Apple v Samsung: Can Look and Feel Be Patented?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Right on all three counts.
They're in court because they don't agree on the value of the patents but neither side is saying patents should be abolished.

Creativity of all types *should* be rewarded.

Didn't say that either. Patents should be awarded and protected appropriately as should copyright, trade secret and trademark etc...

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Design should NOT be patentable.

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Design takes skill, effort and talent. What's wrong with giving protection to the work that goes into design?

Originally Posted by kennyc

That's not what I said.

Designs should not be patentable, that's not what patent law was designed to protect. There are other mechanisms to protect design just as there are for writings, art, preformance.

So you're willing to give some protection to design, but not a patent. What kind of protection should we give to a design. How about a limited term monopoly on the use/licensing of the design?

That sounds rather like a patent, but you don't want to give designs patents. How about we call it a "Design Patent" or perhaps "Design Right"?

I'm really not sure what you're arguing for or against here.

We seem to be in agreement that designs should have some protection, and that "obvious" designs should not receive such protection.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

How about we call it a "design patent" or perhaps "Design Right"?

trade dress?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

trade dress?

Slightly different, but another form of design protection.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Apple bloggers want apple to lose:

I must admit I’m uncomfortable with the idea that the world’s largest corporation, whatever its name, could be given such a big stick as early as this week. However the verdict falls, I feel like there are no winners here in the long term — certainly not us. Maybe that’s why Judge Koh has been begging for a settlement.

http://www.appleoutsider.com/2012/08/22/trial/

[ScotiaBurrell]

New Samsung store in Australia. They say "the new store - just a block from Apple's Sydney store - was all its own idea."

You be the judge:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/d...823-24njn.html

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

New Samsung store in Australia. They say "the new store - just a block from Apple's Sydney store - was all its own idea."

You be the judge:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/d...823-24njn.html

Looks like a cell phone store to me. So Apple copied the cell phone stores.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Looks like a cell phone store to me.

But Samsung copied? Hmmm?

[heySkippy]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

Ok. Place bets on outcome.

My guess is Apple will win on most of their claims.

I don't think it matters much either way, though. The money is pocket change to either company and Apple has already accomplished much just by bringing the suit.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by heySkippy

Apple has already accomplished much just by bringing the suit.

Some people think so.

More design from Samsung's Legal Department, just like the GSIII. Everything about this is made to scream "I am not an iPad." Apple claims "substantial black borders on all sides being roughly equal in width," so this thing has uneven, "Pearl Grey" borders. Apple suggested Samsung could make a non-infringing device with a "front surface that isn't entirely flat" and "thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface," so Samsung fitted the Note 10.1 with hideous, thick, plastic framing.

Samsung didn't design this to look good, they designed it only to not look like something else, and it shows.

http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08...nt-money-grab/

That is basically a list of things you aren't allowed to do. Now, individually, those traits aren't worthy of a lawsuit. It's the combination of those things that will send Apple Legal over to kick down your door. The combination of those attributes got the Galaxy S and SII in legal hot water, so for the S III, Samsung made this list their "Hey, don't do this" design guidelines. That's right, the entire phone design revolves around not pissing off Apple.

http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/05...ly-by-lawyers/

[afv011]

Originally Posted by heySkippy

My guess is Apple will win on most of their claims.

I don't think it matters much either way, though. The money is pocket change to either company and Apple has already accomplished much just by bringing the suit.

You are wrong, the money is important, but what's more important is the precedent it would set. If apple wins, they'll go after somebody else and strangle the competition in the US, and could set of a patent war in pretty much any other segment. If Samsung wins, apple would have lost the scare tactic and wouldn't be able to go bullying around other Android OEMs.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by afv011

You are wrong, the money is important, but what's more important is the precedent it would set. If apple wins, they'll go after somebody else and strangle the competition in the US, and could set of a patent war in pretty much any other segment.

I think that win or lose, Apple will have fewer problems in the future from companies following their designs too closely.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by afv011

If apple wins, they'll go after somebody else and strangle the competition in the US

For the most part, the Android OEMs have diverged from copying Apple. Lots of diversity in design now.

[ScotiaBurrell]

About the above: why didn't they just do those designs first?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

About the above: why didn't they just do those designs first?

Umm... could it possibly be that they were slavishly copying Apple's designs?