|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 11:33 AM EDT |
About 85 Us dollars
Big cpu old phone shell lots of games and freebes.
Cli
ck for a Desperate ploy to stay
alive [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 11:36 AM EDT |
Thanks 10**6 for the education. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 11:47 AM EDT |
Guys, Michael will be checking in from time to
time, so if you have questions, this is your
opportunity. I don't know a lot about design
patents, so I'm asking him too.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 11:53 AM EDT |
Just a thought I had earlier. Apple is claiming damages for the 22.7 million
phones sold that look similar to the iPhone and claiming that they want $24
dollars per device.
But I bought 2 of those phones (Galaxy S / Sprint) and I can tell you that at
the time of purchase the major reason I bought them was for Android and the
slideout keyboard, both features that the iPhone does not provide. Shouldn't I
be able to request that my two phones be removed from consideration because I
knowingly bought my phones for other reasons that the patients Apple is claiming
to own?
Honest question, I'm curious.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- You do have an opportunity - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 12:14 PM EDT
- Damages - Authored by: mbouckaert on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 03:58 PM EDT
- Too late - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 04:05 PM EDT
- Too late - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 04:39 PM EDT
- Damages - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 05:19 AM EDT
- Damages - Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 05:21 AM EDT
|
Authored by: nsomos on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 12:12 PM EDT |
Please post any corrections in this thread.
A summary in the title may be helpful.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 12:32 PM EDT |
Thank you for the explanation. There was one editorial comment, or more
specifically one prepositional phrase, that should have been lost before the
final draft. I quote: "It's one reason why the iPad has only 4 icons across the
bottom despite the ridiculous waste of empty space on a big tablet."
I
have had some experience with graphic design — though I don't want to
pretend
that I'm an expert — and it seems to me that large buttons with
copious
negative space was a design choice driven by aesthetics and some
functionity,
as bigger buttons widely spaced minimize errant launches. I can't
deny
that
there are marketing reasons for four basic Apple-written apps being given
a
primary spot on all launchpad pages.
You, of course, are free to dismiss
Apple's design and business choices,
but today's article was about law and I
found the quoted line jarringly off-
topic. Of course, I may be easily dismissed
as a satisfied Apple customer who
has no problem with the app icon layout. I
suppose one may call me a fanboy
or freedom-hater to hasten my
dismissal. Still, if strengthening one's
ability to enforce
legal rights
is one reason to do something a certain way, then is the extra
negative space
truly ridiculous? Is the tiny headstock of the Fender Telecaster
goofy? How
about the 1890s flourish on the Coca-Cola label, is it hopelessly
old-fashioned? From a personal point of view, I could answer yes to the latter
two questions, but we all understand why they add to product and brand
differentiation. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kuroshima on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 01:02 PM EDT |
Please include a clickable link to the news pick, so it is
visible after it scrolls down from the front page newspicks
Do it by posting in HTML, and writing it like this: <a
href="http://some.domain/and/maybe/something/else"> link
title </a>
Put spaces before and after the text in the link to try and
avoid the bug in geeklog that adds extraneous spaces in long
links[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 01:19 PM EDT |
Michael,
Even if Apple insists that the 4 icons is a design decision,
couldn't Samsung claim that it is functional based on average
finger size? For the wider phones, more icons can be accommodated.
Case in point, the new Galaxy S3 defaults to 5 buttons at the
bottom, and the Galaxy Note has 5 rows across the board.
Also, the tablets have 8 or 10 rows of icons.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: BJ on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 01:23 PM EDT |
I own a Samsung Galaxy 10.1. When using it in a public space,
I hear: "he has an iPad", "...but I'm sure you can find that on
your iPad", "look it up on your iPad", and so on.
From the people seeing me use my device, there must be a
certain percentage potentional buyers of a 'tablet' (generic
term here). How many, having seen mine, are caused by it to go
to an Apple Store?
Oh -- I always feel urged to explain "no -- this a Google Samsung
tablet." Guess why.
bjd
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 01:29 PM EDT |
The Etch-A-Sketch tablet went from sharp to round corners over the decades:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etch_A_Sketch
Why? Probably because little children used them. Hence it was a functionality
aspect - safety. The same with Apple, a phone initially intended for iMac users
which in all likelihood could not be trusted with sharp objects; hence a safety
aspect here too.
Still, other phone makers had rounded corners long before the iPhone; think
Gordon Gecko's phone from 1987
(http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2010/09/23/gordon_gekko_s_cell_phone.html).
Yet, how rounded is deemed rounded? Almost all square objects have rounded
corners if looked at an appropriate scale; e.g. a Marlboro cigarette pack
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette_pack#Hard_pack_.26_soft_pack).
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 02:43 PM EDT |
Maybe Apple could sue this girl:-
http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Gabrielle-Ray-Actress-Doing-Her-
Sums-on-a-School-Slate-Posters_i3998951_.htm?AID=1023772566
Oh hang on - she probably died about 50 years ago. Looks a lot
like an slate or tablet to me - just the ipad is an electronic
version of it. Would this have an impact of a design patent or
trade dress?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 03:59 PM EDT |
"Maybe you didn’t know, but this technology was invented in 1982 at
the University of Toronto and started as a finger pressure multi-touch
screen, which became capable to manipulate images later in 1984, same
year when Microsoft became interested in the field.In 1991, a paper
written by Pierre Wellner described a multi-touch Digital Desk with
support for multi-finger and pinching motions, technology that was
adopted later by Apple for its popular iPhone."
Could this prior art could end up invaliding all these patents?
Apple's, Microsoft's Surface and this witness Samsung Brought in from
Dimond Touch. Seems like very OLD TECHNOLOGY.... if it goes back to
1982![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: RFD on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 04:46 PM EDT |
Among the powers granted to congress by Atricle I, Section 8 of the US
Constitution is the power:
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective
Writings and Discoveries."
Is the initial phrase a throwaway phrase, or was it intended to limit congress's
power to grant monopolies? How can design patents, which have no utility,
"promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"?
---
Eschew obfuscation assiduously.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 05:20 PM EDT |
in Apple vs Samsung, by Christopher V. Carani (McAndrews, Held & Malloy,
Chicago)
posted under a newspick two stories back
paidContent Dec 2, 2011
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 05:28 PM EDT |
I don't see how Apple can say that there is confusion between
their product and any other.
Visit any Best Buy and there is an Apple section and everyone
else.
It is like saying all cars are the same. I bought a Ford but
I really meant to buy a Toyota. Ford tricked me! Please.
Jamie Royer[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 07:28 PM EDT |
Please stay off topic in these threads. Use HTML Formatted mode to make your
links nice and clickable.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The China Connection - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 08:02 PM EDT
- a two-day showcase hosted by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 09:35 PM EDT
- Hmmmm - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 10:16 PM EDT
- Hmmmm - Authored by: Tufty on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 09:46 PM EDT
- My suspicion - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 03:28 PM EDT
- Office to Become Fully Open XML Compliant (at last) - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 10:49 PM EDT
- Lululemon sues over pant patents - Patent suit names Calvin Klein, G-III Apparel - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 11:37 PM EDT
- Assange will be granted asylum in Ecuador - Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 01:10 AM EDT
- Youtube vs. NASA - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 05:03 AM EDT
- Google Launches 'Prior Art Finder' For Patents - Authored by: artp on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 10:39 AM EDT
- Dotcom in court again - wins one and lawyers wants money - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 01:32 AM EDT
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 07:30 PM EDT |
Please post your transcriptions of Comes exhibits here with full HTML markup but
posted in Plain Old Text mode so PJ can copy and paste it
See the Comes
Tracking Page to find and claim PDF files that still need to be
transcribed.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 12:17 AM EDT |
iPhone was launched in 2007. Samsung F700 and LG Prada were
developed in 2006. Infact, LG Prada was launched before the
iPhone. Remarkably, all these companies working separately
came up with similar designs. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 01:59 AM EDT |
http://www.epiphanysearch.co.uk/blog/if-you-wait-long-enough-everything-comes-ba
ck-into-fashion/
"Quantum Link was a dialup service for the Commodore 64, created in 1985,
with a host of features we would all recognise today. Electronic mail, online
chat, instant messaging, file sharing and online clubs which would eventually
evolve into the UseNet service. Stocks, weather, quizzes, online help forums,
online shopping (yes, even an auction site), airline flights reservation and car
rental."
The similarity with the iPhone GUI and Windows 8 is stunning, or?
---
______
IMANAL
.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 09:36 AM EDT |
Would it be more precise (and law is about precision) to say that you can sell
it, but you can't (successfully) claim it as a trademark?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: artp on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 10:28 AM EDT |
Re: 4 icons across the bottom of the tablet
Way back when, I was the volunteer editor of a magazine,
about 15,000 circulation.
I had the privilege of getting a professional graphics
design review of my efforts.
One of the major comments was: Leave some white space. White
space is a major component of an interesting graphics
design. Used properly, the reader's eye is drawn into the
page, helping them continue to read the article. Without it,
the reader's eye is not drawn into the page, it is drawn
away from the page. It drifts off into never-never land.
Given Apple's predilection for aesthetic designs, I would
find it hard to believe that they did not APPLY this basic
principle, and not INVENT this basic principle. It is not
deserving of consideration for a design patent, especially
one that is being used to block a product that is
technically better. Apple's motives are suspect here.
While the law might be clear on design patents, the law
needs to be applied in light of prior developments.
Knowledge of the law without knowledge of the field leads to
some hare-brained rulings that have people well-versed in
the field shaking their heads.
---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: artp on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 11:56 AM EDT |
Michael says:
There are also reasons to have curved corners
(aesthetically, and also actual function -- like not poking
or breaking on
impact). Or maybe not. On the other hand, the
circular button is probably
protectable -- it is
distinctive, and a) functionality does not dictate round,
and b) one button is really less functional than multiple
buttons.
Rounded corners are a must. You can approximate a square
corner, but in all cases, there is a radius. Even on a
machined exterior
corner that is cut in two directions,
there will be tearing at the corner on
the second cut. That
tearing will be eliminated by sanding, tumbling,
sand-
blasting or similar process that will produce - a rounded
corner!
Any
manufacturing process which molds material will produce
a rounded corner.
Stamping, drawing, casting, diecasting,
extrusion, injection molding,
rotational molding -- you name
it, it has a rounded corner. The question is -
how round?
Most processes require tapered surfaces and round corners to
facilitate release from the forming operation tools. A
straight surface
produces too much friction when the part is
released. Corners have an
additional consideration -
material flow follows curved paths. You just can't
make a
right angle turn in material flow without severe costs,
financially and
functionally. Part failure and even die/mold
failure sometimes
results.
When the law differentiates between rounded and square
corners,
they are imposing an artificial definition that
cannot be defined in practical
terms. Where are the limits?
There cannot be a definition without defining the
limits of
the definition. The law does not exist independently of the
physical
universe.
Groklaw was conceived as a multidisciplinary effort at
understanding the law. I have learned a lot about how the
law works in my time
here. Perhaps it is time for the law to
learn how things work outside the
artificial atmosphere of a
courtroom. It's time to get your hands dirty,
Michael!
Let's look at what the industry says about rounded corners
from a
random Google search.
Injection Molding Part Design, San
Francisco
State University, under Fillets:
The flow patterns of
the plastic melt require
generous fillets at all corners on injection molded
parts. A
fillet is formed by rounding off all sharp corners. Sharp
corners,
particularly inside corners, cause severe
compacting of the plastics molecule.
This compacting
produces molded-in stress. Injection pressure forces the
plastic through the thin walled sections of a part. When the
plastic comes
into contact with a square corner, pressure
builds up to the maximum until it
is forced to move at right
angles with the original flow. ... This level of
acute
stress causes increased wear on the mold and results in
premature
failure of the plastic part.
To combat this, inside corners should have a
radius equal to
half of the wall's thickness, at least 0.020 inch are is
considered minimum thickness while 0.050 provides a stress-
free corner for
most parts.
An article from an injection molding company called
ProtoMold
Much of today’s design aesthetic
seems to be
about swooping curves. Nevertheless, sometimes you just need
a
nice square corner. When it comes to molded plastic parts,
inside corners are
easy. The inside corner of a part is
formed by the outside corner of a mold,
and the mold is
formed by machine tools, which are great at cutting straight
lines. Where two of those lines cross, you get an outside
corner that is as
sharp as the material will allow. If you
want a sharp outside corner on a part,
however, that’s
another matter.
How about sand
casting?:
Sand
Casting Design Considerations
1. Use rounded corners.
OK, let's look
at metal stamping:
Arvalda
Corp
Precision Metal Components
Corner radii – Corner radii should be
at least 1/2 times the
material thickness. Tighter corner radii can be achieved
but
often come at the expense of a larger burr as well as
additional tool
maintenance or shorter tool life.
--- Userfriendly on WGA server
outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 08:01 PM EDT |
I am courious. What is the thinking behind having both design patents and
trademarks?
They both do that same job - prevent confusion in the market place. They both
use the same mechanism - non function components. So why have both?
PS, do Design Patents have the same limited lifespan as a normal patent?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- So why have both? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 08:09 PM EDT
|
|
|
|