"Rectangle with rounded edges"
It's been almost a month since Apple won the case against Samsung; complaining that Samsung infringed on multiple design patents in many of their mobile and tablet devices. In an NPR article, Robert Brunner, an industrial designer, says that patenting something so fundamental as a "rectangle with rounded edges" makes it so that there isn't "a lot of room to be creative." With smartphones becoming so ubiquitous, is Apple going to far to sue companies over such a fundamental design? Many certainly have mixed opinions. Supporters of Apple would easily say that the design was innovated by Apple and they solely own the rights to it; while others would argue that the claim is too ambiguous and unfair.
What does this mean to consumers? Well, there will undoubtedly be an impact on how smartphone manufacturers design new phones. Now that there has been a precedence siding with Apple, other manufacturers will have a harder time battling Apple over design infringements. In a press statement released shortly after the verdict, Samsung said that the verdict was a "loss for American consumers." Innovation in technology nowadays often builds on existing inventions, either improving a design or putting a different spin on it. The biggest stakeholder in this verdict isn't Apple or Samsung, it's the consumer. With Apple tightly enforcing its intellectual property, other companies will have a hard time innovating new phones and therefore won't be able to offer consumers more options.
Do you think Apple's patent is too ambiguous or unfair, or do you believe that it is completely in their right? How do you see this verdict from a consumer perspective?
Image and article source: www.npr.org
What does this mean to consumers? Well, there will undoubtedly be an impact on how smartphone manufacturers design new phones. Now that there has been a precedence siding with Apple, other manufacturers will have a harder time battling Apple over design infringements. In a press statement released shortly after the verdict, Samsung said that the verdict was a "loss for American consumers." Innovation in technology nowadays often builds on existing inventions, either improving a design or putting a different spin on it. The biggest stakeholder in this verdict isn't Apple or Samsung, it's the consumer. With Apple tightly enforcing its intellectual property, other companies will have a hard time innovating new phones and therefore won't be able to offer consumers more options.
Do you think Apple's patent is too ambiguous or unfair, or do you believe that it is completely in their right? How do you see this verdict from a consumer perspective?
Image and article source: www.npr.org
In regards to the debate between Apple and Samsung, the lawsuit was based upon stolen patents including tools for: dragging documents, rotating by twisting, zooming in/out by pinching, scrolling through documents with one finger, tap-to-zoom, etc. The lawsuit even argues the patent of design: the way icons are square-gridded out on an iPhone screen. If arguments like these are now legitimate, which they seemingly are since Apple already won $1 billion from the case, doesn't it seem like every phone designer (or tech designer in general) will take advantage of this sort of lawsuit? For example, Siemens created the first slide phone, the Siemens SL10. Can they now place a lawsuit against TMobile's MyTouch 4G Slide, the LG Remarq and the HTC MyTouch for "copying Siemens' design"? Or if the iPhone's ability to drag documents is legitimate enough to make a case out of, then can't, for example, the creator of the idea that clicking the "end" button will turn off a phone sue the majority of phone companies today? Simply put, won't this $1 billion win influence other tech patent holders to sue other companies for such seemingly silly arguments?
ReplyDeleteYou raise a lot of good issues. I would like to see some of your opinions and analysis on them rather than just an objective presentation of the issues themselves!
ReplyDeleteThis is a key issue, and it would be great for you to go into a bit more depth on it. There are a couple of different directions you could take. One is that this one case is only one out of a whole barrage of cases among Apple, Samsung, Google, Nokia, etc. Many of these cases are in different countries, which have different patent rules. What is the real significance of any one case such as this one in the larger picture? Ariela’s post points to some of the other cases and possible cases.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of discussion about patent reform, and it would be valuable to get some of the highlights of that into your comments. Rather than asking readers to speculate on the basis of their “amateur” commonsense opinions (which have almost no standing in the legal system), it would be good to see what people who know the system say about what can be done and what is likely to follow from various decisions. There is plenty of material on the web that you can look into.
Also, there are some typos (e.g., “Is Apple going to far…”). It’s good to proofread entries before posting them.
I look forward to seeing more on the topic.