|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 18 2012 @ 03:22 PM EDT |
Er, if the "foil covered" argument is valid, then why is Apple still
including the description of a rectangle with rounded corners in its claims?
Maybe when Apple gets off that kick and drops that part of its trade dress
voodoo, then maybe people will stop countering it. Perhaps you should drop Apple
a line and make that suggestion. The only Apple product I own are four or five
old blue eMacs I inherited. I don't intend to buy any of their patent encumbered
devices before I die, so they might take a suggestion from a customer more
seriously than from a non-custormer.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 20 2012 @ 02:41 AM EDT |
Are we comparing to the ipad or to the design patent?
I don't see your point since the design patent drawings don't match the Samsung
device any more than they match these other ornamental designs.
Also, check out the opinions of designers here
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4394062/EEs-says-Apple-design-patents-in
valid [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|