Swiss Railway: Apple's Using Its Clock Design Without Permission

An anonymous reader writes "Apple received a lot of criticism during the Apple/Samsung litigation this past Summer as folks deemed it absurd that Apple was able to patent things such as icon design and the overall form factor of a smartphone. Well as it turns out, it appears that Apple has engaged in some copying of its own in the form of the new clock icon design used in iOS 6 on the iPad- a rather ironic turn of events given that Apple railed against Samsung for copying its own iOS icons. Specifically, the clock icon in iOS 6 on the iPad is a blatant copy of a Hans Hilfiker design to which both the trademark and copyright is owned by the Swiss Federal Railways service."

Comments

Re:so i can't make a clock with no numbers?

[AK Marc]

That argument rings as hollow as those in AZ insisting that the immigration laws don't target Mexicans. Technically true on paper, but practice is a whole different matter.

Re:so i can't make a clock with no numbers?

[Calos]

Well; perhaps I was a little too caustic in my response. I think I understand your reaction better now - you were responding as though the second poster was making a statement of fact.

I think you over-reacted. "Troll" implies intent. You admit in your own post that a little-reported aspect of the case is that the rounded-corners bit was not upheld in the case (and I'm only taking you at your word here as I truly do not know), and yet you seem to assume that the poster knows this and is trying to mislead and deceive. Seems an odd jump on your part to both claim that few people know this aspect of the case, but assume this person does. Then in your second post you seem to imply that the error was understandable. Understandable, yet troll? I think you calling them a troll was what triggered my response.

That said - I don't think whether that person knew it or not actually matters - because I don't think that was the point they were trying to make. As you said:
>> but since apple lost that point I suspect that the Swiss will as well ...this is perhaps exactly what the second poster was getting at.

Even if not, at the very least - in my reading, I figured the first post was not to be taken at face-value, that the meaning was something cynical towards design-related patents. The second post, to me, follows along the same lines - by bringing up another design-related patent, exerted offensively, and found to be frivolous. Disagree with them if you will, and there are very valid reasons to do so - the comparison is weak, for one - but when decrying frivolous design-related patents, the rounded corners thing is very pertinent; perhaps moreso *because* the court agreed they are frivolous. And while I can't say that attacking someone for bringing it up means you seek to absolve Apple, it certainly seemed to me like you meant to defend Apple - and I think it would not have seemed that way but for your second sentence.