Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 08:17 PM EDT |
Apple claims what it can because the law (and society) lets it.
Many years ago there was a court case in Melbourne Australia where a speeding
driver got off because the legislation defined speed signs as rectangles or
squares. The legal argument was that if you rounded the corners for safety
reasons, the signs were no longer rectangle or square and thus not legal signs.
Not sure what happened on appeal.
Just saying that this highlights that in law, issues can become absurdly twisted
whereas the average Joe would consider it more simply and move on, not going
down such a twisted path. Seems money corrupts.
It seems that in law, small steps are taken where the law itself changes a
little as it travels along it's legal path. It can end up corrupting what the
original legislators may have intended;, yet judges don't write he law. I guess
that you see this clearly in the USA where the constitution is being slowly
eroded over time and through small steps each justifying themselves (but the
path has taken them to a place other than where the constitution intended). [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 08:56 PM EDT |
The argument should fall of it's own weight. Laughed out of court would be my
preference.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 11:27 PM EDT |
Even if the competitors had sharp corners, Apple would be
trying to put them out of business. After all, a tap is a zero
length swipe. ...Isn't it?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 09:49 AM EDT |
For another argument, it's pretty hard to stamp a piece of metal with perfectly
square corners. It would either have to be milled or cast that way. So, the
least expensive way to make a rectangular device with some space inside it is
with rounded corners. This alone would imply that rounded corners are
functional. Admittedly, the radius can be fairly small, but not 0.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: hAckz0r on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 10:40 AM EDT |
Stone tablets had rounded corners, and even had a touch interface for those who
are visually impaired. Unfortunately that tablets graphics driver is a little
too slow for the current market place, so enter the iPhone/iPad. Obviously
Apples patented IP is just an improvement of a previous product! Mr. Jobs is
apparently just "borrowing" from some previous tried and true successful
products, so is Samsung.
Now we can argue about how successful stone
tablets were for passing messages amongst its users, but one thing I am certain
of is that Mr. Jobs knew of their existence when he first designed the iPhone.
</sarcasm>
--- The Investors IP Law: The future health of a
Corporation is measured as the inverse of the number of IP lawsuits they are
currently litigating. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|