Indeed. But what most people seem to be forgetting is that Apple is duty bound to do whatever it can to protect against unreasonable infringement even if the available procedures are based on precedents that are somewhat questionable. From Apple's point of view, there is clear infringement. The question is how do they most efficiently achieve some recourse. Given the nature of the game and the rules/laws, (sometimes fallacious) that come into play, there is always going to be a level of expediency. As a business seeking to gain some temporary advantages from its own pioneering work, Apple would be silly not to explore reasonable strategies that are legally permissible.
It is more than digital newspaper. You obviously have not watched it. They are the pionieer and innovator in the tablet industry, IMO. Apple copied from them, and Samsung followed Apple making better product. But, I am happy with my IPad as my wife and 3 year old daughter love it.
I have watched it. In fact, it is not EVEN a digital newspaper! It is simply the mock-up of an IDEA for a digital newspaper in 1994.
More likely, Apple's iPad was inspired by their own Knowledge Navigator idea from 1987. Go take a look at what Wikipedia has to say about that:
No one else was trying, so if you are saying it was just luck then I guess I disagree.
Of course it wasn't just luck. A lot of good design work went into it too. But it would have been for naught in all likelihood if the timing wasn't also right.
It is more than digital newspaper. You obviously have not watched it. They are the pionieer and innovator in the tablet industry, IMO. Apple copied from them, and Samsung followed Apple making better product. But, I am happy with my IPad as my wife and 3 year old daughter love it.
It was a great idea, but the point is that it did not actually exist. They did not pioneer, innovate or sell a working product.
Of course it wasn't just luck. A lot of good design work went into it too. But it would have been for naught in all likelihood if the timing wasn't also right.
To suprise you. Apple has been a copycat here. They stole name from 'Padd' from Star Trek and idea of product called 'Tablet Newspaper (1994)', IMO. See the following link.
Also, it makes more sense to think that it was Apple's earlier handheld computer, the Newton MessagePad, that served as inspiration for the name "iPad." (No need to come up with some wild theory that they dropped the extra "d" from "iPadd" to make the provenance less recognizable, which would defeat the ostensible purpose anyway!)
Obviously the issue with Samsung goes well beyond just appearances or concepts. There's a clear attempt to mimic the iPad experience, design, size, UI and gestures.
Perhaps Samsung has redesigned the Galaxy II already in preparation for their impending failure:
Wow! Come on with the H.G. Wells and much more as prior art claims.
Poor Tesla actually invents so much stuff it would take life times to produce, but never mind him he's unimportant with all his patents because we've got Robert Heinlein's fictional work to be our case.
What's next? Roddenberry Estate steps in as well?
I will say though, that table they are sitting on has a strikingly Apple design, note the silver border with black surface.
You know for a movie that came out of late 60s it was surprisingly forward thinking, especially when you compare it to all the bad 80s scifi movies that followed in later years. Kind of scary actually.
HOWEVER, we're talking about a DESIGN PATENT, which is a different matter (http://www.bitlaw.com/patent/design.html). It is conceivable that a design patent could cover just an idea.
Please provide an example of a design patent which protects "just an idea".
Please provide an example of a design patent which protects "just an idea".
Dude, there's so many that they're easy to find. Apple's filed at least 1000 of them, most of which have never been used on any Apple device. With 30 minutes research you can see just what the European Design Patent process is all about, and why it's ripe for abuse.
Dude, there's so many that they're easy to find. Apple's filed at least 1000 of them, most of which have never been used on any Apple device. With 30 minutes research you can see just what the European Design Patent process is all about, and why it's ripe for abuse.
I saw nothing there which was a design patent which covers "just an idea".
I can't do all your work for you. Try seaching for Apple design patents at the linked site. The screen limit is apparently 1000 indices, so that's all you'll get. After viewing a few you'll probably realize that most of them are for "just an idea". If you don't, then view a few more.
Comments
Which appears to be just as much about fortunate timing as anything else IMO.
No one else was trying, so if you are saying it was just luck then I guess I disagree.
Indeed. But what most people seem to be forgetting is that Apple is duty bound to do whatever it can to protect against unreasonable infringement even if the available procedures are based on precedents that are somewhat questionable. From Apple's point of view, there is clear infringement. The question is how do they most efficiently achieve some recourse. Given the nature of the game and the rules/laws, (sometimes fallacious) that come into play, there is always going to be a level of expediency. As a business seeking to gain some temporary advantages from its own pioneering work, Apple would be silly not to explore reasonable strategies that are legally permissible.
Completely agree.
It is more than digital newspaper. You obviously have not watched it. They are the pionieer and innovator in the tablet industry, IMO. Apple copied from them, and Samsung followed Apple making better product. But, I am happy with my IPad as my wife and 3 year old daughter love it.
I have watched it. In fact, it is not EVEN a digital newspaper! It is simply the mock-up of an IDEA for a digital newspaper in 1994.
More likely, Apple's iPad was inspired by their own Knowledge Navigator idea from 1987. Go take a look at what Wikipedia has to say about that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Navigator
Maybe the digital newspaper idea of 1994 was copied from Apple's Knowledge Navigator idea of 1987! Who's to say?
No one else was trying, so if you are saying it was just luck then I guess I disagree.
Of course it wasn't just luck. A lot of good design work went into it too. But it would have been for naught in all likelihood if the timing wasn't also right.
It is more than digital newspaper. You obviously have not watched it. They are the pionieer and innovator in the tablet industry, IMO. Apple copied from them, and Samsung followed Apple making better product. But, I am happy with my IPad as my wife and 3 year old daughter love it.
It was a great idea, but the point is that it did not actually exist. They did not pioneer, innovate or sell a working product.
Of course it wasn't just luck. A lot of good design work went into it too. But it would have been for naught in all likelihood if the timing wasn't also right.
Isn't that true for all inventions?
To suprise you. Apple has been a copycat here. They stole name from 'Padd' from Star Trek and idea of product called 'Tablet Newspaper (1994)', IMO. See the following link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtP...eature=feedlik
They, in the Youtube, are the real innovator not a copycat Apple.
Really? Apple's Knowledge Navigator idea from 1987 clearly says otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Navigator
Also, it makes more sense to think that it was Apple's earlier handheld computer, the Newton MessagePad, that served as inspiration for the name "iPad." (No need to come up with some wild theory that they dropped the extra "d" from "iPadd" to make the provenance less recognizable, which would defeat the ostensible purpose anyway!)
I have watched it. In fact, it is not EVEN a digital newspaper! It is simply the mock-up of an IDEA for a digital newspaper in 1994.
More likely, Apple's iPad was inspired by their own Knowledge Navigator idea from 1987. Go take a look at what Wikipedia has to say about that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Navigator
Maybe the digital newspaper idea of 1994 was copied from Apple's Knowledge Navigator idea of 1987! Who's to say?
Thanks for the info. The Tablet Newspaper was a tablet form of actual product not an idea of something. Also the design resembles IPad quite a bit.
Thanks for the info. The Tablet Newspaper was a tablet form of actual product not an idea of something. Also the design resembles IPad quite a bit.
Do you have a reference for this statement? I can find no evidence that they even built a working prototype of that device.
Do you have a reference for this statement? I can find no evidence that they even built a working prototype of that device.
No of course he hasn't. At this point it's just turning into pure trolling shit! ('scuse my French!)
No of course he hasn't. At this point it's just turning into pure trolling shit! ('scuse my French!)
Your French is impeccable.
Obviously the issue with Samsung goes well beyond just appearances or concepts. There's a clear attempt to mimic the iPad experience, design, size, UI and gestures.
Perhaps Samsung has redesigned the Galaxy II already in preparation for their impending failure:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/23/s...n-promo-video/
Where's the big home button Sammy?
Who wants a stylus?! You have to get 'em and you put 'em away and you lose 'em? yuck!
Your French is impeccable.
Mercy bucket.
Wow! Come on with the H.G. Wells and much more as prior art claims.
Poor Tesla actually invents so much stuff it would take life times to produce, but never mind him he's unimportant with all his patents because we've got Robert Heinlein's fictional work to be our case.
What's next? Roddenberry Estate steps in as well?
I will say though, that table they are sitting on has a strikingly Apple design, note the silver border with black surface.
You know for a movie that came out of late 60s it was surprisingly forward thinking, especially when you compare it to all the bad 80s scifi movies that followed in later years. Kind of scary actually.
HOWEVER, we're talking about a DESIGN PATENT, which is a different matter (http://www.bitlaw.com/patent/design.html). It is conceivable that a design patent could cover just an idea.
Please provide an example of a design patent which protects "just an idea".
Please provide an example of a design patent which protects "just an idea".
Dude, there's so many that they're easy to find. Apple's filed at least 1000 of them, most of which have never been used on any Apple device. With 30 minutes research you can see just what the European Design Patent process is all about, and why it's ripe for abuse.
I'll even give you a headstart: http://oami.europa.eu/ows/rw/pages/index.en.do
Dude, there's so many that they're easy to find. Apple's filed at least 1000 of them, most of which have never been used on any Apple device. With 30 minutes research you can see just what the European Design Patent process is all about, and why it's ripe for abuse.
I'll even give you a headstart: http://oami.europa.eu/ows/rw/pages/index.en.do
I saw nothing there which was a design patent which covers "just an idea".
I saw nothing there which was a design patent which covers "just an idea".
I can't do all your work for you. Try seaching for Apple design patents at the linked site. The screen limit is apparently 1000 indices, so that's all you'll get. After viewing a few you'll probably realize that most of them are for "just an idea". If you don't, then view a few more.
I saw nothing there which was a design patent which covers "just an idea".
Just curious whether you read my earlier reply to your question, and whether you agreed or disagreed.