It has said it will aggressively pursue investments and acquisitions in new areas such as healthcare and renewable energy.

At paragraph 41 of Dyson, Arnold J expressed a qualification to the idea that a markedly different design always gets a broad scope of protection. If the design is based on new technology which brings new design constraints then the differences between the design and the existing corpus based on old technology might have little relevance when it comes to comparing a subsequent design based on the new technology with the registered design. Apple submitted that this was correct. I agree. Its plight is a potential opportunity for the electronics industry, which has been pushing into healthcare. Rademaker, J. H., Kleijn, R., & Yongxiang, Y. (2013) ‘Recycling as a Strategy against Rare Earth Element Criticality: A Systemic Evaluation of the Potential Yield of NdFeB Magnet Recycling’, Environmental Science & Technology, 47: 10129–10136.

Changes over time for: The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2013

Nansai, K., Nakajima, K., Kagawa, S., Kondo, Y., Suh, S., Shigetomi, Y., & Oshita, Y. (2014) ‘Global Flows of Critical Metals Necessary for Low-Carbon Technologies: The Case of Neodymium, Cobalt, and Platinum’, Environmental Science & Technology. doi: 10.1021/es4033452. In 1994, he returned to the US to manage TI’s microcontroller organisation. Later, he led the ASIC business. He joined TI’s field sales organisation in 1984, with responsibility for growing the company’s business with automobile manufacturers. In 1990, he moved to Germany to lead the European automotive sales force, managing teams and customer relationships in France, Germany, Italy, England and Spain. Morrison, W. M., & Tang, R. (2012) ‘China’s Rare Earth Industry and Export Regime: Economic and Trade Implications for the United States’, CRS Report for Congress: Congressional Research Service. Kara, H., Chapman, A., Crichton, T., Willis, P., Morley, N. (2010) Lanthanide Resources and Alternatives. A Report for Department for Transport and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, UK: Oakdene Hollins. Available at: http://www.oakdenehollins.co.uk/media/205/lanthanide_resources_and_alternatives_may_2010.pdf (Accessed October 2013)

iv) He is interested in the products concerned and shows a relatively high degree of attention when he uses them ( PepsiCo paragraph 59); Samsung's case on the facts is that the design corpus in this case as at 24 May 2004 is represented by the designs making up Schedule A to its Particulars of Claim. This is a list of 51 designs. The first item on the list is an "Etch-A-Sketch". This is a child's toy which has been available since the 1960s. It is plainly not a handheld or tablet computer, nor even a computer monitor nor electronic photoframe. It has no electronic screen at all. However I did not hear detailed argument on this point and Apple did not dispute that the design corpus in this case included all the items in Schedule A (save for one which post-dated the design). The case has been argued on that footing and I will work on that basis. That means that no issue of law arises before me on content of the design corpus and I do not need to consider the law on that question.Seaman, J. (2010) ‘Rare Earths and Clean Energy: Analyzing China’s Upper Hand’, IFRI, Gouvernance européenne et géopolitique de l’énergie. Designs dictated solely by function• Article 8(1) excludes from protection features of appearance that are dictated solely by function. Since these proceedings have been expedited, Samsung does not pursue the allegation that any of the seven features of the design in suit as defined by Apple are dictated solely by function. The trend makes sense for social networks: With 800 million people already on Facebook, its growth is bound to slow. But if sharing becomes automatic, the volume of content on Facebook will grow at an accelerated pace. There’s a big problem, however: Users may be “creeped out” by all this automated sharing of their Web activity and grow suspicious of the apps using it. Although the precisely rectangular shape of the screen has led the designer of this device to create a broadly rectangular product, the article has curved sides and is not symmetrical on two axes. It has a mirror plane of symmetry running vertically but no mirror plane of symmetry running horizontally. But getting chips qualified and designed into products, all the certification,

design freedom may be constrained by (i) the technical function of the product or an element thereof, (ii) the need to incorporate features common to such products and/or (iii) economic considerations (e. g. the need for the item to be inexpensive)."• Category (i) is common ground. Apple submitted that categories (ii) and (iii) are very much open to doubt but I have not found it necessary to explore that question on the facts of this case. Sony, Fujifilm and Terumo declined comment, though Sony boss Howard Stringer had said this week the Olympus situation was still evolving and he could not comment. Evil Mad Scientist: A weekly updated blog that delivers electronics projects (and other "maker"-type stuff) with wit, ingenuity, and open-source ethos. as regards the assessment of the overall impression produced by the designs at issue on the informed user, the latter will automatically disregard elements 'that are totally banal and common to all examples of the type of product in issue' and will concentrate on features 'that are arbitrary or different from the norm'."• Apple submitted that this showed that a design feature need not be unique to be relevant. It is only disregarded if it is totally banal. Thus, Apple submitted, for a feature to be relevant it merely needs to differ from the norm and by logical extension, the greater the difference from the norm, the more weight to be attached to it. The point of this submission is to challenge the manner in which Apple contended Samsung was advancing its case. I do not think Apple's characterisation of Samsung's case was entirely accurate but in any case I accept Apple's submission on the law at least as follows. The degree to which a feature is common in the design corpus is a relevant consideration. At one extreme will be a unique feature not in the prior art at all, at the other extreme will be a banal feature found in every example of the type. In between there will be features which are fairly common but not ubiquitous or quite rare but not unheard of. These considerations go to the weight to be attached to the feature, always bearing in mind that the issue is all about what the items look like and that the appearance of features falling within a given descriptive phrase may well vary.

Electronic components

However although the informed user would recognise that feature (ii) is present in the design corpus, I do not accept it is so common as to be regarded as banal or commonplace. It is less common than feature (i). To illustrate the point there are examples from the design corpus which have feature (i) but not feature (ii) such as TC1000. Another example of variation around this theme is Stevenson, which has a flat transparent surface out to the rim but the front of the unit is then curved at the edges away from the screen. Why does this matter? As developers tire of building applications for every operating system out there – from Android to iOS to Windows Phone and beyond – HTML5 offers the opportunity to build an app once and have it work everywhere. The overall impressions compared• I remind myself that the informed user is particularly observant, shows a relatively high degree of attention and in this case conducts a direct comparison between the products. Samsung has targeted healthcare for growth as it diversifies away from businesses where it commands leading positions such as electric components, mobile phones and TVs.