3 ms·
I don't know much about this, but the line you seem to be describing is trademark violation. Things that distinguish iphones. That's a whole different set of l
by netcan 14y ago
I don't know much about this, but the line you seem to be describing is trademark violation. Things that distinguish iphones.
That's a whole different set of laws where the line is much closer to counterfeiting. You can't sell fake Gucci products but you can sell things that are very similar to Gucci. In fact, innovative high street fashion permeates all the way down within a couple of years. If the designs aren't inherently expensive to manufacture, they'll be very close to exact copies.
Trademark exists, as far as I understand, to protect consumers. As long as they know they are buying a knockoff, it's OK.
- nirvana 14y agoTrademark is one set of laws, but you can only trademark names and images. You can't trademark designs. For that there are Design Patents. Design Patents are very different from Utility Patents. Design Patents are effectively a trademark on the design-- the look, the shape, the key design choices of an item. In that regard Samsung clearly copied Apple's designs, and the documents that came out in the trial show that they did this intentionally-- by examining Apple products and talking about how they need to make specific changes in their products to look the same way. Design Patents are the issue at trial here (or well, at leat half of the issue at trial here.)