Re:De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds
by gorbachev on Wednesday May 30, 2018 @08:57AM
(#17187286)
They could patent the process of cutting that shape though, if it's sufficiently complicated.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds
by jerf on Wednesday May 30, 2018 @11:02AM
(#17188213)
But again, that will only hold for some bizarre new shape. Anything using existing techniques and any cuts you can't plausibly claim copyright on will still be fine, and that's going to be almost everything.
If de Beers wants to patent and copyright some bizarre foamy cut of a diamond that does some exotic thing, that's fine, but it's not going to be "a diamond ring" as most people think of them.
Re:De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds
by chc on Wednesday May 30, 2018 @12:19PM
(#17188994)
I don't know, lots of things that shouldn't be patentable seem to somehow become patentable when you say the magic words "using a computer." Maybe de Beers' legal team will come up with some gemstone equivalent.
Re:De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds
by d0lph on Thursday May 31, 2018 @10:46AM
(#17196679)
But, on the other hand just because you can get a patent, doesn't mean it can't be challenged.
Re:De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds
by Retric on Wednesday May 30, 2018 @09:51AM
(#17187610)
Patents last for 20 years and can be invalidated or worked around. Copyright is ~forever.