decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal

User Functions



Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

PJ | 311 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 10:40 PM EDT
No offense what so ever.
A small point, about the 'prior art', by no means I wanted to say, that it
doesn't matter...
in fact, I was trying to avoid it integrally (it is quite a murky territory...
let's see the play in the court room), as much as the 'lawful/fair' (the first
one is a matter of law, and what the judge accepts... the last one is a point of

Anyway, although many can (would) argue that 'design' (specially in software) is
an 'ad hoc' thing, in fact there is a lot of 'psychological research' on it.
And regarding the cars comparison (and I don't know how many have noticed the
c180 versus, for instance, 125i...thing :), although, as you have said,
year-after-year, they look alike, for one thing, if you just look at the front
of a car, even without any label, even if it is a new model, chances are you
will recognize the brand (otherwise the design team would have failed

And this is my point, see, I'm a over 50+ electronic engineering, work with
operating systems back the end of 70s. Have worked with minix, sunos, hpux,
aix....and the last 10+ years with linux as well (and M$). I know from the
distance if an smart-phone is an apple/samsung/lg/nokia. But I have colleagues
(at my Univ. Department) that can't tell them apart, seriously, one was so off
as thinking that 'a samsung phone' was an 'apple's second line phone' so,
let's not argue of how much 'clueless' someone can be....
and that's one of the reasons of this 'hole theater', I mean, this is not about
the ones who know better, this is about the ones that don't have a clue (and
they are the majority).
As you said, many go for an 'android phone', well how many of them know what
this entices? It has happened before (net-books... many buyed a linux netbook
because it was 'cheaper', just to find out it wasn't windows... sure, they
should know better... but the fact is, they simply don't know).
And this isn't a 'niche market', this is about 100+millions of devices year,
most of the buyers are price sensitive, and if a brand get erode to the point of
no value, what is the point of a brand?

Before buying a 3Gs, I had a samsung (if I recall it was HD something...), well,
extremely nice phone, but no firmware upgrade, the synchronization (with a PC)
was a mess.
The 3Gs was a bliss, and best of all, when I bought a 4s, I just connect it and,
after a while a got the 'same phone' in a new body... this is quite remarkable
when you look the alternatives.
Am I an apple fan? Well my laptop is a dell, my PC at uni and home are all 'self
assembled' running SuSE and vmWare ESXi and M$.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Authored by: jonathon on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 01:11 AM EDT
> if I produced a car identical to a BMW with a different logo, then BMW
would have a trade-dress argument.

I remember a case from the seventies or eighties, in which Rolls Royce sued an
after market vendor for trade dress infringement. The vendor was selling hoods
for VW Beatles, that were identical to those used for Rolls Royce. I don't
remember the outcome of the lawsuit, but those hoods were not available after
the lawsuit was filed.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • PJ - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 06:42 PM EDT
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 02:53 AM EDT
I aggree, Apple is 'top shelf'.
I'd have to disagree with you as this side of the pond "top shelf" refers to those publications that a newsagents put on the top shelf so that children can't reach them (and, unfortunately, neither can vertically challenged adults)...oh hang on...I'd definitely have to agree with you that "Apple is 'top shelf'".

I was unaware that the iPhone ran Android as I was looking for an Android phone when I bought my Galaxy; if only I'd known...unless, of course, iPhone does NOT run Android, in which case, Apple did not lose a sale due to the Galaxy looking anything like an iPhone (looks were not a factor in deciding to go for the Galaxy), they lost it because the iPhone does not have the specs I wanted. All of which means that it is Apple's fault I did not chose an iPhone, not Samsung's and so have no claim whatsoever over the profits the sale of the Galaxy made to me.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 01:47 PM EDT
You make a really good point about the fact that the first decision most smart
phone buyers make is whether to go Android or iOS.

Then they decide what brand phone to get.

I suppose that a minority might go through the trouble of picking the
"best" android and then checking it against Apple one last time -- but
how many can that be? Certainly at that point they are no longer
"confused" about the difference.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )