The Glade 4.0

Pretty interesting read, especially since it was written by the man who threw out the Motorola/Apple lawsuit case. Personally, I see Apple as Tonya Harding.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... ca/259725/

_________________
Les Zombis et les Loups-Garous!

Patent abuse falls in line with GTE Flip phone patent filed in 1970s.
A concept idea from a television series several years prior to the patent being filed.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.

If you wonder why companies file a bunch of aggressive patent claims, here's why: Google is claiming that Apple inventions are now "commercially essential," and should be taken away and made into standards.

I wonder if these two headlines are related?

So Apple won their patent trolling against HTC and is on the cusp of chasing Samsung out of the market.

_________________

**** Apple.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Yeah! **** Apple for having those damn judges uphold patents!

Nah, **** Apple For Claiming "Rectangular with Rounded Corners" is a valid and enforceable trade dress.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

These stipulations are pretty specific:

- the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders;
- as to the iPhone and iPod touch products, substantial black borders above, and below the screen having roughly equal width and narrower black borders on either side of the screen having roughly equal width;

Seems to me it's less about the rounded corners and more about everything, down to the screen bezel, being the god-damn same.

uhm.. sorry Lenas, that's NOT specific at all. In fact, I think that you just described every TV I've ever owned...

Lol damn EXACTLY what I was thinking.

_________________

TV's almost exclusively have uniform bezels except sometimes the bottom panel. That's not the same.

Can any of you seriously look at that Samsung phone and not see that it's a blatant ripoff of the iPhone design? Seriously? Prior to the iPhone handsets like that did not exist and now they dominate the market.

The shape of a rectangular housing for a circuit board is not a technological innovation that needs to be protected from duplication. The iPad's housing isn't a cutting-edge air foil.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

The patent system is a joke.

I agree, doesn't mean that Apple isn't working within the confines of their rights. If the judges are siding with Apple then they must have made a good case. This **** has been going on a long time.

That is a retarded patent, and it should be invalidated. Parents are for novel inventions; Apple patented a box with a specific look and feel. If anything, it should be a trademark dispute.

_________________

This.

And this.

Even if it is, I pretty much don't care. Contrary to what Apple's patent might imply, there's nothing earth-shattering about the general form factor of the iPhone. Popular, yes. Ingenious, no. It's a lame patent that shouldn't have been granted in the first place.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.

It's not even a very strong trade dress.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Google's point is valid, and the fact that a court sided with Apple does not change this. The patent law, as it stands now, is crippling to product innovation in many areas. This is in stark contrast to certain other areas where patent law is a necessary protection. Simply put, patent law is not the blanket solution it's currently being used for.

The patent for the iPhone housing is a clear indication of this. Apple has successfully patented a box. There is nothing technologically important about that specific shape of plastic, nor that coloration. It's just a plastic box to protect a circuit board. Patents exist to promote innovation by protecting one's ability to market their inventions before imitators come along. The patent for the box expired before the United States was even founded. This is blatant abuse of patent law to inconvenience one's competitors. It is not protecting any inventor.

Now, if Apple invented a new technology to make the box, that could merit a patent. Perhaps they discovered a particular chemical process that led to a new, more durable plastic. That would be patent-worthy. Perhaps they designed a new machine to cut the beveled corners. That would be patent-worthy.

Slide-to-unlock is not patent-worthy. That's a deadbolt. We already have those. They predate the United States. Touchscreens are patent-worthy, but that patent has already been issued and has probably expired. We've had touchscreens for a while.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Apple didn't 'innovate' the iPhone design anyway. There were several, possibly even dozens of devices the predate it that have similar, or nearly identical designs. They were just the ones who happened to submit a patent description that is just accurate enough, and yet vague enough, to try to use it to cripple it's competition in the courtroom.

That's not what patents are for.

Here is a photo (courtesy of DailyTech.com) that shows many devices that were in commercial use prior to the patent that could easily fit the description Apple attempted to 'patent'.



And here is the Almighty Steve Jobs, basically stating that "good artists copy, great artists steal" and that they (Apple) are shameless about stealing great ideas. (again, courtesy of the same article on DailyTech.com)



Here is the dailytech article I've been citing
http://www.dailytech.com/Samsung+Apples ... e25277.htm

The whole patent system is destroying innovation. Yeah, I said it. Unfortunately, the patent system is also supporting millions of lawyers, and they'll be damned if it changes.