• 3

三星和Android, 漂亮反擊蘋果侵權

原文在:
macrumors.com

According to court filings, Samsung has presented a scene from Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey as evidence of prior art that should invalidate Apple's design claims on the iPad. From the filing:
Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of a still image taken from Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film "2001: A Space Odyssey." In a clip from that film lasting about one minute, two astronauts are eating and at the same time using personal tablet computers. The clip can be downloaded online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8pQVDyaLo. As with the design claimed by the D’889 Patent, the tablet disclosed in the clip has an overall rectangular shape with a dominant display screen, narrow borders, a predominately flat front surface, a flat back surface (which is evident because the tablets are lying flat on the table's surface), and a thin form factor.

The patent in question is a design patent covering the ornamental design of the iPad, with Apple claiming that the Samsung Galaxy Tab is substantially identical to that design. By pointing to an example of a similar design made public in 1968, even if not an actual functioning tablet device, Samsung hopes to demonstrate that there is little variation possible when designing a tablet and show that the general concept used by Apple for the iPad has actually been circulating for decades.

這個反擊還真是漂亮。1968年那是43年前了。 而且這部電影稍微有點年紀的而且研究科技的都應該不陌生。

早在1968年電影 2001太空漫遊 就有類似ipad 的使用場景。所以蘋果還不能說我用觸控螢幕的Ipad是獨步全求的發明,適用專利保護。這個反擊還真是漂亮。我想這是相當有力的舉證了。

有沒有懂專利法的人 稍微comment 一下。
2011-08-24 5:41 發佈
mobile0134 wrote:
原文在:macrum...(恕刪)


Android反還可以,
三星? 算了吧~~

mobile0134 wrote:
原文在:macrum...(恕刪)


三星算哪個蔥~~

iwantgo wrote:
三星算哪個蔥~~...(恕刪)



三星蔥...


((來亂的!酸~

mobile0134 wrote:
有沒有懂專利法的人 稍微comment 一下。...(恕刪)

這個得看法官自己怎麼解釋了...
也好奇蘋果會掰甚麼理由來反駁...


順便補個圖...


「旅行不是為了孩子會記得這趟旅程,而是我們旅程的回憶裡有他們。」 - 網友分享

iwantgo wrote:
三星算哪個蔥~~...(恕刪)

阿不然台灣有什麼可以跟三星比?

hTC??算了吧

iwantgo wrote:
三星算哪個蔥~~...(恕刪)

三星真的不算什麼...只是現在是全球最大手機廠而已...
平平一塊玻璃(螢幕), 剩下螢幕邊框及機背, 能有啥太大的變化? 最後大家都會很類似的.
Hi, I am Joco!

mobile0134 wrote:
原文在: macru...(恕刪)
用這個當理由可能很難說服法官,平板近年才真正商品化.43年前出現一分鐘的畫面無法證明甚麼,除非有文件證明.否則依經驗法則很難說服吧!
CSI:NY裡
辦公室看案例或證據時
有一堆使用觸控手持裝置或桌面觸控裝置
不曉得是電視特效或是真的設備
若真的有此設備
不知道是否為APPLE製作
若不是,那觸控裝置得專利真的是APPLE獨有嗎
  • 3
內文搜尋
X
評分
評分
複製連結
Mobile01提醒您
您目前瀏覽的是行動版網頁
是否切換到電腦版網頁呢?