Indeed. They sued Samsung for making a phone that was a rectangle with rounded corners as if every maker of watches, wallets, tables, beds, couches, previous cell phones, cafeteria trays, cars seats, coffee cups with handles, axe handles, power tools, sports rackets, three-ring binders, televisions, remote controls, radios, messenger bags, and briefcases didn't realize sharp pointy edges are uncomfortable.
Re:Apple is patenting Swift features
by dragonwriter on Friday January 25, 2019 @12:50PM
(#19000403)
That was a design patent, not a utility patent; the former are more like trademarks in purpose than they are like utility patents.
Indeed, but there's nothing distinct or original about the design elements. All sorts of products including electronics products already contained the obvious and practical elements.
Nope. Prior art is the only protection against patent trolls. Patents are no protection at all against trolls because patent trolls are unlikely to infringe any of your patents, due to their sole business being patent litigation.
There are two reasons for Apple to get these patents: defensive and offensive patent litigation against other companies in the industry. Apple has a history of using offensive patent litigation, going so far as using it as a weapon to keep industry wages low. https://www.cnet.com/news/steve-jobs-threatened-palm-with-pa...