Slashdot Mirror
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."
Looks like the UK Railway too is not happy with them.
http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/912750-apple-ios6-maps-debacle-transport-for-london-signposts-alternative
This space for rent.
i have to pay the swiss?
So I can't make a rectangular phone with rounded edges?
maybe the swiss are just afraid of the lawsuit that apple will throw their way after they patent the design?
Is that the only aspect of the design you noticed? That it has no numbers? No, Apple is making an exact copy of every single visual element of the clock, minus the logo. That's what's wrong.
Yes, because Apple is totally absolved from trying that idiotic stunt, just because they didn't get away with it.
I vote based on politicians' actions, unless contrary to my preconceptions. Often wrong, never uncertain. #iamthe99%
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - the most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go against the Swiss when watches are on the line!" Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Apple today announced that they have been granted a patent for using other peoples' designs. iCopy will be featured in all of their future products.
not that it is especially wrong for this: everyone steal from everyone, and then improves on it. this is how creation works
There is an Academic concept of plagiarism. This is very interesting because it has nothing to do with copying; academics are supposed to copy. Someone who fails to report what their predecessors said is treated with more contempt. Plagiarism, however, is worse. It is taking other people's words and ideas without crediting them. That gives you some idea what is wrong here.
which tells us how useless and ignorant intellectual property, as a concept, is
For "Intellectual property" as a phrase and a grouping you are probably right, but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are specific kinds of intellectual property, trademarks are one of them, which have real value. Without clear ownership of names it's very difficult for companies to build a reputation. Without reputation there is no difference between a cheap forced labour made rip off job like an iPhone and a serious communication device like an EADS Tetra terminal. If you ended up in with your communication device packing up just because you put it sprayed it with water to stop it melting you would be rightly upset when you found out someone had given you an inferior product by accident.
With the swiss railways, there is serious value here. When you buy a watch endorsed by them it means something. This is not some random quartz knock off job. Proper precision engineering. Think of the famous joke:
In this particular case there are series of design elements which are completely different from a normal clock; Lack of numbers; a bright red circle on the second hand. A very plain white disk. These are things which are original from Swiss railways and that nobody used before them. If you exactly copy these then you are basically trying to make off the reputation of the Swiss railway. This is something which can reasonably be protected; merely by changing from a bright red to a blue triangle you can copy the concept (a clock which emphasises the change of every second) without copying the design.
Now you might ask; "why does the rtfa-troll support Swiss Railways here and not Apple there". Well firstly; I'm not supporting them for a "beeelion dollars" like Apple wants. I'm supporting them for a couple of hundred quid and an apology. Secondly; pick a random Samsung Galaxy S vs iPhone comparison. Have a look at the way that key design elements (the bare metal surround on the side of the phone) are different. Anything which clearly distinguishes one product from another should be enough. The key standard is "designed so as to be easily confused with" not "designed to pay homage to".
It would be a shame if the IP cowboys forced us to throw away all of the things that are valuable in trademarks or secrets just because they abuse patents and copyright.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
Actually, some swiss guy asked the swiss federal railroad if he can use the design for an according app in the AppStore. The swiss federal railroad gave him permission to do so.
Now comes Apple and rips off the design also - so there is a direct competition between the app developer and Apple.
Isn't a train a mobile device.
What kind of education has Apple given you?
Steve Jobs is God. Apple is His sacred realm. Once he realized His job was finished, He departed this world, leaving his trusted prophet Tim Cook in charge of spreading His faith to all non-believers, by whatever means necessary.
He did leave us, mere mortals, with the best advice we have ever received:
It is never a fault of the iDevice in question, it is a shortcoming of its user, who does not know how to operate it correctly.
In its original Jobsian dialect: "You're holding it wrong. Sent from my iPhone."
This is a clear-cut case of blatant copying of a design, Apple should just admit it, pay up and move on.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Swiss Patent Office workers used to make such better use of their time.
The comment was intended as a humorous stab at Apple.... here have this clue, I have a few of extras.
Different corporations have different personalities. Not like people, but there are still things you expect from apple more than from google, for example. Case in point, apple have a borderline OCD-type control-freak personality. There relation to what they consider theirs is very much akin to the relation between Gollum and the One Ring...
So yeah, you should hit harder on Apple for their dumb lawsuits, because they don't just do it to maximise their profit. They do it out of spite, way beyond what makes any kind of financial sense. Also, they always have been like this: MS won the desktop wars in the 90s because they were more open. Microsoft. Because they needed Open Source to not die, they had to do things that run completely against their DNA. Thus the KHTML-Webkit debacle. Thus their pushing LLVM. They cannot cooperate: they need to control. People, I think, are waking up to that.
Google is not like that. Their crazy obsession is knowing everything about you in a sort of creepy-voyeur kind of way. They see themselves as a benevolent Big Brother. This is a completely different kind of psychopathology. They will give you a gigabit connection to the internet and let you do anything with it. But you have to share your pr0n with them...
If Apple does something, it, by definition, is original. They cannot be copying. If you accuse them of it, you obviously do not know what the word means.
If you are a competitor, you are copying their stuff. If you say you are not because you were using the idea 10 years before Apple did, you still do not correctly understand the word.
Copying means doing anything that may affect their profits - nothing else. You could make a sperical phone with 32 hexagonal buttons, a crescent shaped screen, had a UI based on Lcars and Apple would still sue you if it was faster, cheaper and easier to use and outsold them.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
Back in the US railroad days there was a tycoon named Collis Huntington. He was known to be ruthless and greedy - kind of the same OCD type as Steve Jobs. Huntington is quoted as saying (more or less):
All I want is what's mine. Whatever is not nailed down is mine. If I can pry it loose, it was not nailed down.
When you are dancing with wolves, never limp
um... but round corners is.... well... stupid and shouldn't be patentable. Where as, this is a rather blatant, and obvious direct copy of a piece of artwork. Whomever owns that clock design should sue the shit out of apple.
The design is also trademarked. That's a different kettle of fish. How old is the trademarked shape of the Coke bottle?
Mod parent up.
Trademarks and trade dress expire only when you fail to defend them. The term is trademark dilution.
Put a beverage in a waisted bottle and watch CocaCola successfully sue your ass, just like they have done before. It doesn't have to be identical.
These things however require active defence. The Swiss Railway must defend their mark. If they allow this then the mark is diluted and they lose ownership.
This is not new. Just because "trade dress" is a new concept here (partly due to the inappropriate (in my view) use of the term "patent", does not make it new.
The same rules required Apple to sue to protect their design.
I wonder if Samsung actually understand the concept of "trade dress" and it's long (European) well defined legal status (in case law as opposed to statute).
I would bet that the CocaCola execs were completely happy with the Samsung Vs Apple verdict.