The inventor of the ballpoint pen was named Biro (interesting because as a kid we all referred to ballpoint pen as "biros" so I guess this wasn't exactly an obscure fact). Bich improved on Biro's invention, mainly in ink and process, but the classic "Bic Biro" had a rounded hexagonal cross section (which meant the pens wouldn't roll off desks, evn when separated from their lids) not the cylinder of the more modern pen shown in th article. Is this obvious? I can't find out if this design was patented, but I would be surprised if it weren't.

I realize that it's annoying that what seems like such an obvious and simple design might turn out to be protectable under IP law. Certainly Apple has produced many seemingly more clever and inobvious designs that have turned out to be less easy to protect.

If you look at the kindle fire it's a rounded rectangle with a flat screen. It supposedly represents the first credible threat to the iPad. Is Apple suing? The kindle fire is obviously a lot like the iPad for the kinds of reasons usually raised, but it's not a slavish imitation of the iPad. It's not rounded in the same way. The home screen doesn't feature an arrangement of icons designed, superficially to resemble the iPad home screen. And so on. It's perfectly possible to create a tablet with rounded corners that isn't weirdly identical to the iPad. It's perfectly clear to anyone who has watched Samsung over the years that they're the Burger King of consumer electronics. They let the market leader do the R&D and then slavishly imitate their successes. If someone behaved this way in elementary school you'd call them a cheat and move a desk away from them; getting caught doing it in academia should end your career (but before you get caught it might get you tenure), but it's dandy in business. Frankly, I'd be happy to see more companies get smacked down for behaving this way.

I also wonder why we've basically been seeing a series of histrionic anti Apple pieces from Tech Crunch over the last few days.