|
|
|
|
|
|
by dijksterhuis
4 hours ago
|
|
|
> Neither copyright nor patent cover a user interface *us only > You automatically get copyright protection when you create: ... original non-literary written work, such as software, web content and databases https://www.gov.uk/copyright > Registered designs provide protection for the visual appearance of a product. In the context of GUIs, this means that the unique visual elements of your digital interfaces (i.e. the lines, contours and shapes) can be safeguarded against unauthorised use by competitors. https://cms.law/en/media/local/cms-cmno/files/protection-for... |
|
|
Apple did file a claim against Samsung for multiple design patent infringements, including a design patent for using a grid of icons with rounded corners, but the US Supreme Court ruled that Apple would have to show financial loss from the infringement, which basically gives it no more power than a trademark. That was after a jury trial that heavily favored Apple, so it's not likely that anyone will ever get anything meaningful out of trying to enforce a design patent on a user interface alone.
Has anything like Apple's lawsuits against Microsoft or Samsung happened in the UK? Outside of purposeful counterfeiting, case law over trademark and design patent clams seems to be pretty weak. Then again, copyright is only powerful because of centuries of case law expanding its reach, and as written probably shouldn't cover fan fiction, shared universes, or possibly even translations. Intellectual property in general seems to be more about common law than the actual statues creating it.