4 ms·
Microsoft should not have been allowed to patent this particular design because it is made up mostly of elements which are in the public domain. For example, th
by jondubois 11y ago
Microsoft should not have been allowed to patent this particular design because it is made up mostly of elements which are in the public domain. For example, the 'plus' and 'minus' symbols are universal symbols. Circles and straight lines would also fall into the public domain.
I don't think you should be able to patent designs which are just basic compositions of symbols/motifs which have existed for thousands of years.
Besides, lots of old remote controls use plus/minus symbols to indicate volume-up/volume-down in a similar fashion. This design is obviously derivative.
- astrowilliam 11y agoIf you want to go the route of people using the idea of things that have been used for thousands of years in patents, no one should be able to patent a wheel design because wheels have been around for a very long time and every wheel is a derivative of the original wheel design. Sure, wheels are a utility, but the design of a wheel is using pieces from other people's ideas. Patents are silly anyway, imho.
- throwawaykf05 11y agoYou are analyzing design patents as you would utility patents, which I doubt is correct. These patents are more about "look and feel". You don't break down a design into its components (else taken ad absurdum, everything would decompose to curves and straight lines and combinations thereof), but instead analyze it as a whole. I believe prior art searches for design patents look for almost exact matches of a given diagram.
- jondubois 11y agoIt just doesn't seem fair that you should be able to patent things based on how they 'feel' - The mood of something is highly subjective and usually has cultural roots (and culture is in public domain).
- Natsu 11y agoPatents are (supposedly) a power granted to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" and it's rather hard to see how patents over mere ornamentation can further that goal, even in principle.
- throwawaykf05 11y agoI'd say UI design is an "useful Art". If somebody is forced to come up with their own designs rather than ripping somebody else's off, is that not progress? If there is no conceivable alternative way of doing a design (which I find extremely improbable) the solution is well-known: license it.
- yohui 11y agoI agree good UI design offers utility, but often those "forced to come up with their own designs" are simply forced to kludge together a workaround rather than do what would come naturally. This hardship may sometimes spark innovation, true, but in other cases the effort and frustration might have been better spent pushing the envelope elsewhere. And if the "invention" is obvious, developers (and users) really shouldn't have to pay the cost to license it.
- throwawaykf05 11y agoThing is, in the world of design patents even trivial changes are sufficient to avoid infringement.
- talmand 11y agoTwo things that make me feel design patents seem stupid in general. 1. What if the design is trivial itself? So trivial that there are no trivial changes to make? 2. If trivial changes is all that's require to avoid the patent, such as change a solid line to dotted line, then why have the stupid design patents in the first place? I could maybe understand such a thing for the entire application, but just a small insignificant part of the overall design? It's stupid.
- golergka 11y ago> I don't think you should be able to patent designs which are just basic compositions of symbols/motifs which have existed for thousands of years. I don't think you should be able to patent anything which is written in english, as it is a basic composition of letters which have existed for thousands of years.
- nailer 11y agoYou can't patent written things, that's copyrights.
- dozzie 11y ago> Microsoft should not have been allowed to patent this particular design because ...it is a design, not an invention. It is as simple as that. Patents should only apply to things that advance technology and/or science.