I doubt there are many different good ways to design "trainer" shoes,
so all will have a basic overall similarity.
Likewise, when one looks at different "designer" brands, many appear
quite similar to each other.
However, apart from merely cosmetic features, fine design detail can
be expressed in terms of the geometry of the shoe -- relative size
and shape of panels, shape and thickness of sole, where the lace-holes
are, where the stitching is, etc. etc. etc.
Which leads up to the question: Suppose a new design comes on the
market and is apparenly very similar indeed to an existing design.
The manufacturer of the old design may wish to sue for infringement
of design.
Again leaving aside cosmetic aspects (such as the "label", colours),
presumably an important part would be played by comparison of geometric
measurements -- "trainermetrics" if you like. Given the slight variations
of measurement which must be inevitable in manufacturing that kind of
thing, we would seem to have a nice statistical discrimination problem
in hand.
Does anyone know of such issues arising in court, and being handled
statistically?
Of course, trainers are just one instance of things where this kind
of question could arise, and I'd be interested in similar information
for other things. (However, it did strike me that trainers could provide
a particularly delicate example).
Best wishes to all,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 167 1972
Date: 17-Mar-03 Time: 16:57:11
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
|