Re:Apple Wins $539M from Samsung in Damages Retrial
by yani on Thursday May 24, 2018 @09:36PM
(#17149970)
It is not nearly identical as did the Supreme court find.
These patents are 10 steps back in the direction of inmovation and fair market competition; 10 steps forward in the direction of market monopoly.
Let others to copy, educate the consumer, but leave the consumer to make the decision what to buy not some judge in California.
Re:Apple Wins $539M from Samsung in Damages Retrial
by rayiner on Thursday May 24, 2018 @10:26PM
(#17150183)
This isn’t monopolizing some technology. These are purely arbitrary aesthetic choices, and the only reason to infringe the design patent is to make your product look like someone else’s more popular product. That’s not socially valuable activity, it’s free riding.
Re:Apple Wins $539M from Samsung in Damages Retrial
by stouset on Thursday May 24, 2018 @10:15PM
(#17150140)
Design is a tradecraft like any other. It involves research, experience, skill, trial and error, time, and resources. Unfortunately, once a design is out there, it takes 5% of this initial effort to duplicate wholesale.
What you are saying is tantamount to asserting that this work should have little to no protection, and be freely copyable once a design is made public.
Other drink makers are not allowed to make the exact same bottle shape. But you can still make a bottle. And you can still make a bottle that is very similar to the Coke design. But it can't be nearly identical. Translate that to Apple's home screen and that's what we are talking about.