They spent so much time making a half a dozen different models over the last few years just to conclude that Apple’s design is the one they want to steal. Shameless.
There really should be a penalty for such outright plagiarism. It’s a kind of legal malpractice. As a doctor, it bothers me every day that lawyers are immune to the same ethics rules and penalties as they insist doctors abide by.
Samsung didn’t do this. Samsung’s patent law firm did this. People need to understand that patents are not written by engineers, but by patent lawyers (or more likely students). Should the Samsung engineers have spoke up? Yes.
That’s both misleading and silly. Lawyers are of course not bound by the same ethics rules and penalties. They are bound by different ethics rules and penalties that are just as stringent if not more so.
Patent lawyers create the technical drawings included in patents? On what planet?
And who did Samsung’s patent lawyers take their instructions from?
Exactly, apparently people need to understand something though… not sure what that is here.
Responsibility, perhaps.
Nobody cares that they stole Apple’s ideas in pictures.
If you read the patent, what they’re actually patenting is watch band stuff – watch bands that do things electronically.
The images there are purely illustrative of “ways you might attach a strap”, and there’s no IP issue there, since they’re not claiming them as innovations.
(“FIGS. 10A to 10F and FIGS. 11A to 11F are views illustrating diverse shapes, structures, and materials of a first strap portion or a second strap portion in a wearable device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure” – no claims of novelty or ownership, note.
Credit to Apple is literally irrelevant in this context.)
What’s the tort? Plagiarism is an academic offense, not a crime.
Nor is this “legal malpractice”, since there’s no legal issue to speak of. Hell, they’d have a pretty good “fair use” claim using them illustratively, and the only publishing here is to the patent office, not consumers.
(Many of the claims would never stand a prior art/obviousness test anyway; “X where the seal is polyurethane or silicone” or “X where the connector has two pins”, complete rubbish.
A few of them might pass on novelty, though, depending on prior art.)
Does it matter?
See comment above – this is a non-issue, as the drawings are utterly irrelevant to the patent claims, Samsung is claiming no property interest in them, and they’re purely illustrative.
I can’t make myself care, and I mock Samsung’s slavish bad-copying-of-Apple all the time.
They spent so much time making a half a dozen different models over the last few years just to conclude that Apple’s design is the one they want to steal. Shameless.
There really should be a penalty for such outright plagiarism. It’s a kind of legal malpractice. As a doctor, it bothers me every day that lawyers are immune to the same ethics rules and penalties as they insist doctors abide by.
Samsung didn’t do this. Samsung’s patent law firm did this. People need to understand that patents are not written by engineers, but by patent lawyers (or more likely students). Should the Samsung engineers have spoke up? Yes.
That’s both misleading and silly. Lawyers are of course not bound by the same ethics rules and penalties. They are bound by different ethics rules and penalties that are just as stringent if not more so.
Patent lawyers create the technical drawings included in patents? On what planet?
And who did Samsung’s patent lawyers take their instructions from?
Exactly, apparently people need to understand something though… not sure what that is here.
Responsibility, perhaps.
Nobody cares that they stole Apple’s ideas in pictures.
If you read the patent, what they’re actually patenting is watch band stuff – watch bands that do things electronically.
The images there are purely illustrative of “ways you might attach a strap”, and there’s no IP issue there, since they’re not claiming them as innovations.
(“FIGS. 10A to 10F and FIGS. 11A to 11F are views illustrating diverse shapes, structures, and materials of a first strap portion or a second strap portion in a wearable device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure” – no claims of novelty or ownership, note.
Credit to Apple is literally irrelevant in this context.)
What’s the tort? Plagiarism is an academic offense, not a crime.
Nor is this “legal malpractice”, since there’s no legal issue to speak of. Hell, they’d have a pretty good “fair use” claim using them illustratively, and the only publishing here is to the patent office, not consumers.
(Many of the claims would never stand a prior art/obviousness test anyway; “X where the seal is polyurethane or silicone” or “X where the connector has two pins”, complete rubbish.
A few of them might pass on novelty, though, depending on prior art.)
Does it matter?
See comment above – this is a non-issue, as the drawings are utterly irrelevant to the patent claims, Samsung is claiming no property interest in them, and they’re purely illustrative.
I can’t make myself care, and I mock Samsung’s slavish bad-copying-of-Apple all the time.
<<rw. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!ir444m:….,…..