summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/patents.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'patents.html')
-rw-r--r--patents.html125
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 116 deletions
diff --git a/patents.html b/patents.html
index bbc5f01..1652618 100644
--- a/patents.html
+++ b/patents.html
@@ -90,11 +90,13 @@
<!-- ************************************************** -->
- <div id="other-patents">
- <h2>ClearType Color Filtering Patent Issues</h2>
+ <div id="cleartype-patents">
+ <h2>The ClearType Color Filtering Patents Have Expired!</h2>
- <p>A survey from June 2007 shows no less than ten patents
- from Microsoft that cover ClearType.</p>
+ <p>Since August 2019, all patents related to ClearType color
+ filtering have expired worldwide.</p>
+
+ <p>The affected patents were</p>
<div class="quote">
<p><a href="https://patents.google.com/patent/US6219025">
@@ -150,7 +152,7 @@
pixel sub-components of a display device</em></a></p>
</div>
- <p>Essentially, these patents cover several different
+ <p>Essentially, these patents covered several different
things, which can be grossly sub-divided into</p>
<ul>
@@ -174,120 +176,11 @@
Hitchcock's whitepaper</a>.</p>
</div>
- <h3>Patent Claims, Prior Art, and Validity</h3>
-
- <p>Steve Gibson claims that
- the <a href="https://www.grc.com/ctwho.htm">technique used by
- ClearType is a reinvention of a 20-years old thing used on
- the Apple II</a>. His exact words are</p>
-
- <div class="quote">
- <p>Thus, Microsoft's &lsquo;ClearType&rsquo; application of
- sub-pixel text rendering does not represent the dramatic
- breakthrough that they claim and <em>it can not be the
- valid subject for intellectual property
- acquisition</em>.</p>
- </div>
-
- <p>(emphasis added).</p>
-
- <p>Unfortunately, we believe that Mr.&nbsp;Gibson doesn't
- understand patent law well. Under the current US regime,
- any minor improvement to a previous technique can be
- considered an &lsquo;invention&rsquo; and
- &lsquo;protected&rsquo; by a patent under the right
- circumstances (e.g., if it is not totally trivial). If we
- look at
- the <a href="https://www.google.com/patents/US6219025">first
- ClearType related patent mentioned above</a>, we see that
- the <a href="https://www.google.com/patents/US4136359">Apple&nbsp;II
- Wozniak patent</a> covering this machine's display technique
- is listed <em>first</em> in the patents' citations. This
- shows that both Microsoft and the patent examiner who
- granted the patents were aware of this &lsquo;prior
- art&rsquo;.</p>
-
- <p>We are not trying to defend Microsoft here, just wanting to
- avoid feeding false hopes to people who would like to see
- the patent revoked.</p>
-
- <p>Another popular view is
- that <a href="https://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=723683">these
- patents are too general to be enforceable</a>. Well, to be
- fair, some of the claims in these patents do indeed use
- rather vague descriptive terms (even for a patent lawyer or
- an &lsquo;expert in the field&rsquo;). This is
- absolutely <em>not</em> surprising, it is a direct
- consequence of how the patent game works.</p>
-
- <p>We won't cover this in greater detail since there
- are <a href="https://www.iusmentis.com/patents/claims/">many</a>
- <a href="https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9007.html">interesting</a>
- <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claim_(patent)#Basic_types_and_categories">pages</a>
- on the subject. However, in case you invalidate a single
- patent claim (e.g., with prior art), that doesn't mean the
- whole patent is busted. Any other independent <em>and</em>
- dependent claim can still be enforced.</p>
-
- <p>Some of these patents have up to 40 claims. Invalidating
- them is going to need <em>serious</em> prior-art, even if
- there are also strong chances to invalidate the most general
- claims in there. For example, many of the cheap LCD screens
- on digital cameras have used a screen where each pixel is
- either red, green, or blue, with colour images directly mapped
- to them; they have been doing it for years, even when
- displaying text or menus, and this corresponds exactly to what
- the most general claims cover. If we can find a proof that
- the technique was deployed before the patent's filing date, we
- could have valid prior art to bust these.</p>
-
- <h3>Possible Work-Arounds</h3>
-
- <p>People have proposed alternatives to the ClearType color
- filtering method. A very good example is
- the <a href="http://www.oyhus.no/SubLCD.html">SubLCD</a>
- technique, which employs a different way to use sub-pixels
- compared to Microsoft's ClearType implementation. Its
- author even says it doesn't infringe the ClearType
- patents.</p>
-
- <p>Unfortunately, the FreeType team doesn't share this
- enthusiasm. The reason is precisely the very vague patent
- claims described previously. There is a non-negligible
- (even if small) chance that these claims also cover the
- SubLCD technique. The situation would probably be different
- if we could invalidate the broader patent claims, but this
- is not the case currently.</p>
-
- <h3>Does FreeType Implement Any of the Patented Techniques?</h3>
-
- <p>Technically, no. The patents cover the whole process of
- generating and displaying sub-pixel images. Since the font
- engine doesn't do the display part, it cannot infringe.
- Apart from that, FreeType has provided the capability of
- converting vector shapes into un-filtered sub-pixel images
- for a long time.</p>
-
- <p>By default, FreeType's scan-line converter returns
- &lsquo;gray&rsquo; sub-pixel images, where for each pixel
- the color components are equal (this is, R=G=B). The result
- is visually identical to gray anti-aliasing and cannot
- infringe any of the ClearType patents.</p>
-
- <p>Similarly, the LCD-specific filtering API is disabled by
- default, which means that it returns an error and doesn't
- alter sub-pixel images.</p>
-
- <p>You can override these limitations by activating option
- <code>FT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_RENDERING</code> in
- FreeType's <code>ftoption.h</code> configuration file, but
- you should do that at your own risk.</p>
-
<!-- ************************************************** -->
<div class="updated">
- <p>Last update: 13-Feb-2018</p>
+ <p>Last update: 17-Aug-2020</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
@@ -354,7 +247,7 @@
<a href="#bytecode-patents">Bytecode Patents</a>
</li>
<li class="secondary">
- <a href="#other-patents">Other Patents</a>
+ <a href="#cleartype-patents">ClearType Patents</a>
</li>
</ul>
</div>