[atonse]

Do you think that BMW wouldn't sue Volvo if they built a car that looked identical on the outside, regardless of what's on the inside?

Brands each have a signature look. Sure, when there are frivolous patents that are a poison on the industry, but this is about whether Samsung crossed the line in how deceptively close their tabs look to an iPad. The German court seems to think they did. And I bet they did more analysis than most of us.

[0x12]

Try this: just look at the side of a bunch of cars, if you can tell them apart you've got a better eye for this than I do, but ever since the 'windtunnel' took over as a designer I am having a harder and harder time telling cars apart. Plenty of brands have caught on to this and actually share 90%+ of the basic design of the car and concentrate on the interior to differentiate the brands. The biggest difference on the outside is the logo on the hood.

Once physics and usability enter in to the design process the constraints can be such that there will be fewer and fewer options and room to play without impacting those in a negative way.

Design is always a compromise. By going for a minimalist design you remove all of that room so any minimalist design for a device will likely be very much like every other minimalist design.

[marbletiles]

You can always spot the BMW by the Hofmeister Kink. If Volvo copied that, I bet BMW'd sue.

[0x12]

How does that impact functionality?

[ugh]

? This lawsuit is not about functionality at all. It’s purely about looks, it’s about a design patent.

[0x12]

My point is that once you take away all design and go for minimalist that you can't change it much beyond that without impacting functionality.

The Hofmeister kind is an addition that does not impact functionality, it is the opposite of going for something minimalist. It is a design component specifically added as a signature.

Now if Apple had added a feature that is not relevant to functionality instead of removing a whole pile of stuff that was not relevant and someone copied that particular element they'd have a case imo. As it stands all they've done is taken the device to its logical conclusion. That should not be a protectable configuration.

[jarek]

So, um.

iPad: aluminium back, aluminium stretching out to create a visible border around the front of the device. Prominent single physical button on front of the device. 4:3 form factor.

Galaxy Tab: black textured plastic (?) back, front of the device pure black. No physical buttons on the front. 16:10 form factor.

But sure, identical on the outside...

[notahacker]

Replace the word "car" with "wheel" to more realistically compare with the iPad functional design and you'll spot an awful lot of alloy wheel designs that untrained observers will be able to distinguish only by the badge.