|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 02:54 AM EDT |
| That's modern politics n/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 07:28 AM EDT |
Design patent laws have been on the books for almost as long as the laws on
utility patents. Apple is just taking advantage of existing law. They did not
need to spend any money for this law, just like they feel that they don't have
to spend any money for Samsung's standards essential patents.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Design Patents? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 09:32 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 01:14 PM EDT |
But a design patent, iirc, is a sort of copyright. More like a trademark,
really.
You NEED to divide the market up with design patents, else I could design an
iPhone ripoff and sell it. LOOK AT THE PRECEDENTS.
As I believe PJ said in the article, if the design is not sufficiently close to
fool a knowledgeable observer, then it's not an infringement.
THAT is the stupid thing here - nobody could mistake a Galaxy for an iPhone
unless they were half blind. So the law is clear - no infringement. Yet Apple is
suing, and PJ said the Judge is barred from chucking it out on summary judgement
for other reasons.
Design patents are USEFUL, indeed they are NECESSARY. But not when they're
abused like this. All being well, when this is over Samsung will ask for
attorneys costs and the Judge will award them. There's a good chance the Appeals
Court would overturn such an award, but I can see the Judge granting it, even
with the mess that is US law.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
