Law and Innovation

It is not just a watch. It is a masterpiece of intellectual property (IP) rights. It is not just a revolutionary product. It is the next chapter in Apple Inc.’s story. Apple believes in technology designed for the wrist (such as a smartwatch), but also in a strong design patent protection strategy. To protect this wearable, as a result of their investment, Apple applied for and received several design patents. Every detail is protected: the drawer where the watches are shown, the bracelet, the “slide-in” interchangeable strap system mechanism, the digital crown, the display, the charger, the retail box, etc. Future innovations will however continue to copy this kind of consumer products and challenge the Courts. In this context, developing and/or acquiring intellectual property rights may create a solid foundation for growth and success. Indeed, a winning exploitation of IP assets, including but not limited to know-how, patents, trademarks, aligned with your passion for innovati...

Apple’s success story is well-known: “Before 2007, mobile phones were bulky, inelegantly designed boxes with multiple buttons and protruding antennas”. The context hasn’t changed either: Samsung, faced with a crisis of design, “ made a deliberate decision to copy the iPhone’s innovative look and many of its other features, and its mobile devices became iPhone clones ”. And now we know the result: the petition for writ of certiorari (request for U.S. Supreme Court review) is granted, at least, to question 2 (see below). The tone in Apple’s brief opposition petition for writ of certiorari ("cert. petition"; a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to hear a case) seemed strong, but wasn’t good enough to convince the SCOTUS not to review the Federal Circuit's decision (786 F.3d 983). After a 120-year hiatus, the highest judicial body in the United States will, again, examine the valuation of design patents. Apple did however “win” regarding the scope of the d...

Fresh and interesting article posted on the WIPR about Samsung’s writ seeking to restrict “unjustified windfalls” in design patent cases at the U.S. Supreme Court level.  Happy Reading! Pressure is growing on the US Supreme Court to grant Samsung’s writ seeking to restrict “unjustified windfalls” in design patent cases, after Google and Facebook threw their weight behind the Korean company in its dispute with Apple. Both parties filed an  amicus  brief along with eBay, Dell and HP, arguing that if an earlier decision to award Apple total profits from the sale of Samsung’s smartphone products that infringed Apple’s design patents is left to stand, it would “lead to absurd results and have a devastating impact on companies”. “Awarding a design patentee the total profit from an infringer’s product when the design covers only a relatively minor portion of the product is out of proportion with the significance of the design and out of touch with economic realities,...