iPad design patent - a prior art!!

Samsung is claiming something very interesting with regards to iPad related design patent. If the judge accepts that Stanley Kubrick's 1969 film "2001: A Space Odyssey" shows the design Apple has patent for, then the patent will become invalid, as it's a "prior art".

Details here.

Stanley Kubrick was indeed a visionary!
 

hammill

New member
Mar 20, 2008
212
0
0
bigboss said:
Samsung is claiming something very interesting with regards to iPad related design patent. If the judge accepts that Stanley Kubrick's 1969 film "2001: A Space Odyssey" shows the design Apple has patent for, then the patent will become invalid, as it's a "prior art".

Details here.

Stanley Kubrick was indeed a visionary!
Very interesting. I work for a US company and they try to patent the most trivial of ideas - primarily to stop small companies patenting the idea first and then suing them. I can't believe that all this money spent on lawyers to fight patents wars is very productive.
 

Lee H

New member
Oct 7, 2010
336
0
0
That could cause chaos if allowed. My patent for a flying skateboard is now worthless :)
 

Lee H

New member
Oct 7, 2010
336
0
0
In all seriousness though. There are lots of things which have featured in sci-fi that have now come to market in a similar form. Patents for design could become worthless.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
4
0
Sounds stupid to me. So we're saying that for example if and when someone invents a teleport system in God-knows what century, the risk is he won't be able to patent the design if it looks like anything already seen in fiction? De Vinci's estate will love to hear about this I bet. They must already be drawing-up legal plans to sue the inventor of the modern helicopter.
 

hammill

New member
Mar 20, 2008
212
0
0
MajorFubar said:
Sounds stupid to me. So we're saying that for example if and when someone invents a teleport system in God-knows what century, the risk is he won't be able to patent the design if it looks like anything already seen in fiction? De Vinci's estate will love to hear about this I bet. They must already be drawing-up legal plans to sue the inventor of the modern helicopter.
That is not what this means. If someone created a teleport device AND they made it look like the one from star trek, then they would not be able to patent the look, but they would be able to patent how it works. In this case, part of Apple's case is about how the Samsung looks and Samsung are making the reasonable point that Apple did not come up wth the look as it was already around in 2001.
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Good job this possible precedent wasn't around when Motorola patented the 'Star Tac' flip phone... though they at least had the decency to nod to the source of its Star Trek communicator inspiration :)
 

Paul.

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2010
745
55
18,970
These are not design patents, it is 'registered design'. Most designers agree that registered design is pretty worthless. Registered design doesn't even exist outside of europe. But conversely, quoting a film tablet as prior art is a bit ridiculous of samsung, considering the lengths samsung have gone to copy the iPad.

Case in point, why switch from mini USB to a dock connector, which is uncannily familiar?

6772.jpg


Apple are not suing because the Galaxy Tab looks kinda like the iPad, they are suing because the whole package, including hardware, software, packaging and marketing looks kinda like the iPad.

Another example...

07_nexus-s-white.jpg


galaxy_tab1.jpg


whitebox.jpg


These are not typical samsung behaviours. On there own, these instances would be irrelevant, but as a collection, make up a pretty decent case.

Again, here are some very familiar Samsung branded Apple accesories...

wpid-samsung.suit041811.001.jpg


I should also say I have so far resisted downloading the ST:TNG LCARS app for iPad. If I was quoting prior art for a tablet, LCARS is where I would go :)
 

The_Lhc

Well-known member
Oct 16, 2008
1,176
1
19,195
Paul Hobbs said:
These are not design patents, it is 'registered design'. Most designers agree that registered design is pretty worthless. Registered design doesn't even exist outside of europe. But conversely, quoting a film tablet as prior art is a bit ridiculous of samsung, considering the lengths samsung have gone to copy the iPad.

Case in point, why switch from mini USB to a dock connector, which is uncannily familiar?

6772.jpg

It's "uncannily familiar" because it's a standard connector. You can't patent or "register" the use of something like that, otherwise I'm going to register the look of the 3-pin mains plug and sue the entire country! Besides, the Samsung one is different in about every way it can be, the bottom of the plastic is flared, the iPad is square, the rubber sleeve at the bottom is longer than the iPad one, the Samsung one has their name on it, the iPad one has a symbol.

There's only a certain number of ways a connector like that can look.

Apple are not suing because the Galaxy Tab looks kinda like the iPad, they are suing because the whole package, including hardware, software, packaging and marketing looks kinda like the iPad.

Another example...

07_nexus-s-white.jpg


galaxy_tab1.jpg


whitebox.jpg


These are not typical samsung behaviours. On there own, these instances would be irrelevant, but as a collection, make up a pretty decent case.

Only if you're suggesting that nobody else is allowed to package a phone in a white box.
 

Paul.

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2010
745
55
18,970
Like I said, these instances on there own would be irrelevant. A brand is made up of dozens of components, from design queues, to styles, boxes, adverts, as many ways as you can think of interacting with a product. Just copying a white box would be irrelevant, but a white box, a dock connector, some accessories, a chrome bezel, a software dock interface, lots of little things add up to make a big thing.
 

AnotherJoe

New member
Jun 10, 2011
407
0
0
and the LG Prada is prior art to the Iphone.

Steve Jobs favourite quotes -

"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

"Good artists copy, great artists steal. "

All companies do it - not just Apple - but Apple sees the law courts as its best (and arguably only) chance of stopping the Android charge.
 

Paul.

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2010
745
55
18,970
There is a big diferance between taking a good idea, like the GUI, and running with it (which is what that quote was intended to refer to), and two products apearing to be similar that were in development at the same time. Not denying Apple take the ideas of others, I just think the LG Prada is a poor example, as it was a piece of junk. The bulk of product design in in materials, this is the perfect example. My dad still has my iPhone 2g, and it feels like a solid piece of metal. I still think from a product design standpoint the origional was the best of the bunch.

You could argue Audi stole their grill design off of Rover, as it popped up there first. The Audi wears it better, and is synonomous with them now. They executed the design better, was in development at the same time, but just happened to be slower out the gate.

mg_rover_rover_75_v8_26_05_04.jpg
 
Paul Hobbs said:
There is a big diferance between taking a good idea, like the GUI, and running with it (which is what that quote was intended to refer to), and two products apearing to be similar that were in development at the same time. Not denying Apple take the ideas of others, I just think the LG Prada is a poor example, as it was a piece of junk. The bulk of product design in in materials, this is the perfect example. My dad still has my iPhone 2g, and it feels like a solid piece of metal. I still think from a product design standpoint the origional was the best of the bunch.

You could argue Audi stole their grill design off of Rover, as it popped up there first. The Audi wears it better, and is synonomous with them now. They executed the design better, was in development at the same time, but just happened to be slower out the gate.

mg_rover_rover_75_v8_26_05_04.jpg

Copying designs is one thing & suing others on what was already copied in the first place is another. Every small thing copied may add up to something major, but this was still one of the points which Apple is arguing in the court. Samsung is contesting this particular point with the film's example.....which they're perfectly entitled to.
 

Paul.

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2010
745
55
18,970
Sure, of course they are entitled to, it would be foolish not to try. I think Samsungs defence could have came up with better examples of prior art, but they were wooed by the age of the film. No body is claiming Apple invented the tablet (well, arguably they had a good stab with Newton, the second one was pretty good), they just invented a formula that works for consumers. Its that formula that Apple is protecting.
 

TRENDING THREADS