telsda.gifWe tracked down a photo of the Telsda phone at the centre of Nokia's IPR lawsuit.
At first sight, it does look remarkably similar to Nokia's distinctive
7260, which presumably is why Nokia has chosen this model as a test
case.

The photo comes from Mobile Gazette,
which has done some more detective work and tracked down photos of
other models in Telsda's range. They also bear a strong resemblance to
the models of other western and Korean brand-name manufacturers,
although the similarity is not as glaring as in the case of the 7260.

As I said in my original post,
I think some degree of “commonality” between the designs of brand-name
manufacturers and Chinese OEMs is inevitable because the principal
subsystems — keypads, screens, cameras, cases — increasingly come
“off the shelf” from a limited number of Chinese subcontractors.

To
ensure that phones do not all look the same, the devil is in the
detailing: the corner radius of the keys, the colour of the screen
surround, the shape of the joystick key, and so on.

Apart from
the 7260, whose unusual silver “S” motif is quite distinctive, I think
many western courts would have great difficulty defining exactly what
elements in a mobile phone's “look and feel” are proprietary and which
ones are not.

Its important to note that Telsda's phones are not
counterfeit phones. The Telsda brand is plainly visible so it is
difficult to argue that anyone buys the Telsda A317 believing it to be a
Nokia 7260.

Interesting to see to see how the Beijing court decides.

Technorati : , , , ,

email