苹果(Apple)和三星(Samsung)的专利诉讼案，可能在业界引发两大效应：更多针对外观设计提出的专利诉讼；以及更多企业开始为产品的“外观包装”(trade dresse)注册。
对美国专利系统来说，这些都是相对较新，以及仍在使用的部分。以下我会告诉你，为何要更加关注它们。
1. 要针对这些项目兴讼非常容易。因为外观设计专利不需要长期、复杂的索赔过程。只需要少数图样证明，而且所需的专家和律师以及支出也比较少。
2. 他们的范围涵盖甚广。以外观设计专利为例，在苹果与三星的案子中，许多专家都同意它涵盖了产品外观和感觉的“整体印象”。而印象是主观的，因此律师和专家们都可以在法庭上尽情争辩。
3. 和你年纪相仿的陪审团成员们很容易了解诉讼重点何在。任何人都能明白iPhone或iPad的相似与不同之处。但当有人提出了3G蜂巢式标准相关的“Alternative e-bit”实用专利诉讼时，就不是每个人都能立即明白了。事实上，三星的律师有责任教育陪审团，让他们理解这些复杂又难理解的专有名词。从这次官司来 看，他们为该专利付出了极大的开发代价，但却没有获得任何侵权赔偿。
4. 他们可以藉打官司赚钱。苹果的10.5亿美元损害赔偿中，主要是以外观设计专利和外观包装等专利为主。
5. 保护你甚至不知道你拥有的知识产权。苹果展示了其iPhone的盒子和外包装──也就是“外观包装”。谁会想到这个小盒子也是知识产权？你有想过能靠它赚钱吗？好好想想吧！
6. 每个人都会做同样的事。苹果与三星的官司带来了很大的教训──如果不是今天，那么，不久的将来必然有其它人会做同样的事。当IP大赛开始时，你千万不要被排除在外。
7. 产业的复苏看来更加缓慢。正因为如此，现在有太多人空闲时间太多了，而且他们一直想找新的机会。去提起外观设计专利诉讼，或是注册外观包装专利正是时候。
你可以嗤之以鼻，告诉我有关黑色圆角方形的专利是多么愚蠢。
但，当你忙着看笑话时，我正忙着申请外观设计专利。
法庭上见！
本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载
编译： Joy Teng
参考英文原文：7 reasons to file design patents, trade dresses ，by Rick Merritt
相关阅读：
• 东京法院判决三星未侵犯苹果专利
• MIC:避免重蹈三星专利案覆辙有门道
• 手机产业何谓创新？何谓发明？JTwesmc
{pagination}
7 reasons to file design patents, trade dresses
Rick Merritt
SAN JOSE, Calif. – The Apple vs. Samsung case sent out two calls to action big as billboards along San Jose’s Highway 101: File more design patents. Register more trade dresses.
These are the relatively new and still under-used parts of the U.S. Patent System. I’ll tell you why they are well worth more attention.
1. They are relatively easy to file. Design patents don’t have long, complex claims. Just a few drawings. Fewer experts and lawyers to wait for and pay.
2. They are broad. A design patent, for example, covers “an overall impression” of the look and feel of a product, according to many experts in the Apple vs. Samsung case. That’s very subjective and thus broad and subject to how well your lawyers and experts can argue in court.
3. It’s easy to understand by a jury of your peers. Anybody can understand what an iPhone or iPad looks like and that the look is kinda distinctive. Not everybody can stay awake when someone argues for a utility patent on the alternate e-bit in the 3G cellular standard—something about which the Samsung’s attorneys had to educate the jury. They won no infringement money for their expensive efforts.
4. They make money. A significant fraction of Apple’s $1.05 billion damages award was for design patents and trade dresses. These things pay.
5. They protect IP you didn’t know you even had. Apple showed its iPhone boxes and packaging as part of its trade dress. Who would have thought these little out-of-the-box-experience details could be intellectual property you could monetize? Go figure, and sharpen your pencil.
6. Everybody else will do it. This is a big lesson from the Apple vs. Samsung case. Other people will get it, if not today someday soon. Don’t be left out of the next big IP race.
7. There’s a protracted sluggish recovery going on. Too many people have time on their hands and are hungry for new opportunities. File a design patent. Register a trade dress.
Go ahead, scoff. Tell me how stupid it is to have a patent on a black rectangle with rounded corners.
While you are busy laughing, I am busy filing a design patent.
See you in court!
责编：Quentin
扫码分享到好友
