5 ms·
> The notion that a company can patent rounded corners and sue others claiming innovation makes me sick. Apple didn't patent "rounded corners". Apple v Samsung
by barredo 15y ago
> The notion that a company can patent rounded corners and sue others claiming innovation makes me sick.
Apple didn't patent "rounded corners". Apple v Samsung is more than that repeating mantra about rounded corners.
Why would Apple sue Samsung after GalaxyTab 10.1 and not when the original Galaxy Tab arrived?
* original galaxytab http://www.ebooksytablets.com/68-224-thickbox/protector-pantalla-original-samsung-galaxy-tab-p1000.jpg http://www.ebooksytablets.com/68-224-thickbox/protector-pant...
* second galaxytab http://messenger.com.es/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/galaxy-tab.jpg http://messenger.com.es/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/galaxy-ta...
I suggest you to read early Nilay Patel analysis for more understanding about trade dressing and the reasons behind Apple's requirements.
http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/ http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analys...
- drivebyacct2 15y agoIn my opinion, the second looks like an obvious progression of the first.
- jsnk 15y agoAfter reading the article, I was all I was doing was wondering how could these trivial things possibly get patents that supposedly claims to be new innovation.
- jeswin 15y agoJust today morning, I was talking to someone who is getting a patent. He was telling me that you outline the idea, and then the patent lawyers come in to phrase it. I don't know how far this is true, but if true just shows how broken the system is.
- tlholaday 15y agoYou will wonder less if you learn the difference between a patent and a design registration.
- dpark 15y agoThe original galaxy tablet looks about as much like an iPad as the second one, with the exception of the case color. The other major physical difference is that the buttons moved on-screen, which doesn't make it more iPad-like.