Assuming that it's possible to patent such a patently obvious thing as 1s update, zero power eInk for reader with video/interactive power hungry LCD for navigation.
I can't see how this can be claimed to be patentable.
I agree with Mage. Dual-screen handheld devices have been around since at least the Nintendo DS, which also has one of them being a touch screen. So using the same idea for an E-book reader seems pretty obvious.
That won't prevent lawsuits, though. Even if the idea is not patentable, Spring Design may claim that B&N violated their NDA by making a similar design. But since the idea is so obvious, B&N can claim that whoever produces the Nook had the same idea independently. The ensuing fight will make some lawyers rich, but noone else.
I loathe Barnes & Noble - I used to use the eReader.com site as a great source of reasonably priced volumes for my Palm PDA and iPod Touch. Then B&N took over and the prices went up (although that could have been down to the economic conditions); the range went up too, but most of the ones I was interested in came back as "US subscribers only" when I got the checkout - so I could't buy the books I wanted. The stupid retards then sent me an email recently wondering why I'd not bought anything from them in a long time.
Oh and while I'm slagging them off, their ereader looks Sony-boring whereas the "Nook" looks kind of Palm-cool. :-p
Terk LF-30S 2.4 GHz Wireless A/V Transmitter and Receiver System
Harmony ONE Advanced Universal Remote
Harmony 510 Advanced Universal Remote (LCD, 5 Devices)
Avayon DB8 Multi-Directional Antenna
Harmony 1100 Remote Control
Anonymous Coward
Ideal for pr0n #
Posted Tuesday 3rd November 2009 18:17 GMT
The Nook-e reader - or is it Nookie?
Paris, well, because....
Peter Bond
Twins? #
Posted Tuesday 3rd November 2009 18:17 GMT
I thought those two devices looked bloody similar when I first saw pictures of them. Now I guess we know why.
Mage
Dual Screen #
Posted Tuesday 3rd November 2009 18:17 GMT
Assuming that it's possible to patent such a patently obvious thing as 1s update, zero power eInk for reader with video/interactive power hungry LCD for navigation.
I can't see how this can be claimed to be patentable.
Ken Hagan
Re: Twins? #
Posted Wednesday 4th November 2009 01:05 GMT
You're kidding, right? Other than being fairly rectangular and having a screen, they have almost nothing in common.
Ivan 4
@ Mage #
Posted Wednesday 4th November 2009 01:05 GMT
You forget it is the US of A where this is taking place.
Torben Mogensen
Dual screen #
Posted Wednesday 4th November 2009 10:11 GMT
I agree with Mage. Dual-screen handheld devices have been around since at least the Nintendo DS, which also has one of them being a touch screen. So using the same idea for an E-book reader seems pretty obvious.
That won't prevent lawsuits, though. Even if the idea is not patentable, Spring Design may claim that B&N violated their NDA by making a similar design. But since the idea is so obvious, B&N can claim that whoever produces the Nook had the same idea independently. The ensuing fight will make some lawyers rich, but noone else.
Anonymous Coward
I hope B&N lose #
Posted Wednesday 4th November 2009 10:24 GMT
I loathe Barnes & Noble - I used to use the eReader.com site as a great source of reasonably priced volumes for my Palm PDA and iPod Touch. Then B&N took over and the prices went up (although that could have been down to the economic conditions); the range went up too, but most of the ones I was interested in came back as "US subscribers only" when I got the checkout - so I could't buy the books I wanted. The stupid retards then sent me an email recently wondering why I'd not bought anything from them in a long time.
Oh and while I'm slagging them off, their ereader looks Sony-boring whereas the "Nook" looks kind of Palm-cool. :-p
Jason D
@AC 10:16 GMT #
Posted Thursday 5th November 2009 14:57 GMT
"Oh and while I'm slagging them off, their ereader looks Sony-boring whereas the "Nook" looks kind of Palm-cool. :-p"
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or contrary, but the Nook is by Barnes and Noble, not vice-versa.
At least, that's how your sentence reads.
This forum is now closed for new posts.