from you.
Last edited by TechGuyPA on 03 Sep 2009 - 14:05
http://web.archive.org/web/19960511013133/...ta.digital.com/
BTW, I wonder how this would fly with web pages simplified for mobile phones. Many would use a similar minimalist style.
And this post is undergoing patent review so please try to emulate it so I can use the opportunity to buy another boat.
Oh please Google, no need to flatter yourself. A search box with a logo on top and two buttons underneath it not revolutionary. It's the least effort you could possibly go to. I wouldn't worry about competitors stealing this "idea" as its not tough to do better.
What will you patent next, the "idea" of making slight logo modifications for special occasions? Yeah, no one's ever thought of that before. EVER! Get that patent going before someone else thinks of doing it!
Seems to me this is a smart move on Google's part. Now they don't have to worry (as much) about being sued one day for someone else patenting something so general and winning. If I had a company, I'd sure as heck try to patent anything remotely close to the technology or method or whatever someone might try to patent so I wouldn't have to deal with the lawsuits.
Seems to me this is a smart move on Google's part. Now they don't have to worry (as much) about being sued one day for someone else patenting something so general and winning. If I had a company, I'd sure as heck try to patent anything remotely close to the technology or method or whatever someone might try to patent so I wouldn't have to deal with the lawsuits.
True. If Google doesn't patent this, someone else will, and they would love nothing more then some of Google's $$$$.
I'm personally going to patents the double click action....
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.