4 ms·

Thing is, in the world of design patents even trivial changes are sufficient to avoid infringement.

talmand 11y ago
Two 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.
- throwawaykf05 11y ago
  Not a big fan of design patents either, but... 1. Not sure if something trivial (e.g. an empty circle for a button) would be eligible even for a design patent. 2. The solid and dotted lines are just to indicate the claimed design vs the rest of the product respectively. Potentially the dotted lines in one patent maybe claimed as solid lines in a separate design patent.
  - talmand 11y ago
    I have seen designs I would consider trivial, such as a slider made up of two circled symbols, a solid line, and a small box for an indicator. I wasn't referring to the lines in the claim, but in the design. I was saying; for instance, if changing a solid line in the design to a dotted line may get you past the design patent, then they are worthless to begin with.
    - Natsu 11y ago
      They're actually saying that the lines indicate what's claimed in the patent. While it may be true that you just have to not match the solid lines of the patent, when you have a minimal design that's barely anything but a rounded rectangle (as posted below), the design patents become a farce.
Natsu 11y ago
> Thing is, in the world of design patents even trivial changes are sufficient to avoid infringement. The Samsung case showed us that even a trivial match like rounded corners was enough to establish infringement, though.
- throwawaykf05 11y ago
  No, it didn't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10807369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10807369
  - Natsu 11y ago
    http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/07/30/strong-design-patents-the-power-of-the-broken-line/id=44215/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/07/30/strong-design-patents-t... I never said there weren't other elements, only that it took little more than rounded corners. The complaint uses a lot of words to say very little, as there sure aren't many solid lines other than those rounded corners when you look at the patent. Note that the dashed lines aren't counted. And this minimalist design is apparently worth nearly $1 billion, something I simply don't agree with at all.

Two 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.

throwawaykf05 11y ago
Not a big fan of design patents either, but... 1. Not sure if something trivial (e.g. an empty circle for a button) would be eligible even for a design patent. 2. The solid and dotted lines are just to indicate the claimed design vs the rest of the product respectively. Potentially the dotted lines in one patent maybe claimed as solid lines in a separate design patent.
- talmand 11y ago
  I have seen designs I would consider trivial, such as a slider made up of two circled symbols, a solid line, and a small box for an indicator. I wasn't referring to the lines in the claim, but in the design. I was saying; for instance, if changing a solid line in the design to a dotted line may get you past the design patent, then they are worthless to begin with.
  - Natsu 11y ago
    They're actually saying that the lines indicate what's claimed in the patent. While it may be true that you just have to not match the solid lines of the patent, when you have a minimal design that's barely anything but a rounded rectangle (as posted below), the design patents become a farce.

Natsu 11y ago

> Thing is, in the world of design patents even trivial changes are sufficient to avoid infringement. The Samsung case showed us that even a trivial match like rounded corners was enough to establish infringement, though.

throwawaykf05 11y ago
No, it didn't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10807369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10807369
- Natsu 11y ago
  http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/07/30/strong-design-patents-the-power-of-the-broken-line/id=44215/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/07/30/strong-design-patents-t... I never said there weren't other elements, only that it took little more than rounded corners. The complaint uses a lot of words to say very little, as there sure aren't many solid lines other than those rounded corners when you look at the patent. Note that the dashed lines aren't counted. And this minimalist design is apparently worth nearly $1 billion, something I simply don't agree with at all.