Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pocket Lint)   Apple saves a bundle on design costs by making its new iWatch identical to Motorola's Moto 360   (pocket-lint.com) divider line 89
    More: Interesting, Motorola, speaker recognition, accounting analyst, copying, Brian Blair  
•       •       •

4270 clicks; posted to Business » on 29 May 2014 at 10:25 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



89 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-29 08:41:51 AM  
Why would I strap something on when I've got a perfectly good...
 
2014-05-29 10:02:03 AM  

Tr0mBoNe: Why would I strap something on when I've got a perfectly good...


Also known as the lesbian paradox
 
2014-05-29 10:09:37 AM  
I bet it even straps onto your wrist.  Copycat bastages!
 
2014-05-29 10:34:39 AM  
Does it have rounded corners?
 
2014-05-29 10:34:50 AM  
Fark Headline: "TOTAL RIPOFF OF THE MOTO 360 DESIGN!"

Article Headline: "It looks like the Moto 360!"

Article: According to rumors, It has a round face, sort of like the Moto 360 and NINE OUT OF TEN WATCHES MADE EVER!

/A conventional round face != design ripoff
 
2014-05-29 10:37:02 AM  

Fireproof: Fark Headline: "TOTAL RIPOFF OF THE MOTO 360 DESIGN!"

Article Headline: "It looks like the Moto 360!"

Article: According to rumors, It has a round face, sort of like the Moto 360 and NINE OUT OF TEN WATCHES MADE EVER!

/A conventional round face != design ripoff


What was Apples complaint about Samsung's phone design?
 
2014-05-29 10:37:49 AM  
LOL.

Haters gonna use low quality electronics.
 
2014-05-29 10:40:11 AM  

Muta: Fireproof: Fark Headline: "TOTAL RIPOFF OF THE MOTO 360 DESIGN!"

Article Headline: "It looks like the Moto 360!"

Article: According to rumors, It has a round face, sort of like the Moto 360 and NINE OUT OF TEN WATCHES MADE EVER!

/A conventional round face != design ripoff

What was Apples complaint about Samsung's phone design?


Are we to assume you're as stupid as you come across?
 
2014-05-29 10:41:21 AM  
well, Apple, et al., steals from Linux/Open Source all the time so no big deal.


its the 'murican way.   the key is being able to obfuscate it so as not to have to pay someone down the road in a lawsuit.

comon, folks, get with The Program. wink.
 
2014-05-29 10:41:23 AM  

Fireproof: Fark Headline: "TOTAL RIPOFF OF THE MOTO 360 DESIGN!"

Article Headline: "It looks like the Moto 360!"

Article: According to rumors, It has a round face, sort of like the Moto 360 and NINE OUT OF TEN WATCHES MADE EVER!

/A conventional round face != design ripoff


So you mean to say that using an obvious design already present in other mediums doesn't constitute design infringement, even if another manufacturer had also used that obvious design before you did?
 
2014-05-29 10:43:07 AM  
Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...
 
2014-05-29 10:43:26 AM  

s2s2s2: LOL.

Haters gonna use low quality electronics.



no, 'haters' gonna buy PC hardware at half the cost of Apples and put Linux on instead, which is faster and more secure than Apple's OS. and, you don't have to live in apple's walled garden if you don't want to. you have more Freedom.

that is called Smart.
 
2014-05-29 10:44:25 AM  

Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...



but you can tell all your friends about it!!  and look cool!!
 
2014-05-29 10:47:10 AM  
Apple Heads.


that's what they are: Apple Heads.  don't know sh*t about the technology as long as they think they look cool and can tell their friends about it.

and, as long as they pay twice as much for it as they would competing hardware/software.   see look at me, i paid twice as much for my laptop as you did for your Linux laptop!  and mine is not as secure or fast as yours is!  aren't i cool!!
 
2014-05-29 10:52:49 AM  

Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...


Of course it will. It will be 10:15. Always.
 
2014-05-29 10:54:32 AM  
Apple stole an idea?  Get outta here!
 
2014-05-29 10:54:55 AM  

Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...


Doesn't need to.  That's what your iPhone is for.
 
2014-05-29 10:55:24 AM  

digistil: Are we to assume you're as stupid as you come across?


So it's ok for Apple to claim the rights to a look, let's say a smartphone with rounded corners, even though there was prior usage of that design before they came around, yet it's not ok for anyone else to use the same thing?
 
2014-05-29 10:56:02 AM  

Linux_Yes: Apple Heads.


that's what they are: Apple Heads.  don't know sh*t about the technology as long as they think they look cool and can tell their friends about it.

and, as long as they pay twice as much for it as they would competing hardware/software.   see look at me, i paid twice as much for my laptop as you did for your Linux laptop!  and mine is not as secure or fast as yours is!  aren't i cool!!


Trying too hard.
 
2014-05-29 10:58:56 AM  

TNel: digistil: Are we to assume you're as stupid as you come across?

So it's ok for Apple to claim the rights to a look, let's say a smartphone with rounded corners, even though there was prior usage of that design before they came around, yet it's not ok for anyone else to use the same thing?


There are two parts to this... First, the design patent was a lot narrower than just "rounded corners", so while there was prior usage of "rounded corners", alone, it didn't render the patent invalid. Second, trade dress doesn't require that a design be novel, just distinctive. So, you're wrong for multiple independent reasons.
 
2014-05-29 11:02:55 AM  

Flint Ironstag: Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...

Of course it will. It will be 10:15. Always.


http://youtu.be/okiCApJeonQ
 
2014-05-29 11:03:48 AM  

Theaetetus: TNel: digistil: Are we to assume you're as stupid as you come across?

So it's ok for Apple to claim the rights to a look, let's say a smartphone with rounded corners, even though there was prior usage of that design before they came around, yet it's not ok for anyone else to use the same thing?

There are two parts to this... First, the design patent was a lot narrower than just "rounded corners", so while there was prior usage of "rounded corners", alone, it didn't render the patent invalid. Second, trade dress doesn't require that a design be novel, just distinctive. So, you're wrong for multiple independent reasons.


Something tells me TNelstill believes he's right and you're a moran for questioning him.
 
2014-05-29 11:08:49 AM  

Theaetetus: There are two parts to this... First, the design patent was a lot narrower than just "rounded corners", so while there was prior usage of "rounded corners", alone, it didn't render the patent invalid. Second, trade dress doesn't require that a design be novel, just distinctive. So, you're wrong for multiple independent reasons.


"Those patents describe designs featuring a rectangular front face with a rectangular screen, a border around the screen, and an oblong-shaped speaker opening above the screen. "   So a speaker for your ear, above a rectangular screen with a bezel.

http://www.google.com/patents/USD618677

"The claimed surface of the electronic device is illustrated with the color designation for the color black. "  WOW revolutionary a black phone.
"The electronic device is not limited to the scale shown herein. " Wow so the patent wasn't even to scale so it could be any size.

Explain what I'm missing.  The fact that they got a jury that was in the heart of Apple world it was easy to see that Apple was going to win.  When everyone else was rolling their eyes.
 
2014-05-29 11:14:28 AM  

s2s2s2: Haters gonna use low quality electronics.


Haters of what? My hatred of Apple (which began in 1987 as the result of ridiculous pricing on the Mac II, btw) has served me well over the years. It has forced me to buy better hardware for a much better price in spite of all of Apples colorful advertising.

fang06554: So you mean to say that using an obvious design already present in other mediums doesn't constitute design infringement, even if another manufacturer had also used that obvious design before you did?


No, I think he means to say that making OLED screens circular is not the easiest or most efficient way to produce them which is to suggest that Motorola made design choices that were not at all obvious from the fabrication stand point and having another company all of a sudden make that same choice (which had not been made by any other company previously, to the best of my knowledge) seems a little suspect. Maybe a lot suspect.

But don't take my word for it. If Apple created a cancer vaccine, I still wouldn't buy it. Yes, I hold a grudge.
 
2014-05-29 11:41:13 AM  
Motorola should stop infringing apple's IP.
 
2014-05-29 11:52:28 AM  

Fireproof: Fark Headline: "TOTAL RIPOFF OF THE MOTO 360 DESIGN!"

Article Headline: "It looks like the Moto 360!"

Article: According to rumors, It has a round face, sort of like the Moto 360 and NINE OUT OF TEN WATCHES MADE EVER!

/A conventional round face != design ripoff


Neither do rounded corners, but we saw how the worked out for Samsung.
 
2014-05-29 12:05:44 PM  
Is this where we argue about whether a completely unannounced product looks too much like another arbitrary product based on baseless speculation? Cuz that is hella-fun!
 
2014-05-29 12:08:02 PM  

TNel: Theaetetus: There are two parts to this... First, the design patent was a lot narrower than just "rounded corners", so while there was prior usage of "rounded corners", alone, it didn't render the patent invalid. Second, trade dress doesn't require that a design be novel, just distinctive. So, you're wrong for multiple independent reasons.

"Those patents describe designs featuring a rectangular front face with a rectangular screen, a border around the screen, and an oblong-shaped speaker opening above the screen. "   So a speaker for your ear, above a rectangular screen with a bezel.


As near as I can tell from Google, you're quoting this article on Law360, right? That's not the patent, it's an article about the patent, in which the person paraphrases what the patent shows. By definition, paraphrasing removes details in order to reword something in simpler terms. You have to actually go to the patent, not someone's description. With design patents, it's even more difficult, because the visual and aesthetic aspects of the design are what's claimed, so any description is necessarily translating from a picture. Did you include every feature of the picture in your description? If not, it's inadequate.
This is Fig 1 from the patent:
www.blogcdn.com
And that's what's claimed (with the other figures). It's not  just "a speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel", but specific placement and shape of the speaker, specific dimensions of the bezel around the screen, etc.

For example, this shows "a speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel":
www.samsung.com
... but no one would claim that the figure in the patent and that flip phone are indistinguishable.

"The claimed surface of the electronic device is illustrated with the color designation for the color black. "  WOW revolutionary a black phone.

Again, they're not claiming just a black phone. That Samsung flip phone is black, but it doesn't look anything like the patent figure, does it?

"The electronic device is not limited to the scale shown herein. " Wow so the patent wasn't even to scale so it could be any size.

Yes, that's true for any design. If you make something that's indistinguishable from an iPhone except it's 10% larger, then you're still infringing the design. I don't think anyone would defend that.

Explain what I'm missing.

The fact that the design patent claims the entire design, and not individual features like "a black phone" or "a bezel" or "a speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel". If it doesn't have  every feature, then a phone wouldn't infringe the patent. Like that Samsung flip phone wouldn't infringe, despite being black, and having a speaker, screen, and bezel.

The fact that they got a jury that was in the heart of Apple world it was easy to see that Apple was going to win.  When everyone else was rolling their eyes.

And this is just table-pounding. Oh, you lost, therefore the jury must have been corrupt. Facts are irrelevant, the important thing is that the jury was from California? Come on.
And even if that was true, then how come they didn't find for Apple on every claim and gave a significantly smaller damage figure than Apple was asking for? Is it because they're biased  against Apple, too?
 
2014-05-29 12:09:35 PM  

Theaetetus: ... but no one would claim that the figure in the patent and that flip phone are indistinguishable.


... or did I speak too soon? TNel, are you claiming that the flip phone, showing a "speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel" is indistinguishable from that patent figure? It's even a black phone.
 
2014-05-29 12:11:52 PM  
I'm just anxious to see how Apple shill sites like Gizmodo put the spin on this. Even though it's late to the game, and a clone of the Moto 360, it will be regarded as revolutionary and life-changing.
 
2014-05-29 12:14:59 PM  

sidgoop: I'm just anxious to see how Apple shill sites like Gizmodo put the spin on this. Even though it's late to the game, and a clone of the Moto 360, it will be regarded as revolutionary and life-changing.


It will be thinner. Didn't you know Apple patented things being thinner?
 
2014-05-29 12:20:45 PM  

Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...


If you want to get right down to it, does anyone really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?
 
2014-05-29 12:21:56 PM  

RoxtarRyan: sidgoop: I'm just anxious to see how Apple shill sites like Gizmodo put the spin on this. Even though it's late to the game, and a clone of the Moto 360, it will be regarded as revolutionary and life-changing.

It will be thinner. Didn't you know Apple patented things being thinner?


So those rumors about their infringement suit against Jenny Craig are true?
 
2014-05-29 12:23:58 PM  
Fark Apple.  How dare they not announce a non-existing product for everyone to speculate about!!
 
2014-05-29 12:27:51 PM  

jso2897: Great_Milenko: Given that this is an Apple product, the first version of it will do a number of innovative, amazing things, but it won't tell time...

If you want to get right down to it, does anyone really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?


An honest "Thank You" for getting that song stuck in my head. It's one of my happy songs.
 
2014-05-29 12:28:06 PM  

Theaetetus: Theaetetus: ... but no one would claim that the figure in the patent and that flip phone are indistinguishable.

... or did I speak too soon? TNel, are you claiming that the flip phone, showing a "speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel" is indistinguishable from that patent figure? It's even a black phone.


The google link has the info you are showing which I linked.

So to you:

www.bestbuycells.commedia.idownloadblog.com

This phone infringes on the patent picture you showed?  Oblong speakers have been the norm for cell phones for ages.  There is no center button on the bottom, the only things that are similar is that it has rounded corners and is black and has a bezel.  The Galaxy S did look similar with the center button but the Nexus does not.
 
2014-05-29 12:35:02 PM  

TNel: Theaetetus: Theaetetus: ... but no one would claim that the figure in the patent and that flip phone are indistinguishable.

... or did I speak too soon? TNel, are you claiming that the flip phone, showing a "speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel" is indistinguishable from that patent figure? It's even a black phone.

The google link has the info you are showing which I linked.


Once more in English please? Are you saying that the flip phone, which shows a speaker for your ear above a rectangular screen with a bezel, is indistinguishable from the patent figure?

So to you:
[www.bestbuycells.com image 650x650][media.idownloadblog.com image 593x328]

This phone infringes on the patent picture you showed?


Nope. And interestingly, you picked one of the few models of the Galaxy that wasn't claimed to infringe that patent. The Nexus is alleged to have infringed  other patents.
 
2014-05-29 12:40:47 PM  
So it's round, like 99% of every watch ever manufactured? There isn't much "copying the moto 360" going on with that.

That being said, it reminds me of a swatch from 1990. So I actually think that picture looks kinda cool.
 
2014-05-29 12:51:50 PM  
They'll make you shell out for a new watch every time they release a "new" iphone.
 
2014-05-29 12:57:03 PM  
Apple sells premium products at premium prices. Get over it.
 
2014-05-29 01:01:19 PM  
3 years of rumors about this alleged watch that was supposedly 'just about to hit the market'.

The concept image of the watch in the article wasn't produced by Apple, it was made as a speculation by a random Apple fan... just like the other 20 images that have appeared with articles like this. If there is a watch coming to market, it won't look like this.
 
2014-05-29 01:06:23 PM  

Surool: 3 years of rumors about this alleged watch that was supposedly 'just about to hit the market'.

The concept image of the watch in the article wasn't produced by Apple, it was made as a speculation by a random Apple fan... just like the other 20 images that have appeared with articles like this. If there is a watch coming to market, it won't look like this.


You're using logic and common sense. What are you doing in this thread?
 
2014-05-29 01:07:56 PM  
Of course flip is not the same. Now that I look the center button is not part of the patent due to the dotted lines so even the galaxy wasn't infringing and only was due to bezel and rounded corners.
 
2014-05-29 01:11:51 PM  

bingethinker: Surool: 3 years of rumors about this alleged watch that was supposedly 'just about to hit the market'.

The concept image of the watch in the article wasn't produced by Apple, it was made as a speculation by a random Apple fan... just like the other 20 images that have appeared with articles like this. If there is a watch coming to market, it won't look like this.

You're using logic and common sense. What are you doing in this thread?


Sorry. I couldn't help myself.
 
2014-05-29 01:14:09 PM  

TNel: Of course flip is not the same. Now that I look the center button is not part of the patent due to the dotted lines so even the galaxy wasn't infringing and only was due to bezel and rounded corners.


Other models of Galaxy did infringe it. For example:
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-05-29 01:14:55 PM  
(or rather, the black version)
 
2014-05-29 01:29:32 PM  

Theaetetus: TNel: Of course flip is not the same. Now that I look the center button is not part of the patent due to the dotted lines so even the galaxy wasn't infringing and only was due to bezel and rounded corners.

Other models of Galaxy did infringe it. For example:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 213x367]


How?  The button doesn't matter remember that.  How does that infringe other than rectangle scree, with bezel and rounded corners?

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/07/30/strong-design-patents-the-power -o f-the-broken-line/id=44215/
 
2014-05-29 01:38:47 PM  

TNel: Theaetetus: TNel: Of course flip is not the same. Now that I look the center button is not part of the patent due to the dotted lines so even the galaxy wasn't infringing and only was due to bezel and rounded corners.

Other models of Galaxy did infringe it. For example:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 213x367]

How?  The button doesn't matter remember that.  How does that infringe other than rectangle scree, with bezel and rounded corners?


Remember, it's not  just "a rectangle screen, with bezel and rounded corners." As you agreed, this phone doesn't infringe, even though it has those three elements:
img.fark.net
Instead, it's the  totality of the design: rounded corners, screen dimensions, bezel sizes, symmetricality of the screen/bezel, corner radii,bezel wraparound, speaker slot dimensions and placement, etc., etc. Every element needs to be there - literally, the "thousand words" that the picture is worth.

So, how does this:
img.fark.net infringe this  cdn.androidpolice.com?
It infringes because the two designs are nearly indistinguishable to an ordinary observer.
 
2014-05-29 01:43:34 PM  

lilbjorn: Linux_Yes: Apple Heads.


that's what they are: Apple Heads.  don't know sh*t about the technology as long as they think they look cool and can tell their friends about it.

and, as long as they pay twice as much for it as they would competing hardware/software.   see look at me, i paid twice as much for my laptop as you did for your Linux laptop!  and mine is not as secure or fast as yours is!  aren't i cool!!

Trying too hard.



i wouldn't call it trying.  it's fairly effortless. it pretty much writes itself, thanks to apple.
 
2014-05-29 01:46:58 PM  
Android.

runs 81% of all smartphones in the World.

71% of all mobile developers develop for the Android platform.


based on the Linux kernel and a member of the Free handset alliance, along with 84 other companies.  i.o.w. game over for the apple.


thank you.
 
Displayed 50 of 89 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report