Launch day is still a couple of weeks away, but as of today Frog Design founder Hartmut Esslinger's new book is now available for pre-order. Entitled Design Forward: Creative Strategies for Sustainable Change, the 308-pager details case studies from Esslinger's Frog years, when he was designing for Wega, Sony (the company that gobbled Wega up) and of course Steve Jobs, with both Apple and NEXT. Mac geeks will enjoy seeing photos of Esslinger's early Apple concept work, like proposals for a Macbook laptop and flatscreen workstation circa 1982.
Examinations of his personal work aside, Design Forward is not intended to be a vanity piece, nor a mere look backwards; Esslinger's current position as a professor of industrial design at Vienna's University of Applied Arts provides him with exposure to plenty of young students, and he incorporates select examples of their work in a series of case studies.
Get it while it's hot right here.
Posted by
core jr | 7 Dec 2012
|
Comments (0)
Last chance to enter your portfolio and win a scholarship to the iPensole Footwear Academy! Coroflot is teaming up with Pensole Footwear Design Academy to offer five students a unique opportunity to be part of a footwear design masterclass. Learn about color theory, construction, materials, storytelling and biomechanics in a "learn by doing" environment. REGISTER BEFORE DECEMBER 15th!!
This year, PENSOLE has partnered with the Two Ten Footwear Foundation and FN Platform tradeshow at MAGIC to award scholarships to their footwear design class to 210 lucky students. The programs will begin in January 2013 for a 3-week online class and a 4-week masterclass at PENSOLE HQ in Portland, Oregon. Students and schools are encouraged to apply for either program. But most exciting, work from the program will be showcased at the FN Platform footwear tradeshow in Las Vegas, February 19-22, 2013.
continued...
Posted by
Daniel Stillman | 27 Nov 2012
|
Comments (6)
When analytic thought, the knife, is applied to experience, something is always killed in the process. That is fairly well understood, at least in the arts... Something is always killed. But what is less noticed in the arts—something is always created too.
-Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance
I teach design process to people with very little experience in design, at a thing we call the Design Gym. The response from our attendees is always very positive. People, with this new knife of analytic thought, feel excited and energized to go and use it in their lives, to organize their thoughts and to approach their problems in a new way. When I tell other frameworks for non-designers to better understand design, the responses are sometimes controversial.
A few months back, at an Interaction Designer's meetup, I brought up what I do at the Design Gym. A new friend protested adamantly against the idea of process. He insisted that he just got in, rolled up his sleeves, and got the job done. He insisted that he followed no process at all. Plus, he derided process as rigid and no fun. And in one way, he's right: something is killed when you think about and describe what you do. He feels that a certain freedom is killed. But what is created?
One of my friends from Industrial Design school recently had me over to discuss her portfolio as she considered her options for jobs. She's been working at a design-driven consultancy for the past several years as a senior designer... and the feeling is that it's time to start getting ready for the next step. The consultancy she works at doesn't have an explicit process—companies come to them for their brand power and aesthetic. So when showing the story of a project, there are too few pieces around to speak to. There are a few sketches, then some renderings, then the object. Which is a story, after all...but it doesn't speak to the why or the how—the sort of things employers say they love to see in portfolios. I think she realized that this was a problem, which is why she had me over: to help her find and tell her story, through the lens of process.
What is created when we apply a process? When process is used consciously you have evidence of work for each part of the design process. Those groupings of work help tell the story of the project, and the decisions made at the transition points in the process.
continued...
Posted by
Kai Perez | 14 Nov 2012
|
Comments (0)
Although yesterday saw the launch of the Design Salary Guide, we were also interested to hear that Pratt's student-designed, -managed and -organized magazine the "Prattler" recently did a survey on the student body. The data covers a range of categories, from Cumulative Debt by Graduation to Sexuality and Who's Voting.
Pratt's student run magazine illustrates data, through, well illustrations
Many third party sites offer statistical data about colleges, such as rate of acceptance or more importantly male to female ratio. This information, however, is a current representation of the views and opinions of students, putting a face to the data point.
The execution of statisitcal data, which can be relatively uninspired, is presented in a refreshing and clear manner in this month's "Prattler." For example, the dominating theme of dollar bills is used to illustrate the various ways that students spend their money.
continued...
Posted by
Kai Perez | 5 Nov 2012
|
Comments (3)
With each passing day of my design education it seems that I arrive at more questions than answers. A lot of what you get out of school is asking questions, more importantly the right kinds of questions. However sometimes good ol' advice is more beneficial and rewarding then asking questions.
"Do understand respect. Respect yourself, your work, and other's. Design is not light stuff. It is life and world changing."
-Nate Kendrick
On the Core77 Boards there is a thread titled "If I Knew Then What I Know Now." Before I came to school I glanced at it and really paid no attention to it. Now that I'm in my sophomore year this thread has become somewhat of a credo for me, a manifesto if you will. The thread encapsulates the design education of multiple members each with their own words of wisdom. The advice is comprehensive, covering studio life, what skills employers are looking for, and even the rule for how young grad students can date.
"If you want to make it big some day, you've got to know how to take calculated risks, negotiate, cut a deal and protect yourself! Chances are your design profs have no idea about that stuff or they wouldn't be teaching design."
-Steve
I urge anyone who is currently in school or applying to read this thread thoroughly. It will give you a sense of purpose and instill a level of motivation that you didn't know you had in you. Read the thread in its entirety, even reading the debates between people who don't agree on the same piece of advice (take your own stand on it). Try not to listen to one person's advice but a diverse group of people.
Students working in MIT's Design Studio
The thread has become somewhat static lately so if other talented and experienced designers would like to share their advice please post!
"Do be creative. School is only about learning how to be creative. If school gives one thing: it is the teaching and path to creativeness."
-Nate Kendrick
Posted by
core jr | 3 Nov 2012
|
Comments (0)
There's still time to RSVP for the MFA Products of Design program's Information Session/Open House coming up next Saturday, November 10th, from 11am to 1pm. Meet faculty and students, tour the department and Visible Futures Lab, and preview projects and the curriculum.
Please join us for our Open House and Information Session. The MFA in Products of Design is an immersive, two-year graduate program that prepares exceptional practitioners for leadership in the shifting terrain of product design. We educate heads, hearts and hands to reinvent systems and catalyze positive change through the business of making.
Students emerge with the confidence, experience and professional networks to fill positions at top design firms and progressive organizations, to create ingenious enterprises of their own, and to become lifelong advocates for the power of design.
Check out all the goings on at the department goings on at the site.
RSVP for the Open House/Information Session event here.
Posted by
Coroflot | 1 Nov 2012
|
Comments (0)
Coroflot is teaming up with the PENSOLE Footwear Design Academy to offer 5 students a unique opportunity to participate in a 3-week masterclass! Learn about color theory, construction, materials, storytelling and biomechanics in a "learn by doing" environment.
This year, PENSOLE has partnered with the Two Ten Footwear Foundation and FN Platform tradeshow at MAGIC to award scholarships to their footwear design class to 210 lucky students. The programs will begin in January 2013 for a 3-week online class and a 4-week masterclass at PENSOLE HQ in Portland, Oregon. Students and schools are encouraged to apply for either program. But most exciting, work from the program will be showcased at the FN Platform footwear tradeshow in Las Vegas, February 19-22, 2013.
PENSOLE was founded by D'Wayne Edwards, former Design Director of Brand Jordan, to give talented young design students an opportunity to learn from the industry's best and to provide a farm system for the next generation of footwear designers. Since the first PENSOLE class in 2010, academy graduates have found opportunities with footwear companies worldwide such as Columbia Sportswear, Bluehaven, AND1, North Face, New Balance, Wolverine, Cole Haan, Under Armour, Stride Rite, adidas, JORDAN and Nike.
So ready your Coroflot portfolios and register today! They're accepting portfolios until DECEMBER 15th. Don't forget to check the "Coroflot Member" box when you submit your work!
In an earlier post I'd alluded to the design philosophies of Ayse Birsel, which included living life to the fullest both inside and outside of the studio. Industrial designer Birsel, who hails from NYC by way of Turkey, is part of Herman Miller's Why Design video series. In her installment, "Your life is your most important project," she describes part of what she had transmitted to us wide-eyed Pratt ID students so many years ago. At less than four minutes it's a pale shade of the richness of her three-hour design classes, but hopefully it will give you a taste:
continued...
Yet another U.S. city is getting a maker's facility. Seattle's forthcoming MakerHaus is a 10,000-square-foot "creative space designed for fabrication, education, professional services, and co-working," featuring a metal shop, wood shop and digital manufacturing lab featuring a laser cutter, 3D printers and a CNC router.
On the educational side, the membership-based space has a materials library and will offer instructional classes on Rhino, Photoshop, a variety of tools, and even how to navigate Kickstarter.
The best two things about the shop at every art school industrial design department were the array of tools you could never afford, and getting to work with those tools within a community. The worst thing was that you couldn't always work on whatever you wanted, as time was limited and what you built had to fulfill a class assignment. The advent of places like TechShop and now MakerHaus promise the first two things without the hassle of the third.
MakerHaus is scheduled to open their doors on January 7th December 6th, and shop-access memberships start at $299 a month for month-to-month folks, with a cheaper $189 per month rate for those signing up for a year.
In a nod to their community-building aspirations, MakerHaus has foregone a generic "Here's our facility" video and have instead chosen to shoot individual creatives within the context of the space. Here's designer Brandon Perhacs explaining what MakerHaus can do for him:
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 19 Oct 2012
|
Comments (0)
Reporting by Joey Zeledón and Jóse Gamboa
Costa Rica is quickly becoming one of Central America's hubs for all things design. There are a growing number of design education initiatives that have seemed to gain some momentum in the past few years by the local creative community.
This year, Costa Rican designers have launched a national sketching workshop in their home country. They call it Sketching Lab Costa Rica. It's a 3-day, intensive workshop that focuses on the development of rapid visualization and the most effective ways to visually communicate your ideas as a creative. The workshop follows the principles of the sketch aerobics that uses music and the very basic elements in drawing to promote learning by doing.
The 3-day workshop kicked off at the end of August and brought in 70+ participants. The event was led by Costa Rican designers Jóse Gamboa of Slingshot Product Development Group and Joey Zeledón of Smart Design and was organized by Mario Ramírez and David Melendez of Plex Studio.
The first day of the event was focused on rudimentary form development and drawing in perspective. It was held at the National Museum of Gold "Museo del Oro" in San José, Costa Rica. The museums exhibit features many ancient artifacts and objects from the pre-Columbian era that gave the participants inspiration during sketching breakout sessions.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 18 Oct 2012
|
Comments (0)
The Campana Brothers for Spectaculu
The Brazilian artist Vik Muniz has enlisted some of his talented friends—The Campana Brothers, visual artist Mark Bradford and director Carlos Saldanha—to raise awareness for the arts and technology organization Spectaculu. The organization provides educational opportunities for at-risk youth in Rio de Janeiro including filmmaking, audio/visual arts, and carpentry workshops.
The limited edition T-shirts created by friends of Vik are available online and at select Levi's stores across the Americas.
Last May, ten young artists were chosen to participate in a special 4-month intensive workshop with Vik Muniz and his friends. The "Friends Of" program, connected the students with professionals working in the field.
They were given lessons in Art History (Eduardo Machado), Fashion and T Shirt Design (Lylian Berlim), Silk Screen and Print Techniques (Evandro Harlabey), Design Notions and Digital Technology (Heberth Sobral) and Image Treatment Techniques (Marcello Rosauro). To add further knowledge to the course, they had workshops with Vik Muniz, with Levi's Latin America Marketing Director, Mauricio Busin, as well as with the fashion editors Lu Catoira, Iesa Rodrigues and Melina Dalboni. They also gave the course insights into the client's universe, the fashion world and the creative process.
continued...
Posted by
Kara Pecknold | 12 Oct 2012
|
Comments (2)
This week saw the emergence of the first International UN Day of the Girl Child, which is intended to promote the empowerment of young girls around the world. One obvious way to do this is to encourage their access to education. Because of this, we thought it was only fitting to celebrate the development of a toy that is meant to promote the education of girls and more specifically, their learning in science and math.
Debbie Sterling was discouraged by the stereotypes that suggested that boys should play with Bob the Builder while girls were left to dress up Barbie. With 89% of male engineers in her program at Stanford, it was obvious that there was a gender gap in the field. But more notably, Sterling was aware that there was a significant gap in the formative space of play. Because of this, she was motivated to spend a year of research with over 100 children in order to develop GoldieBlox: a construction toy for girls.
continued...
Many of us armed with tools and skills have, at some point, seen something we wanted to buy—then decided we'd rather build it ourselves, either to save money or for the fun of it. So, here's a sticky question: With design piracy being such a hot-button issue, how do you feel about someone knocking off an existing design, as a one-off for their own personal use? And does it differ if the design is considered a classic?
For example, let's say you had the capability to create bentwood forms, do metalworking and upholstery, and you decided to make yourself an Eames Lounge Chair for your living room. Your friends would probably be impressed. Versus the stink you might have on you for copying an end table that you saw at this year's Salone.
I ask this because I recently came across this post of a father-and-son team building a desk with built-in cable management. The desk is a knock-off of the Bluelounge StudioDesk, minus the routed cable slot. Similarly, I follow a DIY blog written by a young mother living in the Alaskan wilderness. She frequently blogs about seeing a nice piece of furniture at Pottery Barn, not being able to afford it, and using her skills to build a copy for herself.
continued...
Last month we looked at neon light artist David Ablon and briefly mentioned Brooklyn Glass, the outerborough studio Ablon co-founded. The 4,000-square-foot facility boasts two furnaces and multiple shop areas, where everyone from experienced glassblowers to newbies taking their first class work the material.
Now there's a new video showing what goes on within Brooklyn Glass' walls. In an exceptionally well-shot and -edited two minutes, Ablon's co-founder Alan Iwamura breaks down what glassblowing takes and what you can expect to get out of it:
See also: Corning GlassLab & Cooper-Hewitt Present Live Glass Demos at Governors Island
Last week, I announced on Core77 the publication of the Design for Growth and Prosperity report by the European Design Leadership Board.
Christian Guellerin, president of Cumulus, the International Association of Universities and Schools of Design, Art and Media and executive director of the acclaimed Ecole de design Nantes Atlantique, likes the report but would have wanted the role of design education and design internships to be emphasized much more strongly in this volume.
"Designers will play a key role in new types of economic structures, those that are flexible, adaptable, and mobile. And companies will have to think differently. They will need to adapt their model and their management to industrial mobility. The idea is not to relocate in Asian countries or elsewhere, but to adapt to change where you are."
He thinks designers:
- are good at mutating and helping companies and organizations develop their ability to do something else with what they already do;
- can help make companies the radical move to an economy of really sustainable products, "designed to last"; and
- with consumers intervening more and more in the design process of products they buy, the management of a contributive economy will have to turn towards design and shared conception.
Read his reaction in full at Metropolis.
Image via Metropolis
Posted by
core jr | 26 Sep 2012
|
Comments (0)
If you're checking out grad schools for next September, be sure to take a look at the MFA Products of Design program at SVA. Chaired by Core77's Allan Chochinov, the department will welcome guests to its Information Session/Open House on Saturday, November 10th, from 11am to 1pm. Meet faculty and students, tour the department and Visible Futures Lab, and preview projects and the curriculum.
Please join us for our Open House and Information Session. The MFA in Products of Design is an immersive, two-year graduate program that prepares exceptional practitioners for leadership in the shifting terrain of product design. We educate heads, hearts and hands to reinvent systems and catalyze positive change through the business of making.
Students emerge with the confidence, experience and professional networks to fill positions at top design firms and progressive organizations, to create ingenious enterprises of their own, and to become lifelong advocates for the power of design.
Check out all the goings on at the department goings on at the site.
RSVP for the Open House/Information Session event here.
I'll never forget the pleasure of studying industrial design under Ayse Birsel, who was the first to tell us wide-eyed students that design is about more than the academics of it. "Part of your homework," she said, "is to take long walks through the city, go out with your friends, go to parties, see new things, and enjoy life." In later years I also had the pleasure of freelancing out of her then-studio on Broadway, which I remember as always being filled with sunlight and music.
Birsel is one of the featured designers in Herman Miller's awesome "Why Design" video series, and her entry, titled "Your Life is Your Most Important Project," reminded me of this. The tone of the series is similar to Birsel's philosophy in that it gets the thoughts of important designers on life both inside and outside of the studio. But we'll have to wait for a bit to see Ayse's; the series, which features interviews with a new designer every Monday, kicks off today with Yves Behar's equally great "Surfing is like improvisational jazz." Enjoy:
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 23 Aug 2012
|
Comments (1)
*The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of his firm or its clients.
Our articles so far have laid the foundation to repair the broken image of design patents. While this can help you argue for the resources to seek design patent protection, we also need to learn what to do to make sure that the design patents you seek end up meeting the expectations that you set for them.
A big part of the reason for requiring patent lawyers to have a science or technical background is to put a lawyer and inventor-client on the same page from the beginning of the patent drafting process. As illustrated in the graphic below, the knowledge involved in putting together a patent application has three components. First, someone needs to have deep knowledge of the product itself including how it works, how it was designed and what's unique about it. Clear on the other side of things, there needs to be deep knowledge of patent law, including all of the patent office rules, the legal limits of what you can claim and how and all of the various legal traps that one can fall into when writing a patent application.
Somewhere in the middle, though, there's a section of knowledge that requires viewing the product itself from a legal perspective. This involves all of the considerations discussed in the other parts of this article, including what to claim as individual inventions, what is the broadest coverage that you should seek and what backup positions should be included. On top of that, it also involves how to describe a product within the context of all the legal rules and requirements to achieve the type of coverage desired.
When a lawyer's technical background aligns with the area of the product being patented, the lawyer can handle the bulk of the middle section, as illustrated in the graphic below. The lawyer can generally describe the requirements for a patent including the theories of novelty and obviousness to help the client understand what the lawyer is doing. These bits of patent law knowledge can also help the client make decisions that balance potential coverage with real-world considerations such as cost and timing.
On the other hand, when dealing with design patents, there will likely be much less of a knowledge overlap between designer and lawyer. As illustrated below, there are many instances where there is no overlap at all or even a substantial gap in knowledge that really prevents the lawyer and designer from getting on the same page and developing a good working relationship. This, in turn, can prevent the lawyer from knowing what really needs protection within an overall scheme and can also prevent the designer from fully appreciating that something could be done.
All of this can really make it seem like an uphill battle for designers seeking a comfortable level of design protection. Do they first have to educate a lawyer on the finer points of design to close the knowledge gap? Do they, instead, have to first learn all there is to know about patents and patent strategy before discussing things with a lawyer? In a perfect world, yes, both sides could do a little extra work to close this gap, but as a more practical solution, I've developed a short list of questions that designers can ask themselves as a beginning to the design patent process. These questions are aimed to help designers start to bend their thinking toward the patent side of things. They can help designers put things in terms that a lawyer can use and understand.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 22 Aug 2012
|
Comments (3)
*The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of his firm or its clients.
Now that we've seen how a valuable design patent strategy can begin to take shape, we'll step back a little and look at how even a known positive aspect of design patents ended up being misused to their detriment. This can also give us a clue as to where to start to turn things around and rehabilitate the reputation of design patents.
Misconception 3: Design patents are, at best, just an easy way to get a patent number on a product.
In all the ways that common misconceptions about design patents are wrong, the notion that they're easy to get is actually correct. That is, compared to utility patents, they're relatively easy to get. The patent process itself is confounding, difficult and full of seemingly inane rules no matter which side you're on. However, once a utility patent is filed, it often faces an uphill battle to actually be allowed by the United States Patent Office. For one, the waiting list for utility patents to be examined is between about two and three years. Once examination starts, the back-and-forth arguing with the patent office over whether or not a patent is actually deserved can take at least another year and can be endlessly frustrating.
Design patents, on the other hand, only sit for about six months to a year before being examined. Even better, many design patents are immediately allowed or only face formal objections, rather than more difficult substantive rejections, that are almost automatic for utility applications. Even taking a more strategic approach to design patent filing may not have a significant impact on examination times because the sheer volume of design patent applications filed is so much lower than with respect to utility patents.
Many people who are otherwise unconcerned with the visual aspects of a product seek to use the ease of getting a design patent to their advantage. Their goal is to quickly get a design patent, even a cheap one, to be able to honestly mark a product as "patented" or to have some minimal level of protection while they wait for their utility patents to issue. When people take this approach, they really don't care what they end up with; they just want it to be cheap and quick. This is a big part of the reason why so many bad design patents exist.
The problem that stems from all the bad design patents out there is that, eventually, people do decide to try and enforce some of them. The courts have always seemed to struggle not only in trying to make sense of visual design but also simply trying to find a way to keep design patents, including bad ones, afloat. More often than not though, actually winning a design patent lawsuit proves exceedingly difficult. This phenomenon fed back into the perception that design patents themselves are inherently weak, causing that myth to become widespread.
The perception of design patents was on a downward spiral for some time, during which repeated half-hearted attempts at design protection were followed by repeated unsuccessful but costly attempts at design patent enforcement. It got so bad that even in cases where those involved felt that the product's design really did matter, the motivation behind any accompanying design patents was simply the thought that "well, this does have a design so we might as well file a design patent."
In spite of all this, the Federal Circuit recently opened the door somewhat for design patents. In what would seem like a very innocuous case involving a design patent for fingernail buffers, the Court removed a critical aspect of the law of design patent enforcement that was partly what made winning a design patent lawsuit so difficult. In the absence of the requirement that design patent plaintiffs spell out the "points of novelty" of their design before it's compared against the alleged infringing product, design patent enforcement may now prove easier. In one example, the footwear maker Crocs was successful in a lawsuit against some knock-offs that actually had some noticeable differences from the patented design (this should also ease any concerns that a design has to be universally lauded to deserve design patent protection).
Even outside the courtroom, people may be paying more attention to existing design patents when developing new products. Notably, while Apple and Samsung are still locked in litigation over the design of Samsung's Galaxy II phone and Galaxy Tab, Samsung openly admitted that a goal of the design of its successor Galaxy Nexus phone was to be different enough from Apple to avoid even a hint of future design patent issues.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 21 Aug 2012
|
Comments (4)
*The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of his firm or its clients.
In the first article of this series, we introduced the idea that valuable design patents are something that designers can, and should, work to obtain. We also explored the misconception that design patents are inherently narrow or easy to get around and discovered exactly where the holes in such a belief lie. In this article, we'll look at how the cost of design patents affects how people perceive their value and what the actual cost of a good design patent strategy should be.
Misconception 2: Design patents are cheap (and why it's a good thing that this is wrong)
Anyone who has participated on both the design and utility side of the patent application process can see a difference in how the applications get written and assembled. Both the amount of information exchanged and the time taken for preparing a utility patent are much greater than when dealing with a design patent application. Of course, this time is ultimately reflected in the cost of the application, which in the case of a utility, is typically expected to be in the range of $8,000 to $12,000. That, however, is for a single application that may only cover limited aspects of a product. Simply comparing this to the cost for a design application, which can be between $2,000-3,000, shows a notable difference in the expected amount of time usually spent on these two types of applications.
Adequately covering a new and innovative product on the utility side, however, can often involve multiple applications, adding up to sometimes more than $50,000 for a single product (and that's just to file the applications). Most of the time, when working on the design side, only a single application is filed. The Patent Office might require an applicant to split up the application into separate applications that cover what they determine to be different designs, even if only slightly different. Such a requirement only incrementally increases the cost, which ultimately pales in comparison to the total on the utility side.
This vast difference in cost certainly makes design patents look cheap. Simply because there isn't much actual legal writing involved, design patents shouldn't cost as much as utility patents. But, they shouldn't be viewed as cheap. There are probably a lot of designers who wouldn't view $3,000 as cheap, but the overall notion, especially from the perspective of someone paying $50,000 to begin the utility patent process, is that design patents comparatively lack value. It's also worth mentioning that there can also be a significant additional cost in actually getting a utility patent through the Patent Office. The cost of so-called patent prosecution can add another $10,000 to $20,000 to the cost of a utility application itself (it can be more in extreme cases) and is also less expensive when dealing with design patents.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 20 Aug 2012
|
Comments (5)
*The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of his firm or its clients.
The mere mention of design patents in the title of this article has already gotten most of you thinking about the ongoing trial of Apple against Samsung. Many are waiting to see which side of the dispute I'll favor and some people are ready to unleash their arguments against my position. They'll have to keep waiting, though, because this article isn't about Apple v. Samsung...well, as much as any article on design patents right now can manage to not be about Apple v. Samsung.
While we wait through what many are characterizing as the "boring" part of the trial, I'd like to take some time to discuss design patents in general. I'm sure that many industrial designers who are following the Apple v. Samsung case are wondering how a handful of design patents, the oft-maligned afterthought of the intellectual property (or "IP" world), can make up a significant part of a $2.5 billion lawsuit. More importantly, designers should be interested to know what the impact of this case will be on design patents and how that will affect their own work.
From a purely legal standpoint, nothing is likely to change because of Apple v. Samsung, regardless of the outcome. Any design patent not involved in the trial will be the same on the day after the verdict as it was the day before. The decision in Apple v. Samsung is going to be based on how the jury interprets the facts of the case. The only way any law has a chance of being changed is if a decision gets appealed.
The real potential for impact, however lies in the mere fact that the design and business worlds are paying close attention to the design patent side of this case in the first place. Design patents have been around for over 150 years and in that time have only seen limited usage. Sure, many people or corporations have sued in the past to enforce their design rights with some success, but both the number of design patent lawsuits and the number of design patents granted pale in comparison to those of utility patents.
The traditionally meager status of design patents is the reason why many designers are likely surprised by the prominence of design patents in Apple v. Samsung. In all reality, practically everyone who has an opinion holds design patents in the lowest esteem of all the different forms of IP protection. You'll find that most people listing the different areas of intellectual property will rattle off copyright, trademark and patent while actually only thinking of utility patents—the more esteemed form of patent protection that is geared toward what an invention is or how it functions.
If asked about protection for the visual aspects of a product's design, that same person might then dismissively mention the existence of a design patent before relaying a common view about them: they're easy to get around, but they're cheap and easy to get. This perspective views design patents, at best, a quick way to get a patent number to slap on a product.
The negative view of design patents is so widespread that even most designers feel that there is no meaningful way to protect the appearance of a product. The fact is that while many of the innovations that come out of design and design thinking find adequate protection in utility patents, most designers feel that there is no meaningful way to protect the appearance of a product. As a result, designers often feel that a substantial part of their work is left vulnerable to copying. This feeling exists in spite of the fact that an entire section of IP law in the United States has been carved out for the protection of a product's visual design.
Before we get too far in, it is important to understand the different types of IP protection and how they relate to each other. Put as simply as possible, patents protect things and methods for making or using things, trademarks essentially protect brand identity and copyrights protect artistic expression. As mentioned above, patents are further broken down into utility patents and design patents. While methods fit exclusively within the area of utility patents, physical things can find protection on both the utility and design sides.
Essentially, the structure or functional elements of a thing can be protected by utility patents, and the physical appearance can be protected by design patents. If there are any features of a product that straddle the line between being functional or being visual, you can often find a way to get protection from both types of patents. This alone is a major advantage of design patents over trademarks and copyrights, which both specifically exclude coverage for anything functional (the recent grant of trademark protection to Hershey's notable chocolate bar pattern notwithstanding). To get design protection for something that has unique characteristics both visually and functionally, all you have to do is to find a way to present it so that the appearance of what you're protecting is dictated more by aesthetics than by function, if only slightly.
While Apple v. Samsung isn't currently rewriting any design patent laws, it's certainly putting design patents in a position that makes them hard to ignore. Apple's focus on its design rights with respect to a product that is also covered by over 200 utility patents (by Apple's own count) is making people realize that, if you're serious about design, you need to seriously consider design patents. The key for designers going forward is going to be knowing what it means to be serious about design patents.
Unfortunately, I can't simply say that the common, dismissive view of design patents is absolutely false and that filing more design patent applications and suing more people for design patent infringement will fix everything. The fact is that not all design patents are created equal, and that it's really easy to end up with a bad one. If you go into the patent process with the view that you're just trying to get a cheap and easy patent, a design patent can fit that bill, but it may prove to be worth about the amount of consideration and time that went into it. Often, this ends up being very little or nothing at all. On the other hand, with the right thought process and a little extra effort, it is actually possible to get valuable coverage from a design patent.
The problem is that the cheap and easy approach to design patents is so pervasive that it weighs down the entire design patent system. The result is that each of the components of this view have been almost accepted as fact. However, the thinking that design patents are easy to avoid, that they're cheap and that their only redeeming quality is that they're easy to get, are really misconceptions about design patents that arose over time from lack of understanding of or appreciation for design itself. As you can see, this problem is bigger than three individual design patents and can't be fixed by one simple trial, but designers can use the opportunity presented by the current attention to design patents as a way to take steps to erase these misconceptions.
To understand how to get valuable design patents we need to understand why so many bad design patents have been filed and have been issued in the past. This involves exploring each misconception about design patents to see that they are not indicative of inherent limitations of design patents in general. Of course, simply knowing that good design patents are a possibility is only one step to actually getting one yourself. Fortunately, there are a few simple things that designers can do themselves to ensure that the design patents they get or that cover their designs are worth the effort and expense.
Misconception 1: Design Patents Are Easy to Get Around
Everything starts with the idea that design patents are inherently narrow in scope and that any design patent can be avoided or "designed around" by simply making some minor change to the original design. Historically, it's true that most of the people who have tried to sue someone for infringement of a design patent have found that their patents can't protect against much more than blatant copies. We can see that this isn't always the case though, by the simple fact that Apple's case against Samsung has made it this far. The reason why people have such a hard time covering other products with their design patents, however, is really a problem with how those specific patents are put together and not because of some built-in limitation of design patents in general.
continued...
Over the next few weeks we will be highlighting award-winning projects and ideas from this year's Core77 Design Awards 2012! For full details on the project, jury commenting and more information about the awards program, go to Core77DesignAwards.com
- FABLAB Education Program
- Designer: TYTHEdesign
- Location: Hunts Point - South Bronx, New York
- Category: Educational Initiatives
- Award: Professional Runner-Up
TYTHEdesign in collaboration with the non-profit Sustainable South Bronx (SSBx), has developed and piloted an educational after-school program to teach job and life skills by focusing on sustainability and business basics through the lens of design. By using design educational principles, students learned valuable transferable skills that can be used in every area of their lives.
How did you learn that you had been recognized by the jury?
It was lunch time in New York and we took a break to watch the live broadcast of the awards. We work in a co-working space in Brooklyn, so watching the awards meant sitting quietly in the corner, with our earphones on! We were so honored to be recognized and immediately shared the news with our collaborators.
What's the latest news or development with your project?
Following the initial pilot launch of the program, Sustainable South Bronx has set up the FABLAB as part of their regular programming. We supported the organization in the hiring process to make sure they brought on someone who had the right background in design, education and the environment. Additionally, we provided some basic training and education to the new teacher to make sure the transition worked smoothly. In the Spring/Summer of 2012 they officially launched the program to great success, doubling the attendance of the pilot. The programs have just ended and we are looking forward to an update from both the students' and organization's perspectives.
What is one quick anecdote about your project?
Through the initial pilot program and first Etsy store, we heard back from a college recruiter, "I was interviewing a prospective student for college and we talked at length about FabLab; you have an excellent-sounding program there and I do hope you keep it going." Additionally, we have been contacted by individuals looking to hire our students, who were using the program as a form of reference. It was great for us to hear that the program had such a positive reach towards our students next steps.
What was an "a-ha" moment from this project?
Bottom line, our 'a-ha' moments came through collaboration, with both the organization, our team and the students. Due to our constant evaluation during the pilot program we were able to quickly identify what was working well and what wasn't. This in itself was our 'a-ha' moment/process. Many times our assumptions were incorrect and our ideas didn't match the interest of the the students. The biggest 'a-ha' moment was changing our terminology, learning to relate better to the student by talking about 'next steps' not specifically college or job. This allowed everyone to feel comfortable, be in the same conversation and be excited that 'next steps' were all equal and exciting regardless of what they were.
Posted by
Perrin Drumm | 9 Aug 2012
|
Comments (0)
We've seen some pretty spectacular thesis projects by up and coming designers over the years, but never before have any of those projects involved a 6+ month-long road trip through small towns all across Sweden. Erik Olovsson, who recently completed his Master's Degree in Graphic Design - Storytelling at Konstfack, noted how easy it is "to be sitting in the office and surf design blogs instead of finding inspiration from reality... It's rare that a designer gets a deeper insight into the client's business." With that in mind he bought an old motorhome, cleaned it up, gave it a bright new graphic paint job and hit the road seeking face-to-face interactions with small business across the country.
The crux of his mission is his strict no-fee policy. Instead of money, he takes payment for his design work in trade, with a preference for goods or services that will help him on his way. "Perhaps something to eat? Gasoline? New tires? A new hairdo? A hot shower?" he suggests. So far he's traded a t-shirt design for a massage and web advice for cinnamon rolls. Overall he's found that when no money changes hands the client/designer relationship is much more collaborative and equanimous.
He recently held a concert on the roof of his van, did the brand identity for a Swedish-owned mango factory in Burkina Faso and completed a poster for a letter writing group (check his blog for images of the group's founders' Wes Anderson-esque vintage letter writing suitcase). It's too bad that his thesis didn't include plans for a Designjet, as we'd gladly cook him a hot meal in exchange for some modern Scandinavian design. Currently, he's in Östersund, and you follow his journey on Instagram at #eriksdesignbuss or on his blog, where he posts images of his travels as well as his work in process.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 6 Aug 2012
|
Comments (1)
Each year TEAGUE teams up with Western Washington University to help students build their knowledge of design discourse and professional practice in the discipline through a hands-on collaborative project intended to challenge current thinking and suggest new ways of looking at the world.
The 2012 design brief—Access Over Ownership—inspired two concepts: Vote+ and Local Kitchen. The team at TEAGUE was kind enough to share the results of this year's workshop with Core77. Here's a brief overview of the two projects:
LOCAL KITCHEN
Local kitchen is a public space that helps users learn to cook healthy, cost effective meals while providing a social outlet that strengthens community.
Eating used to be social and a key to reinforcing community but in recent years food and the issues that surround it have increasingly become ones of access: access to quality produce, to knowledge of how to prepare it and the financial means to purchase it. The result? Increasingly large portions of the population don't enjoy the benefits of good eating. When health and wellness concerns are added to the mix, the social benefits of providing equal access to good food becomes enormous.
Local Kitchen seeks to address the issue by reducing many of the barriers to healthy eating—specifically cost, access and knowledge. Installed at national and regional grocery stores, Local Kitchen provides enrollees the space, equipment, instruction and produce they need to learn and prepare healthy meals. The program incorporates several common features of fidelity programs with social media tools encouraging participants to discover recipes and techniques while allowing them the opportunity to meet new people.
Using the smartphone app, menu options are presented by cost and by featured produce; a promotion on salmon for example, is paired with a number of relevant recipes. Once a dish is selected users can drive the per plate price down by joining other groups or by adding friends from their Facebook account. Once an acceptable price is arranged, users can book Local Kitchen time and send invitations easily from within the Local Kitchen app or website. On the day of their reservation, users meet up in-store and divvy up shopping responsibilities taking advantage of promotions and special pricing available to program participants. Condiments and basic cooking items such as salt & pepper, butter and spices are provided free of change making the savings even more appealing.
With their ingredients collected, users check out at dedicated Local Kitchen check-in stations located at the entrance of the space.
Fully stocked stations equipped with pots and pans as well as cutting knives and other basic equipment are provided at no additional charge. Each station comes with a dedicated display that provides step-by-step instructions for promoted recipes. A central station is manned with staff prepared to demonstrate basic cooking techniques or more personalized instruction for a small premium. Similarly, specialty equipment and advanced services such as wine pairings or dessert recommendations can be provided at additional cost.
continued...
Posted by
core jr | 6 Aug 2012
|
Comments (6)
Image courtesy of Michel Boot, Delft University of Technology
This is the second article from Dr. James Self exploring designers' approaches and tools in support of a thoughtful, reflective design activity. You can read the first piece, "CAD vs. Sketching, Why Ask?" here.
Design practitioners are well-aware of and indeed exploit uncertainty as a means to facilitate design thinking, innovation and creativity. As design intentions are explored through the use of designerly tools such as sketching, design activity remains divergent, iterative and uncommitted. This ambiguous uncertainty facilitates design thinking and the exploration of often ill-defined design problems. In short, there exists a unique relationship between uncertainty and design activity. Because to design is to engage with an exploration of ideas towards the yet to be. Understanding this relationship is important if we are to develop our understanding of what it is to design.
So, what is uncertainty and what contribution can it make to design activity and design thinking?
In order to understand uncertainty as it relates to design activity it is important to first attempt to define it. The Oxford English dictionary offers the following definition:
The state of being uncertain... not able to be relied on; not known or definite.
This suggests uncertainty is a human state or emotion, a reaction to situations that are or appear to be unknown or unclear; the ambiguous. This definition of uncertainty has implied negative connotations—the natural response to uncertainty is to employ a course of action with the purpose of resolving the uncertain state; to seek the truth. In the natural sciences, where the objective is to understand the world as it is, this makes good sense. Through scientific enquiry we discover truths about our natural world. We are able to develop an understanding of how the world is.
But what if our purpose is to develop strategies, ideas and thinking towards that which does not yet exist? How should uncertainty be approached and what can this then tell us about the unique nature of designerly ways of knowing? Before addressing these questions it is worth spending a few moments to consider the slippery subject of what it is to design.
It has been well documented in previous attempts to define 'design' that the word immediately throws up challenges in coming to a consensus of its use and meaning. Ironically, the meaning of design remains uncertain! This is not the time or the place to engage in a discussion of the various semantic meanings of the word. However, for the purposes of our discussion of uncertainty in design activity, we will refer to the word design as a verb; as in to design—we are referring to the activity of designing. We can also say that the act of designing has, at its core, a requirement to adapt an existing system, process or object in a new way or to describe a new system, process or object. The designer is a futurist—they must explore, develop and present concepts and ideas towards that which may be, but does not yet exist.
So engagement in an activity of design is characterised by the exploration of the yet to be. As a result of this, design activity involves engagement with not only the unknown, as in the pursuit of knowledge in the sciences, but that which cannot be known because it does not yet exist. It is because design activity involves an exploration of the yet to be that design is unique in its relationship with uncertainty.
Related to this uniqueness, design problems may be described as ill-defined or wicked, where the solution to the problem or outcome is unknown or unclear at the start of the process. There may be more than one 'correct' solution to any given design problem. The designer's role is to explore alternatives, finally coming to the specification of a best or optimal solution.
continued...
Posted by
An Xiao Mina | 3 Aug 2012
|
Comments (0)
Paddy Donnelly designed poster, a backers gift for Kickstarting the 3rd Season of 99% Invisible. An ode to the audio cassette and a time when a pencil could solve all of our problems.
One of the coolest things about visiting a design studio and shadowing a designer is seeing their work in action. It's amazing to see a design come to life, and to watch designers ask and answer all the questions that designers do. That's also the beauty of solid design writing and journalism—the best writers are storytellers who find the tidbits that make design such a compelling field.
"I felt there was a real way to tell these stories in a cool way. And you can tell that the awareness of different aspects of design is at an all time high," said Roman Mars, the producer, host and founder of 99% Invisible, a popular radio show about design. As a host for Public Radio Exchange, Mars brought his public radio experience to the design show and met with numerous designers and architects to refine the concept.
99% Invisible host Roman Mars.
Everyone he spoke with mentioned a quote from legendary designer and innovator Buckminster Fuller, who talked about the "99% invisible" forces that shape the world and with this inspiration, the show was born. What started as a 1 minute spot soon evolved into a 4 1/2 minute radio show with even longer episodes for the popular podcast.
While it might seem difficult to talk about such visual work in an aural medium, Mars has a knack for finding the remarkable in daily life. And it's by identifying the compelling stories behind design that his program shines. In one popular episode, "Frozen Music," he talks about just how radical it was record music:
But no effect has been as world changing as that original innovation: freezing music in time onto a recording, where a single version of a song, a single performance of a song, became the song. An inherently mutable method of communication was fundamentally changed.
"That's sort of my favorite part," Mars explained, "a little factoid about something that makes you see that thing differently and that makes you appreciate it and find some kind of genius or wonder in everyday things. I tend not to cover amazing or innovative design that makes you ooh and aah."
"I kind of like to cover manhole covers," he continued. "That's more my beat."
continued...
NY DESIGN WEEK 2013 - WANTED DESIGN
NY DESIGN WEEK 2013 - SATELLITE SHOWS
NY DESIGN WEEK 2013 - ICFF
FRIEZE NEW YORK 2013
