Apple awarded $1.05b settlement with Samsung

Started Aug 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
57even Forum Pro • Posts: 11,313
Re: just imagine

jfelbab wrote:

Looks and packaging is patented all the time. It's called Trade dress.

It is NOT a patent its a trade mark and it has to be used intentionally to confuse.

"Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers.[1] Trade dress is a form of intellectual property."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress

57even wrote:
Not the first touch screen phone

http://www.mobilegazette.com/o2-xda-guide-08x12x17.htm

If you want to patent looks and packaging, then every maker of a current hatchback car would sue each other.

jfelbab wrote:

It you had actually researched what you posted you would find that most, if not all of the things you mentioned are in fact patented.

Rotary knob - http://www.patents.com/us-5513268.html
Pushbutton for car radio - http://patents.com/us-4020704.html
toggle switch - http://patents.com/us-7687730.html
Keyboards - http://patents.com/us-8125347.html (many listed)
Mouse - http://patents.com/us-8164568.html (many listed)
Steering Wheel - http://patents.com/us-8177019.html

As to smartphones in the pre-iPhone era, this is what they looked like:

Then along came the iPhone:

Revolutionary? If not, why does nearly every smartphone today try to look like the iPhone?

tko wrote:
Revolutionary?

Imagine someone had invented the volume control. No one else could use a rotary knob to adjust anything. The toggle switch, the push button switch.

How about push buttons for a radio? What about the computer keyboard? A mouse? The steering wheel in a car?

The point is, at one point in history these were considered just engineering as usual. Creating new and useful things.

Now inventing is a job for whichever company has the most money. The iPhone is cool. But in the world of inventions it's just a tiny blip. Style and interface. Like a B&O stereo versus a Sony. Pretty, but no different fundamentally from any other icon based interface.

I read the whole article you posted. Nothing interesting or new. Samsung liked the looked of the 3-D buttons. Apple has always made pretty products. But there was nothing patentable or revolutionary presented. Kind of like one car manufacturer copying the tail fins of another. Or making a light switch with rounded instead of sharp edges.

jfelbab wrote:

If you had spent millions on R&D to bring a revolutionary product to market, I suspect you wouldn't feel that this is just good business by the competition. If you review the court documents objectively, you would see that this was clearly improper action by Samsung. Just take a moment to acquaint your self with the evidence in this case.

http://allthingsd.com/20120807/samsungs-2010-report-on-how-its-galaxy-would-be-better-if-it-were-more-like-the-iphone/?refcat=mobile

All that aside, the patent system is a mess. Yet it is what it is and laws are laws. We are a nation of laws and lawyers. Cheating and stealing is not a virtue that is highly regarded except in politics. LOL

-- hide signature --

Jim
'There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.'
-- Ansel Adams

-- hide signature --

Jim
'There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.'
-- Ansel Adams

-- hide signature --

Jim
'There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.'
-- Ansel Adams

 57even's gear list:57even's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
tko
T3
T3
T3
ck3
tko
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow