-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
EC investigating Samsung over FRAND patents
- Thread starter Phynaz
- Start date
Red Storm
Lifer
I hope Samsung gets (metaphorically) slapped for this, but this article only highlights how stupid this whole patent system is. Apple suing company after company over "design" patents is as anti-competitive as it gets, yet not in the EU's eyes.
I think the EU is the worst of the bunch. They're always on the hunt for ways to extort money out of companies.
I think the EU is the worst of the bunch. They're always on the hunt for ways to extort money out of companies.
This kind of argument completely ignores any merit in Apple's lawsuits. I'm sure you would agree that if a company were to produce a product that looked exactly like the iPad/iPhone, they would obviously be violating Apple's design patents. The problem is that things aren't so black and white and it's difficult to determine when something is too closely resembles another companies products and therefore infringes on their design patents.
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
Just in your mind imagine yourself designing a cell phone. Not the inside at this point but the overall size and shape of it. The old mathematical "pinching theorem" comes into play here as it will almost certainly be within a certain range of sizes and shapes and when you take the guts of the phone into account the size and shape kind of fall out from there. Now finish it in gloss black and when your're done it would be difficult to tell it apart from an iPhone or Galaxy from 20 feet.
You know, a wheel is a wheel is a wheel and is very likely to be round!
Brian
You know, a wheel is a wheel is a wheel and is very likely to be round!
Brian
This is a poor analogy. I suggest you read up on design patents. They don't cover functional aspects, merely ornamental design.
theeedude
Lifer
Apple also lost that case, so what's your point?
theeedude
Lifer
Apple thought it had merit. Went as far as charge the Spanish company with criminal piracy.
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
Interesting that you make no comment about the basic shape of a modern cell phone and that Apple claims ownership of even that!
The shape of a modern cell phone is not merely ornamental but are driven by the very functional requirements of the technology. A wheel is a functional element and not merely ornamental.
Me thinks you need to better understand the patent system before playing Apple fanboy.
Here's something to warm the hearts of all the Apple fanboys out there...
http://www.androidcentral.com/germa...on-against-apple-motorola-patent-infringement
Brian
And the case was dismissed. So once again, what's your point?
I don't recall Apple having any kind of patent for the basic shape of a cell phone. What they have is a design patent for their iPhones and iPads and they've stated that they feel the some competitors' products mirror their device designs too closely. Given the large number of manufacturers and devices that haven't been targeted, it's silly to claim that Apple is attempting to claim ownership of a generic box-shaped design.
I don't see how having rounded edges, using a silver trim, or other aspects of Apple's design patent are in anyway a functional requirement for a modern phone.
Which is why you can't get a design patent on a wheel. You can get a design patent on any engravings or other non-functional ornamentation that you choose to adorn it with, however.
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
Yes, Apple IS trying to patent the basic shape and you play right along with the comment about rounded corners. Again, imagine yourself designing a cell phone of the basic size and shape that "everyone" else is but instead of rounded corners they are hard sharp corners and edges. Yeah, you'b be sued by the first person that cut or poked themselves. All phones have rounded corners and the rounding precedes Apple by decades!
25 years ago the technology did not permit the smallish cell phones we have today so what we got were bricks. Modern electronics, the guts that make cell phones work, are much more compact and energy efficient now so it's possible to make them small enough to fit in your pocket. This isn't something Apple came up with as phones have been small enough to fit in pockets since the mid 90's and HAVE been put in pockets since they could be. A cell phone designer must take that into account and, once again, imagine doing that with hard sharp corners and edges.
Apple can't own rounded corners even if they and you think they can! Apple can't claim ownership of this concept any more than the roundness of wheels!
Brian
25 years ago the technology did not permit the smallish cell phones we have today so what we got were bricks. Modern electronics, the guts that make cell phones work, are much more compact and energy efficient now so it's possible to make them small enough to fit in your pocket. This isn't something Apple came up with as phones have been small enough to fit in pockets since the mid 90's and HAVE been put in pockets since they could be. A cell phone designer must take that into account and, once again, imagine doing that with hard sharp corners and edges.
Apple can't own rounded corners even if they and you think they can! Apple can't claim ownership of this concept any more than the roundness of wheels!
Brian
Ignoring the fact that the roundness of wheels is a functional, not ornamental aspect of their design and therefore not subject to design patents, Apple doesn't own a design patent for rounded corners.
There are a lot of devices that have rounded corners that aren't the target of Apple litigation. This would seem to indicate that simply having rounded corners isn't adequate. Here's a design patent for RIM's Blackberry, which has rounded corners and is not the target of an Apple lawsuit.
Why some people continue to harp on about one single aspect of a design when design patents clearly don't work that way is beyond me.
Anyhow, this is really dragging the thread off-topic.
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
A contemporary cell phone is small enough to fit in a pocket.
Many people put there phone in there pocket.
A cell phone with hard sharp corners and edges, in addition to being somewhat dangerous, will chew threw the pocket.
Smart phones need a large screen area.
Put it all together and to make a FUNCTIONAL smart phone it is going to look pretty much the way pretty much all smart phones look. The roundness of corners is not merely ornamental and is in fact functional and necessary!
Apple picks and chose's who they go after for there own reasons and not every phone maker will feel there wrath at this moment. Given time and success in court you can bet they WILL go after ALL makers -- that's how they roll...
Brian
Many people put there phone in there pocket.
A cell phone with hard sharp corners and edges, in addition to being somewhat dangerous, will chew threw the pocket.
Smart phones need a large screen area.
Put it all together and to make a FUNCTIONAL smart phone it is going to look pretty much the way pretty much all smart phones look. The roundness of corners is not merely ornamental and is in fact functional and necessary!
Apple picks and chose's who they go after for there own reasons and not every phone maker will feel there wrath at this moment. Given time and success in court you can bet they WILL go after ALL makers -- that's how they roll...
Brian
Are there any smart phones that actually looked like a iPhone before the 2G was released?
Before the iPhone was out, all leading manufacturers are still figuring out how best to fit a QWERTY keyboard into the phone... I remembered reading articles that people were actually skeptical of the iPhone 2G because there was no number keys on it!
Today, people took touchscreen on smart phones for granted and claim that this is industry standard....
So, yes, there are ways to design things. Just that many chose to copy the prevailing design of a successful product.
Even the original Windows based tablet PCs are completely different from the iPad. Those original Windows based tablet PCs are just notebooks that you can flip the other way around.
While a wheel is a wheel, why did Samsung opt to have a silver trim on their Galaxy tab? Why did they opt to have a 30 pin connector? Why did they opt to use the exact radius for their corners? While Samsung's wheels are round they're using the same rims as Apple and this is why Samsung is losing their lawsuits.
Here's a popular tablet, its square but looks original and nothing like an iPad. Why hasn't Samsung chosen a similar route and design their own look? Everyone else has.
What about the UI and OS? From what I remember, iOS1 stomped on what was currently available. People were amazed by simple things like pinch/zoom/scrolling, this should tell you something. Even the keyboard and text messaging UI remains unchanged 5 years later, which is a testament to its design at the time.
Last edited:
Aye, the lg prada do look very close to the iphone (without the qwerty keyboard).
But the point is, before the iPhone, different companies designed mobile phones in very different ways.
But after the iPhone, the design suddenly become "there are only that many ways to design a phone".
I actually like Motorola putting back a qwerty to the phone, or that the phone has a small stand at the back so the phone can be placed on the table standing up. This is design.
Not look at the competitors product, make it bigger and slimmer but the same look and feel.
(e.g. same home key at the bottom of the screen...).
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
There have been many attempts at portable devices before the modern smart phone. Some, like the iPaq, didn't have phone features but did have touch screen and some of the tools we now use. Technology was leading us to where we are and Jobs wasn't the only one to recognize this fact.
Look, I've said before that Samsung chose to venture too close to Apple in there design and shame on them for being so stupid. But, much of the argument here is between ornamental and functional with too many claiming the basic physical design is more ornamental than functional -- rubbish! Again, once you take the touch screen seen more than a decade ago and marry that to a cell phone using modern electronics you get pretty much what you get.
Apple did not invent the touch screen or the cell phone!
Brian
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
So Sammy should be prevented from selling tablets because they have the same corner radius -- infuckincredible! Hey, I have 16 inch wheel on my car should I worry that the first car maker to use 16 inch wheels will tell me to cease and desist! First the corner rounding was purely ornamental, but, having blasted a hole in that nonsense the argument now is -- hey, they use the SAME radius so they must be stopped!
But, let's get this straight, is it your argument that ONLY Apple can sell smart phones with touch screens and no physical keyboard? Well, is it?
Brian
cheezy321
Diamond Member
Your analogy of using the wheel is pretty terrible and makes your argument look pretty weak. Really? Comparing a simple wheel to a smartphone, which has an endless array of features?
Have you read this article?
http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/
Edit:
An even more in-depth look at the issues:
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html
Last edited:
Dude, it's not just the corner radius, it's the design as a whole, which includes the radius. The galaxy tab looks like an iPad, while other tablets don't. What does this tell you? Other designs are possible and isn't as simple as just a rectangle. Anyone can sell touchscreen devices, but Samsung is the only one to design theirs strikingly similar to Apple. Even their damn packaging is the same.
There's a reason why Apple has any leverage at all in Samsung lawsuits and not the others.
Brian Stirling
Diamond Member
No, you don't get it -- the argument is between ornamental and functional and whether Apple can claim ownership of the shape of the smart phone because they are claiming functional is ornamental. What Apple would like is to own the rounded shape so that anyone else should be compelled to not employ rounded corners and edges.
What Apple wants is for everyone else to make wheels that are not round and therefore fail. The wheel is a simple example illustrating the relationship between functional and ornamental. Do you think all other smart phone makers should be compelled to avoid using rounded corners and edges? If so them that would force all other makers to make products that would injure there users and damage the clothing they wear. If not then how can Apple, and its fanboys, claim ownership of rounded corners?
The shape of the modern smart phone is governed by what the technology is capable of. 25 years ago electronics were not so compact and efficient so we had huge cell phones that could not be put in your pocket, but since the mid 90's the electronics were compact and efficient enough to package the phone into a size that was small enough to fit in your pocket. When technology progressed further permitting the smart phone marriage of PDA and cell phone the physical package largely falls out from that. And, once again, to make the device FUNCTIONALLY capable of being put into your pocket you HAVE to round the corners -- it's not an option and is NOT simply ornamental.
A wheel is round not because someone thought it looked good that way but because a square wheel just doesn't work quite as well. You can make ornamental details on a wheel but the basic shape is purely functional as are the rounding of corners on a portable device intended to fit in your pocket!
Brian
You really don't get it, do you?
Simple test. If we remove the touch screen from a smartphone it loses its input source and therefore its functionality, so it logically follows that a phone's touch screen is a functional component of the device. If the phone doesn't have the same rounded corners as the iPhone it still works the same, therefore that part of the design is ornamental.
You also keep trying to reduce the argument to being about rounded corners. It's not. It's about rounded corners, device color, icon design, and a handful of other ornamental design similarities between the iPhone and some competing devices. Focusing on any single design aspect is missing the forest for the trees.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
