Apple and Samsung's Long-Running Design Lawsuit Heading to Supreme Court This Week

[tooltalk]

If I remember my phone history - the lg Prada came out in the time between the iPhone announcement and actual launch and was widely cited as copying the iPhone and being rushed to market.

You remember it wrong. LG Prada was first revealed at some design event in 2006 for which LG won some prizes, months ahead of the iPhone announcement.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/

 

[Moorepheus]

You remember it wrong. LG Prada was first revealed at some design event in 2006 for which LG won some prizes, months ahead of the iPhone announcement.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada <- Announced December 2006

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone <- Announced September 2006

Not that I care, because the whole idea of patenting rounder corners, bezels, UI icon shapes, etc is just BS to me

 

[rjohnstone]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada <- Announced December 2006

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone <- Announced September 2006

Not that I care, because the whole idea of patenting rounder corners, bezels, UI icon shapes, etc is just BS to me

Not sure where you got that date from, but the iPhone was announced on Jan 9th 2007 and released on June 29th 2007.
No one saw it or even had leaks of it prior to Steve showing it in Jan of 2007.

The LG Prada was an announced in December 2006, and everyone knew what it looked like before anyone saw the iPhone. It also went on sale publicly (May 2007) before the iPhone.
And the interesting part is it won the iF design award in Sept of 2006. (The award is for 2007 model year, but was chosen in 2006).

 

[tbrinkma]

I don't think that icon spacing or rubber banding should be patentable either. For the same reason, anything that merely mimics on a computer screen something that already exists in the real world (like rubber banding) doesn't qualify as an invention. Or anything that's an algorithm, which is just an idea. There's a good reason why software patents aren't generally accepted in Europe.

As I said, the US patent office is unfit for purpose. The whole IP protection thing in the US has gone beyond lunacy in general (see Mickey Mouse), it's just rent seeking at its worst, with consumers being ripped off as a result.

I don't care about Samsung in the slightest. I think in my entire life I bought one thing from them. It's not Samsung that loses, if Apple's ridiculous patents are upheld. It's people like us.

It sounds like your basic disconnect is that you don't understand what a design patent is. Despite the name, a design patent is not the same sort of beast as a patent. Design patents are in the same family of 'IP' as trademarks and trade dress. They have nothing to do with *function*, and everything to do with distinctive appearances.

 

[Moorepheus]

Not sure where you got that date from, but the iPhone was announced on Jan 9th 2007 and released on June 29th 2007.
No one saw it or even had leaks of it prior to Steve showing it in Jan of 2007.

The LG Prada was an announced in December 2006, and everyone knew what it looked like before anyone saw the iPhone. It also went on sale publicly (May 2007) before the iPhone.
And the interesting part is it won the iF design award in Sept of 2006. (The award is for 2007 model year, but was chosen in 2006).

My Bad, I misread it. Long day, have a cold, should go back to bed...lol

 

[kdarling]

It sounds like your basic disconnect is that you don't understand what a design patent is. Despite the name, a design patent is not the same sort of beast as a patent. Design patents are in the same family of 'IP' as trademarks and trade dress. They have nothing to do with *function*, and everything to do with distinctive appearances.

Design patents also don't require the years long vetting that utility patents get.

Yet they have all the regular benefits of a utility patent when it comes to rights and awards... plus drastically more (thus this appeal to the Supreme Court).

It's a case of ornamentation being deemed far more valuable than the functionality of the item it adorns.

Ironic since smartphone functionality continues to grow and become more valuable, while the ornamentation aspect changes constantly, and what was valuable in case or UI design last year can be out of style the next.

 

[Jeans01Ddk]

If Nokia, Ericsson or Motorola had been as officious with their patents as Apple, there would be no iPhone today ... These companies own most of the teknonogies which is the basis of all smartphones today! So shut the F*** up Apple!