David/Goliath Story Brewing Between Apple and iControlPad Makers

relliker writes "Apple has just patented a design for an iPhone gaming add-on after admitting that the iPhone is somewhat hard to use as a games machine. The catch is that the design is not theirs. It was designed by a team of gaming aficionados, one member of which, Craig 'craigix' Rothwell of OpenPandora fame, is already twittering like mad about the shot just fired by Apple in their direction. The iControlPad team are in contact with their IP lawyer, since their design is already in production. Will Apple still try to steamroll right through them?"

Comments

Re:Short answer:

[Anonymous Coward]

BURMA SHAVE

Re:Apple

[Culture20]

This is typical Apple behavior.

No murders took place.

Dilemma

[M4DP4RROT]

It's the anti-Apple Slashdotters VS the anti-Patent Slashdotters! Round 1... FIGHT!

Re:Heads , I win, Tails, You Lose.

[samkass]

If an "implementation" were all that was at issue, in the field of software copyright would be more than adequate.

No, copyright covers an instance of an implementation of an idea. Patents can cover a virtual mechanism regardless of exact syntax and choice of object breakdown. And in this day and age it's pretty obvious to me that if you allow patents for any physical invention it would be silly not to also offer patents on virtual inventions.

Re:The US' legal system follows the Golden Rule:

[Paradise Pete]

Exactly; like Bernard Madoff. Oh wait... If he made the rules, he probably would have exempted himself from a life sentence.

What actually happened was that when he turned himself into the police he thought then he would be the police and he could drop the charges. But obviously he misunderstood the meaning of the phrase.