War Shaping

Re: war shapping

Very tricky question. I am reminded of how Apple went on a sue frenzy with its shape patents. What are your views?
 
If the product have some unique identity or product have some special feature ( for e.g. food items, electronics items) can be patented because product design involve lot of R & D and huge amount of money so it is complete right of the firm to use patent for there benefit only.
 
siddharth.dubey6486 said:
If the product have some unique identity or product have some special feature ( for e.g. food items, electronics items) can be patented because product design involve lot of R & D and huge amount of money so it is complete right of the firm to use patent for there benefit only.
Click to expand...

Siddharth, you made a valid argument.

To give you a counter argument. I think the fundamental idea of creating innovative product designs have 'Consumers' at the center of it all.

And thus, when competitors get sued by patent holding companies, it is ultimately the consumer who is denied the right to access value additions.

Thinking out of the box, I think it would make sense to have Patent validation periods. These validation periods would allow limited advantages to the innovators to recover their costs and make valid profits as incentives. However, post this period, competitors could be allowed to imitate the innovation by adding further value additions to the product offerings. (It's a random thought, may need further discussions to validate)
 
Agree with all thoughts, but as per my views, it is not all about the cost you incurred to developed a product design, but once you through with the thought process, your sentiments automatically get attached with the product features or design, So ofcourse no body will simply let it go. Thus, it's always important go get it patent.

In the market two things are very important, if you wanted to compete, one always put true facts of your product, customers want you to be loyal, and other thing, your invention needs some protection which will lead you and your product at the height.

Today, we can see the number of branded companies are being preferred by customers, just because of above two reasons (many other factors are also important and are understood).

For example: if apple is inventing some new features that will surly cost you & the company more, and after sometime samsung also launching the same features that will dismiss apple image indirectly. see how, if same featured product launched by samsung is not much user friendly then customer will avoid taking that featured product without knowing " Who is the real one & who is the mirror image" . So one way apple will be losing its sales, and the cost heavily incurred to made original product (made by apple, its R&D costs) will become as a sunk cost.

So as per my understanding it's very important to get your product, its features, and its design patent and show up the real things and mark the difference. Thus, the customer can also make the difference.

Just my thoughts.. :)
 
Doesn't this harm the customer? Samsung came up with same features at a low cost. Apple's products are over priced and if there was no patent dispute, consumers would benefit.
 
I do agree with above comments but there should be short time period in which company can gain there profit. After that those patent design can be used buy other also.
 
Its nothing but a Business claim,but patent is a limited property right given by any government and it may be sold,mortgaged,transferred and company cannot apply any patent tax on that particular product,but have right to fight legally if any one try to copy their patented products.
 
some of u r talking about apple samsung case ..but this lawsuit is nt for shape ..it is for some software and the design of screen
 
ya nikunj basic lawsuits was on design, innovative technology, distinctive user interfaces, and elegant and distinctive product and packaging design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top