Apple Iphone Clone Legal or Not?

There is far too much confusion about this issue.

It is LAWFUL to manufacture and sell products that are identical to someone else's product so long as the copycat product does not infringe any valid patent, copyright, or trademark that protects the original product. To jump to the conclusion that a copycat product is "counterfeit" without first evaluating what it is that's proprietary about the original product simply ignores -- to our society's grave detriment -- the first principle that intellectual property rights are the exception, not the rule.

It is way too easy for lawyers to default to the "moral" position that a client should not exploit the work of others by selling a product that looks or functions like another's product. But the terms of patents and copyrights end for a reason: they are necessary restrictions on commerce that initially serve a motivating purpose but then become too oppressive for the value they provide. The sanctioned patent and copyright monopolies are limited -- in time and in form -- because marketplaces work best when competition is free.

The limited patent and copyright protections are society-approved "rewards" for investing in innovation. But those rewards are not only limited, they simply do NOT exist unless the innovator applies for and is then awarded them. In fact, we have codified the rule that if a patent is not sought within 12 months on a publicly-disclosed invention then that invention is expressly made part of our public domain. As for trademarks, they are limited in scope in many ways -- for example, unless "famous," their use is exclusive only on particular products, no trademark rights exist at all if the mark is functional, and if the mark is not used for some time it becomes abandoned and free for anyone to use. Intellectual property rights are far more limited than most general practice attorneys believe.

So, while I have no idea what particular patents, copyrights, and trademarks protect Apple's iPhone, I do know that everyone else is free to make and sell other cell phones so long as those phones do not infringe a valid patent, copyright, or trademark. Intellectual property attorneys spend a lot of time advising clients on how to "design around" the protections that cover their competitors' products.

Our retail small businesses are clearly in a tough spot --- they need to sell products that consumers want at a price that generates a profit. And so they often end up distributing products that DO infringe another's patent, copyright, or trademark because their supplier feeds them infringing products. Which means that both the supplier AND the retailer become infringers. Business attorneys need to involve themselves in their retail client's purchase decisions far more than what I've experienced in my practice.