- Why were electronic tablets or phones not "invented" in 1950, or
1850, or 1750 or at any time in human history prior to the present?
The answer is clear. Such products are not unique inventions or designs. Rather, they are incorporations of the technological state of the art.
- What about 84 jury instructions on 109 pages to decide whether some undeserving monopolist should be awarded rights to rectangular electronic tablets with rounded edges?
Does that make any kind of sense? for such a simple question?
That the American legal system is permitting this kind of "home field" charade in Cupertino, California is a tragedy of law AND business, domestically and internationally.
Hayley Tsukayama has the story at the Washington Post in Judge gives instructions to Apple-Samsung jury before closing arguments.
Frankly, if you run down to your local electronic shop, all the products in any given product category look pretty much the same as the competition, and this applies whether you are looking at TV screens, laptop screens, camera displays, tablets, phones, or whatever. All this hype about patents and designs is just a smoke screen for the exercise of monopolistic tyranny.
The bananas that competing banana companies are selling remain bananas, and so it is with tablets, which were invented long ago.
There are only a few OBVIOUS designs available for tablets, as prior art proves, but which the judge in Cupertino does not understand. So why should the world be bound by the decisions of such a hopelessly overwhelmed judge?
Essentially, all electronic products follow the state-of-the-art in their design and function, and their form is largely determined by what is technologically possible at any given time. All the rest is Madison Avenue hype.