Can software user interfaces be patented?

When discussing patent protection for software innovations, many people often think in terms of automation or production — that is, what useful actions or output the software can produce. Some examples include:

• Data processing (e.g., encoding/decoding, compressing, storing, retrieving, etc.);
• Managing communication between computing devices (e.g., communication protocols, handshaking, authentication, etc.).

While it’s important to invest in patenting these aspects of your software, it’s also critical to consider IP protection for user interface components. In fact, an innovative user interface that delivers a seamless and effective user experience can be one of the most valuable aspects of your software and your IP portfolio.

Because user interfaces can significantly inform your software’s overall user experience, you’ll want to develop a robust intellectual property strategy around them. In this blog post, we’ll explore the case for using patents to protect your software user interface innovations.

What is a user interface?

Simply, user interface (UI) refers to the means by which a human user interacts with a machine — whether that’s to control a device, webpage, or software application.

A goal of effective UI is to make it convenient and intuitive for users to get what they want from using computing devices or software processes.

To that end, UI can involve elements that relate to a human’s senses and interaction abilities, such as:

• Tactile input (e.g., via a keyboard, mouse, or touch sensitive surface)
• Tactile output (e.g., via actuators that create movement or vibration)
• Audio input (e.g., via microphones)
• Audio output (e.g., via speakers)
• Visual input (e.g., via cameras)
• Visual output (e.g., via screens displaying pages, windows, buttons, or forms)

Can user interfaces be patented?

UI can indeed be patented; major corporations like Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have long led the field for seeking utility patents for UI.

For UI to be considered patent eligible, it must meet the standard requirements for patentability: namely, it must be new, non-obvious, and be described with enabling technical detail.

Software UI patent applications in particular may face added scrutiny because they must also overcome the “abstract idea” exception to patent eligibility. Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, innovations directed toward an abstract idea cannot be patented. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark Alice decision, it’s become more challenging than before to obtain a software patent. (We’ll discuss this in greater detail later on in this post.)

Why should we pursue patent protection for UI?

Given the challenges and expense associated with pursuing patent protection, you may be wondering: is it even worthwhile to commit our resources to obtaining a UI patent?

We’d argue yes. It’s at least worth considering as part of an overall IP strategy.

A piece of software (or device) is only as good as its ability to be used effectively. A software tool with an innovative and effective user interface can be much more valuable than a more powerful software tool with an inefficient and frustrating interface.

Many companies recognize this and spend considerable resources and engineering time developing not only what’s under the hood (so to speak), but also what’s in the driver’s seat. After all, the user interface will be their customer’s main touchpoint with a product.

What are some examples of software user interface patents?

When we talk about user interface patents, we aren’t talking simply about aesthetics, as this discussion is about obtaining a utility patent for UI. With that in mind, what type of concepts can be the subject of a UI patent?

In this context, UI innovations will relate to technical improvements in the person-machine interface. As hardware and software capabilities progress, so have the number of options for user interaction. Generally, UI innovations surrounding these interactions can lead to the following tangible benefits:

• For the user: Reduce the number of inputs needed to perform an action, make inputs more intuitive, provide new modes of providing input, etc.
• For the device: Reduce power consumption, save battery life, simplify hardware, etc.

As an example, a software UI patent could cover new ways of interacting with devices via speech, touch, and hand or face gestures. This is illustrated in a patent (number US7479949B2) assigned to Apple, which covers techniques for determining commands based on a user’s detected finger contacts with the device’s touch screen.

As another example, a software UI patent could also cover a graphical user interface (GUI) that enables a user to interact with a computing device and its software in an innovative way. We can see this in a patent (number US11921694B2) assigned to Dropbox, which covers “techniques for collapsing views of content items in a graphical user interface.”

Moreover, software UI patents have been successfully asserted resulting in significant damages awards. A high-profile example of this includes US7469381B2 assigned to Apple covering a “bounce back” or “rubberbanding” feature related to how a document is displayed in a GUI when touch screen input for scrolling continues beyond the edge of the document. Another such example of includes US7864163B2 assigned to Apple covering a “double tap to zoom” feature related to zooming in on content in response to a double tap gesture on a touch screen.

What are the benefits of patenting software UI?

Patents are business assets. As such, your patent portfolio can help add value to your business, as well as give you a competitive edge in the market. (You can read more about how patents can benefit your business in our blog post, “7 Reasons Your High-Tech Business Needs Patents.”)

On top of the commercial value patents bring, there are two other notable benefits that software UI patents potentially offer.

The first benefit concerns the ease of detecting infringement. In order to enforce your patent, you will first need to be able to prove that the other party has made, used, sold, or offered to sell the invention claimed in your patent without your permission. As a result, the value of your patent is directly correlated to whether it’s possible to detect infringement. Enforcement of a software UI patent might be streamlined because you may be able to simply use a competitor’s product and determine definitively that infringement is occurring.

The second benefit arises during the patent prosecution process. Namely, explaining your UI innovation and its benefits to a patent examiner is usually relatively straightforward, as the utility is often intuitive to understand. This can allow efficient prosecution.

What are the potential challenges to patenting software UI?

If you’re considering seeking patent protection for your software UI innovations, it’s important to understand the potential challenges you might encounter during the process, so that you can develop a game plan to address them.

1. Subject matter eligibility

One of the most notable challenges when trying to secure a software user interface patent concerns subject matter eligibility. We briefly touched on this earlier; following Alice, software patents as a class have been subject to intense and continually evolving scrutiny of subject matter eligibility jurisprudence under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

The patent eligibility of a software user interface innovation typically turns on whether the claimed invention:

• Is considered to recite an abstract idea (or law of nature or natural phenomenon);
• Integrates the abstract idea into a practical application; or
• Recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.

To address the uncertainty around meeting the § 101 framework, the Federal Circuit has put forward some examples of innovations related to user interface that might withstand close scrutiny even in the wake of Alice. These include:

• A specific technique for generating a composite webpage having visual elements of a host website and product-related content from a third-party merchant;
• A user interface for electronic devices that displays a summary of unlaunched applications; and
• A specific, structured graphical user interface that improves the accuracy of trader transactions by displaying bid and ask prices in a particular manner that prevents order entry at a changed price. 

From these examples, it seems that generically claiming the solution or outcome is insufficient. Instead, it can be helpful to highlight the extent to which the claim covers a particular solution to a problem and a particular way of achieving a desired outcome.

Put another way, a graphical user interface can have a form (i.e., appearance), but the function enabled by this form should be described in detail.

1. Prior art

Another potential challenge you might encounter during patent prosecution is that prior art may be pulled from an overly broad pool, as your examiner might overgeneralize certain features of your claimed innovation.

For example, let’s say your user interface involves a GUI that uses visual indications (like images, windows, and other graphical representations) to signal information to a user or receive input for interacting with the software.

Your patent application might be rejected based on prior art where other GUIs appear visually similar, even though these other GUIs do not otherwise perform the same (or similar) function or solve the same problem as your claimed innovation.

To overcome these types of rejections, your response should highlight the function (e.g., solution and way of achieving it) enabled by the claimed user interface.

2. Claim drafting

A third potential pitfall could arise when crafting or amending patent claims for software user interface inventions. Earlier, we discussed how one of the possible benefits of a user interface patent comes from ease of detectability. However, if a claim ends up incorporating just one limitation, it could be difficult to prove infringement down the line.

For example, if a software user interface claim includes a limitation covering a “back end” software process that isn’t easily detectable, it could be very hard to enforce in practice.

Consulting a qualified attorney during the patent process

These challenges highlight why it’s important to entrust your software UI innovations to a patent practitioner with extensive experience prosecuting claims for this type of invention. In particular, navigating the subject matter eligibility pitfalls associated with this type of invention can be tricky.

At Henry Patent Law Firm, our team is well-versed in addressing § 101 concerns related to Alice, and we’ve successfully prosecuted multiple software-type patents for our clients. If you have any questions about seeking patent protection for your software UI innovation, we’d love to help — contact us today!