The [Creative] Zen patent (6,928,433) covers the aspect of the user interface where a user can select at least one track in an MP3 player using at least three screens to browse for that track in a hierarchical method. As the Creative press release states: “One example would be the sequence of screens that could display artists, then albums, and then tracks. When the user selects an artist, the player displays a list of albums for that artist. Selection of one of the listed albums then displays a list of tracks on the album.”
Being able to browse songs by album/artist (the sole focus of the Creative patent dispute) doesn’t seem to be a major factor for the iPod (or its success, disregarding marketing). The innovations were elsewhere.
I don’t think Apple stole UI from Creative.
No, I’m pretty sure they licensed it, and so did Dell. Go look at Dell’s MP3 players, damn near identical interface.
Being able to browse songs by album/artist (the sole focus of the Creative patent dispute) doesn’t seem to be a major factor for the iPod (or its success, disregarding marketing). The innovations were elsewhere.
Elsewhere as in the companies and idividuals not employed by Apple that actually invented the things Apple sold? Correct.
No.