[" url="/t/152844/swiss-federal-railways-to-meet-with-apple-over-ios-6-clock-design#post_2197338"]The only thing original about that Swiss clock seems to be the red ball on the seconds hand. Besides that, it looks like any average, common clock.
I'm pretty sure Apple could go to few museums and find examples of clock faces that predate the design. Maybe not exactly like that but similar enough that you would have to wonder how the design got trademarked in the first place.
If the Swiss railways demands even a single penny, then Apple should just change the red ball on the Apple clock and make it into an arrow or something.
Maybe maybe not. Sometimes it is to both parties advantage to come to an agreement. Done right Apple could present some prior art to cause the railroad to use some caution before trying to demand too much.
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Hilfiker died in 1993. The copyright is valid until 2063.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
It's a trademark, not a patent (which expire) or copyright (which...may expire). Trademarks can be held indefinitely.
This is a pretty clear case of a look similar enough that most people who know the Swiss design will think Apple copied it or meant to imitate it very closely. If Apple values its own "look and feel" patents and trademarks, which it clearly does, then I expect that it will now reciprocate when another firm justifiably feels that Apple has infringed.
It's not like it's going to cost a fortune if Apple keeps the design, and they can always change so as not to infringe.
Give me a break. That is an clear and obvious copy job as I can imagine. As soon as I saw it on my iPad, I showed my wife and say "hey look they did the Swiss railway clock design." Maybe Samsung would try to argue that they didn't copy it if they had done it, but there is no way Apple will insist that they just stumbled onto the "obvious" design.
I think they made a beautiful copy, but if they want to continue using it, they should meet SBB's conditions. Or just switch to another design, no big deal.
But Apple never copies anybody, remember? /s
Just like all musicians are inspired by music they have previously listened to, many companies are inspired by other companies designs. Still, this would definitely be considered a copy as far as I am concerned. Don't be a hypocrite Apple, either pay up or give them credit for the design!
It's a trademark, not a patent (which expire) or copyright (which...may expire). Trademarks can be held indefinitely.
This is a pretty clear case of a look similar enough that most people who know the Swiss design will think Apple copied it or meant to imitate it very closely. If Apple values its own "look and feel" patents and trademarks, which it clearly does, then I expect that it will now reciprocate when another firm justifiably feels that Apple has infringed.
It's not like it's going to cost a fortune if Apple keeps the design, and they can always change so as not to infringe.
Apple is clearly infringing on this trademark but as you note it won't cost a fortune. I'd like to also note that Apple's infringement has note affected the trademark holder in a negative way. They aren't able to sell less clocks because of Apple unauthorized usage. People are thinking it's an iPhone when they see it's a Swiss clock or vice versa. The Swiss aren't competing with Apple for the same sale of a product which could be awarded damages. It's simply an homage to a design they should pay for if they want to keep or change if the Swiss want too much for it.
It's a trademark, not a patent (which expire) or copyright (which...may expire). Trademarks can be held indefinitely.
This is a pretty clear case of a look similar enough that most people who know the Swiss design will think Apple copied it or meant to imitate it very closely. If Apple values its own "look and feel" patents and trademarks, which it clearly does, then I expect that it will now reciprocate when another firm justifiably feels that Apple has infringed.
It's not like it's going to cost a fortune if Apple keeps the design, and they can always change so as not to infringe.
Life + 70 years effective 1 July 1993 non-retroactively, but Life + 50 years for computer programs[290]
Life + 50 years (before the law changed on 1 July 1993, applicable for deaths through 1942)][291]
Now, since the copyright holder is presumably the Swiss Railway, not the designer, that would affect the length of the term (assumedly).
If Apple infringed on a design that is still enforceable, the designer at Apple should be fired and they should immediately come to an agreement or change the design.
Apple is clearly infringing on this trademark but as you note it won't cost a fortune. I'd like to also note that Apple's infringement has note affected the trademark holder in a negative way. They aren't able to sell less clocks because of Apple unauthorized usage. People are thinking it's an iPhone when they see it's a Swiss clock or vice versa. The Swiss aren't competing with Apple for the same sale of a product which could be awarded damages. It's simply an homage to a design they should pay for if they want to keep or change if the Swiss want too much for it.
If their copyright is still valid, and it appears it might be, Apple has no excuse in this case. Dumb of them to do this. I'd fire the designer responsible and have them apologize to the Swiss Railway. A sloppy mistake on Apple's part (again, if everything appears as it seems).
If their copyright is still valid, and it appears it might be, Apple has no excuse in this case. Dumb of them to do this. I'd fire the designer responsible and have them apologize to the Swiss Railway. A sloppy mistake on Apple's part (again, if everything appears as it seems).
As previously noted I would assume this falls under trademark, not a copyright, which can last indefinitely. Think of the Coke bottle.
Assuming Apple does have to pay for this, my problem is that they'd even up the door for something so petty beawe we both know the DaHarders, Teckstuds and Jfannings of the world have no ability to see the difference between this clock and what Samsung has done to Apple and the rest of the Android licensees.
I've been an Apple fan since 1984 (Apple II) and I started with Macs in 1988 with a Mac II, but they are obviously infringing here. It's at least as close a copy as Samsung's products. Just dig out the checkbook, guys.
The IBM or should we say prior to IBM, the School Clock design that is generic across the US in every university, high school, down to grade school is a better design
It beats Sammy's "slavish" reworking of the original design I would say...
If you google images with "clock" as a keyword, you will see literally thousands of possible 2D & 3D's clock shapes, and Apple, as it always proudly says, will come up with the thousands-1st unique design. This is apparently that "unique" design. Apple might even go with the "square with rounded corners" inspired clock altogether..., but no.., Apple has to go this "slavishly" instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Tell SFR that they can use for free Apple's slightly more elegant reworking of the original design, and call it even.
Allow them to call it the William Tell version. ;-)
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
Wrong, the Swiss Railway owns the rights to the design.
As previously noted I would assume this falls under trademark, not a copyright, which can last indefinitely. Think of the Coke bottle.
Assuming Apple does have to pay for this, my problem is that they'd even up the door for something so petty beawe we both know the DaHarders, Teckstuds and Jfannings of the world have no ability to see the difference between this clock and what Samsung has done to Apple and the rest of the Android licensees.
Of course there's a big difference but a company that's suing others for copying their designs shouldn't be caught doing that very thing.
Comments
Look. Apple realises there are only so many ways to design a clock, and its just natural progression that it has gone to this style.
Maybe maybe not. Sometimes it is to both parties advantage to come to an agreement. Done right Apple could present some prior art to cause the railroad to use some caution before trying to demand too much.
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
I won't argue with that. Still, I think, far from what was written in the article.
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Hilfiker died in 1993. The copyright is valid until 2063.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
They did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Why is there any need for an agreement? The copyright on the Swiss design is long expired. It's in the public domain... anyone could copy the original design "as is" and face no legal threats.
Frankly, I wish Apple had made the effort to marginally improve the original design, which is actually not that easy to quickly read and discern what is the correct time.
It's a trademark, not a patent (which expire) or copyright (which...may expire). Trademarks can be held indefinitely.
This is a pretty clear case of a look similar enough that most people who know the Swiss design will think Apple copied it or meant to imitate it very closely. If Apple values its own "look and feel" patents and trademarks, which it clearly does, then I expect that it will now reciprocate when another firm justifiably feels that Apple has infringed.
It's not like it's going to cost a fortune if Apple keeps the design, and they can always change so as not to infringe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax
Give me a break. That is an clear and obvious copy job as I can imagine. As soon as I saw it on my iPad, I showed my wife and say "hey look they did the Swiss railway clock design." Maybe Samsung would try to argue that they didn't copy it if they had done it, but there is no way Apple will insist that they just stumbled onto the "obvious" design.
I think they made a beautiful copy, but if they want to continue using it, they should meet SBB's conditions. Or just switch to another design, no big deal.
But Apple never copies anybody, remember? /s
Just like all musicians are inspired by music they have previously listened to, many companies are inspired by other companies designs. Still, this would definitely be considered a copy as far as I am concerned. Don't be a hypocrite Apple, either pay up or give them credit for the design!
Apple is clearly infringing on this trademark but as you note it won't cost a fortune. I'd like to also note that Apple's infringement has note affected the trademark holder in a negative way. They aren't able to sell less clocks because of Apple unauthorized usage. People are thinking it's an iPhone when they see it's a Swiss clock or vice versa. The Swiss aren't competing with Apple for the same sale of a product which could be awarded damages. It's simply an homage to a design they should pay for if they want to keep or change if the Swiss want too much for it.
http://csdigitalworks.deviantart.com/#/d5fvzve
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
It's a trademark, not a patent (which expire) or copyright (which...may expire). Trademarks can be held indefinitely.
This is a pretty clear case of a look similar enough that most people who know the Swiss design will think Apple copied it or meant to imitate it very closely. If Apple values its own "look and feel" patents and trademarks, which it clearly does, then I expect that it will now reciprocate when another firm justifiably feels that Apple has infringed.
It's not like it's going to cost a fortune if Apple keeps the design, and they can always change so as not to infringe.
Here is the link to Swiss trademark length: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length
Life + 70 years effective 1 July 1993 non-retroactively, but Life + 50 years for computer programs[290]
Life + 50 years (before the law changed on 1 July 1993, applicable for deaths through 1942)][291]
Now, since the copyright holder is presumably the Swiss Railway, not the designer, that would affect the length of the term (assumedly).
If Apple infringed on a design that is still enforceable, the designer at Apple should be fired and they should immediately come to an agreement or change the design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by csdigitalworks
Problem solved.....
http://csdigitalworks.deviantart.com/#/d5fvzve
Is that a Red Delicious?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Apple is clearly infringing on this trademark but as you note it won't cost a fortune. I'd like to also note that Apple's infringement has note affected the trademark holder in a negative way. They aren't able to sell less clocks because of Apple unauthorized usage. People are thinking it's an iPhone when they see it's a Swiss clock or vice versa. The Swiss aren't competing with Apple for the same sale of a product which could be awarded damages. It's simply an homage to a design they should pay for if they want to keep or change if the Swiss want too much for it.
If their copyright is still valid, and it appears it might be, Apple has no excuse in this case. Dumb of them to do this. I'd fire the designer responsible and have them apologize to the Swiss Railway. A sloppy mistake on Apple's part (again, if everything appears as it seems).
As previously noted I would assume this falls under trademark, not a copyright, which can last indefinitely. Think of the Coke bottle.
Assuming Apple does have to pay for this, my problem is that they'd even up the door for something so petty beawe we both know the DaHarders, Teckstuds and Jfannings of the world have no ability to see the difference between this clock and what Samsung has done to Apple and the rest of the Android licensees.
Sammy's saying "damn, apple beat us to it. so we wasted time creating a 132 page comparison slide deck between the Swiss clock and ours."
It beats Sammy's "slavish" reworking of the original design I would say...
If you google images with "clock" as a keyword, you will see literally thousands of possible 2D & 3D's clock shapes, and Apple, as it always proudly says, will come up with the thousands-1st unique design. This is apparently that "unique" design. Apple might even go with the "square with rounded corners" inspired clock altogether..., but no.., Apple has to go this "slavishly" instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Tell SFR that they can use for free Apple's slightly more elegant reworking of the original design, and call it even.
Allow them to call it the William Tell version. ;-)
Wrong, the Swiss Railway owns the rights to the design.
Of course there's a big difference but a company that's suing others for copying their designs shouldn't be caught doing that very thing.