False advertising and more
Rebecca, I don't think the CAFC said the design was not obvious. According to Oblon's blog, the court said the district court used the wrong standard. Obviousness is from the eye of the ordinary designer, not the ordinary observer. Infringement, on the other hand is from the view of the ordinary observer.
Thanks--I have to admit that design patent jurisprudence baffles me. Among other things, I don't really understand why, in this case, the perspective of the ordinary observer and the ordinary designer would diverge, though I could see the point in a more specialized product.
Post a Comment