4 ms·
An exact, 1-1 copy shouldn't be prevented. Also, you're either completely wrong or completely misleading, and I can't tell which (maybe both) because of HN's h
by kick 7y ago
An exact, 1-1 copy shouldn't be prevented.
Also, you're either completely wrong or completely misleading, and I can't tell which (maybe both) because of HN's history with completely misinterpreting patent law. They've gotten other software patents before (on things no more based on functionality as the above patent), and utilized them to sue opponents.
"Slide to Unlock" comes to mind.
https://www.theverge.com/2014/5/2/5676776/samsung-found-to-infringe-apple-patents-for-over-119-million-in https://www.theverge.com/2014/5/2/5676776/samsung-found-to-i...
- threeseed 7y agoDesign patents serve a useful purpose though. Companies should be encouraged to innovate on a design and arrive at their own implementation. Otherwise you would see large companies simply duplicate en masse the works of smaller ones. Utility patents like "slide to unlock" are obviously more about protecting an idea by patenting the most common implementation. But again in this case it was trivial to workaround since we've seen many unique phone unlock mechanisms come from the Android ecosystem.
- ascagnel_ 7y agoDesign patents are why Apple sued Samsung, and won, over the Fascinate (the Verizon-branded version of the original Galaxy that was pretty naked in its attempt to clone the look & feel of iOS in that era).