5 ms·
I thought the same thing ... and wonder how Apple can possibly believe this is patentable.
by smoyer 5y ago
I thought the same thing ... and wonder how Apple can possibly believe this is patentable.
- catfishx 5y agoSo is Raspberry now violating Apples patents?
- arghwhat 5y agoNo, it is by definition impossible for an older product to ever violate a later patent, as a patent is invalid in the presence of prior art.
- unfocussed_mike 5y agoI thought it was a design patent. It's full of very specific measurements. Design patents only protect key aspects of product design, they are more limited, and -- evidently like this one -- they're kept secret until they are granted. There's a good chance this device is actually going to happen. If it's not a design patent then they are really only claiming one or two small elements of this as innovation. Read any patent; they're all like this at some level.
- unfocussed_mike 5y agoMore notes in my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30467618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30467618
- Someone 5y agoMeasurements and details (“a hinge foldable about an axis perpendicular to the rear-facing wall”, “a cross-sectional shape of the enclosure is triangular”) This is to protect (somewhat) against lookalikes. One interesting part is that they mention an inductive charging coil. Cursory reading didn’t tell me whether that’s for keeping a mouse charged or for charging the device.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago> This is to protect (somewhat) against lookalikes. Right. Fits with my understanding. Basically they (and others -- HP/LG) use these patent classes to protect aspects of technical designs in the way that Coca Cola used design patents to protect their classic bottle shape. So possibly not an actual design patent but something with the same narrow scope. I guess it's an open question as to whether they should be allowed, but they surely seem largely to be easy to avoid in good faith.