Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Licenses Swiss Railway Clock Design for iPad's iOS 6 Clock App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Nothing new" being the key bit.
The design has been trademarked since long before Steve & Steve started Apple.
That said, I believe it was an honest mistake on the part of Apple (though there might be a designer getting fired somewhere), and I'm glad they settled it amicably.
My thoughts exactly. This sort of thing keeps Apple in tune. Companies get to a stage where they think they are untouchable, like oil companies etc Apple has joined them ranks. Its good to see that the Swiss can bring them back to earth with a bit of a bump. Apple preach a lot and now they have to practice it. Glad they are keeping the clock though, its pretty cool.
Simple oversight ? If one of my designers did this, trust me he would be getting a lesson from the legal department and all those who approved it would be in for some major pain
Beautiful design.
As Apple fanboys you should know that it is hard to design something that is beautiful, simple and functional at the same time
Most designers would have crammed in some numerals or other stuff to make themselves or their clients happy.
It is the art of leaving out the unnecessary that is beautifully represented in this clock design.
As Apple fanboys you should know that it is hard to design something that is beautiful, simple and functional at the same time
Most designers would have crammed in some numerals or other stuff to make themselves or their clients happy.
It is the art of leaving out the unnecessary that is beautifully represented in this clock design.
I am amazed by the amount of people not being able to acknowledge this great design. It is just so generic to you nowadays, because it is such a great design.
Funny enough the same group would probably defend Apples claim against Samsung about the generic icons in a grid that really been done so many times before Apple got around to trademark it.
T.
Funny enough the same group would probably defend Apples claim against Samsung about the generic icons in a grid that really been done so many times before Apple got around to trademark it.
T.
Now this is beginning to irritate me.
Steve Jobs was NOT a genius.
Anyone who read or watched 2001:A Space Odyssey has already seen all of these toys/gadgets back in 1968. All Jobs did is say make this happen in a commercialized, economically viable, manufacturing process. He didn't create or envisage anything new, he just drove it into production.
Vincent van Gogh, genius
Ludwig van Beethoven, genius
Albert Einstein, genius
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, genius
Steve Jobs, NOT a genius
Steve Jobs was NOT a genius.
Anyone who read or watched 2001:A Space Odyssey has already seen all of these toys/gadgets back in 1968. All Jobs did is say make this happen in a commercialized, economically viable, manufacturing process. He didn't create or envisage anything new, he just drove it into production.
Vincent van Gogh, genius
Ludwig van Beethoven, genius
Albert Einstein, genius
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, genius
Steve Jobs, NOT a genius
Last edited:
The whole team responsible for the clock design should be sent home. I think they took Steve's statement "great artists steal" way too far.
Apple did not Trademark icons in a grid. They have a design patent over it, they claim it is their (albeit unregistered) Trade Dress, but they hold no trademark over the grid arrangement.
They hold trademarks for individual icons though.
This clock design is trademarked by the Swiss Railway. Anyone trying to draw paralleles to Apple v. Samsung and this case are bound to be completely wrong, since it's not the same kind of IP involved.
Honestly as a Swiss person, I would bet that the amount paid by Apple wouldn't exceed a couple thousand dollards... Maybe 100'000 but there were no insidious wish to make Apple paying billions as it firstly make no sense, and this not because Apple is rich that people should ask too much money for minor issue...
Hey guys I'm about ready to submit my first game to the App Store. It's a children's game kind of like "Pin the Tail on the Donkey" called "Bite the Apple."
I've been working on the app icon and want your opinion. This one is probably kind of simplistic and derivative, anybody could have designed it really. But there's really no other way of drawing an apple with a bite out of it, amiright? Has anyone seen anything like this before? Do you think it looks good? I was thinking of adding like rainbow stripes but didn't want to get too gaudy.
I've been working on the app icon and want your opinion. This one is probably kind of simplistic and derivative, anybody could have designed it really. But there's really no other way of drawing an apple with a bite out of it, amiright? Has anyone seen anything like this before? Do you think it looks good? I was thinking of adding like rainbow stripes but didn't want to get too gaudy.
Then Jobs was a complete idiot.
Michelangelo didn't steal
Rembrandt didn't steal
van Gogh didn't steal
Renoir didn't steal
Picasso/Braque didn't steal
Matisse didn't steal
Rothko didn't steal
Pollock didn't
great artists strive to say something in their own voice, they do not stand on shoulders of others.
they stand alone.
Last edited:
I didn't think it was the same as the shorter hour hand threw me off...
In today's world, I'm surprised some patent troll company isn't trademarking 'arrows', etc. and suing companies for usage...although in this case it's pretty obvious they took some 'inspiration' from their design.
In today's world, I'm surprised some patent troll company isn't trademarking 'arrows', etc. and suing companies for usage...although in this case it's pretty obvious they took some 'inspiration' from their design.
Because it's their job. It's a design well-known to people in the profession. It's not some random image any more than Snoopy is just some drawing of a dog.
This is a bunch of nonsense. Every last one of those artists was carrying on a 'conversation' with their precursors and their contemporaries and are indebted to them as such. Every last bit of them used allegory in their works, which at times blurs the line between homage and theft. The 'singular genius' model of the Great Artist who bootstraps him- or herself above contemporaries through a unique, self-generated vision is a joke to anybody who knows anything about art history.
Last edited:
Every great artist, inventor, engineer, whatever builds on the shoulders of giants. Everyone takes what has been done and takes it to a new level.
Great artists have done so forever. To think "Great artists" don't do so is insane.
you are full of BS and know nothing about the artists or the creative process.
i'm an artist, i would know.
I didn't think it was the same as the shorter hour hand threw me off...
In today's world, I'm surprised some patent troll company isn't trademarking 'arrows', etc. and suing companies for usage...although in this case it's pretty obvious they took some 'inspiration' from their design.
Trademarks are very specific. Trademarking "arrows" would only protect 1 design of arrows that is very specific. Unless you did a bunch of arrows and then registered trademarks for all of them, but since there's millions of different ways to design arrows, the task would be too great for the return on investment which would be ludicrously small.
Trademark trolling is really not like patent trolling. Patents cover methods and ideas, you don't need 1:1 copying to infringe on a patent. For trademarks, it's quite different. The designs need to be so similar that it becomes confusing to someone which is the original and which is the infringer.
Uh... "Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal" is a Picasso quote which Jobs stole (see what I did there?), so now you've indirectly dismissed Picasso as an idiot.
Obviously, not a very good artist. You're telling us you go out there, grab a bunch of plants, create your own pigments ? You do not rely on existing color theory for warm/cold colors, gradients, etc.. ?
You do not use already known musical instruments and theory ? Octaves mean squat to you, you do not use either the wind or object vibrations or percussions, but a new paradigm in sound making ?
You create all your materials from scratch, building at the atomic level to make sure you use no existing mineral types ? You carve out shapes yet unknown to the wide world from those new materials using tools you made yourself, after envisioning them, from all these new materials ?
Of course not. Don't be ridiculous.
Myself and people I know do create our own pigments, materials and bindings. No I don't rely on any color theories, I rely on nature.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think everything is just one magnificent, made-up spectacle, as it is too much of a win-win situation for both companies:
Apple proves that design is important and that you can also copyright it
SBB hopes to sell thousands of their $400 mondaine wristwatches to people who never knew it existed...
And would you consider Warhol an artist and/or a genius? After all, with things like the Brillo boxes, his only contribution was to dream up the idea of oversized Brillo boxes. The original box was designed by a guy named James Harvey. Warhol commissioned his assistants to build large wood replicas of the boxes, I'm guessing Malanga did the silkscreen print and then someone else stacked them as part of a grocery-themed exhibit in a museum somewhere. The art world is still in awe of that, er, accomplishment.
I hear this is another idea the designer was playing around with. Just something that popped in his head.
