DESIGN PATENTS FOR IMAGE INTERFACES

251 Journal of Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 251-259 (2017) DESIGN PATENTS FOR IMAGE INTERFACES Rain Chen 1, * Thomas C. Blair 2 Sung-Yun Shen 3 Hsiu-Ching Lu 4 1 Department of Visual Communication Design Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology Tainan, Taiwan 710, R.O.C. 2 Department of Art and Design National Taipei University of Education Taipei, Taiwan 106, R.O.C. 3 Graduate School of Digital Content and Applied Design Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology Tainan, Taiwan 710, R.O.C. 4 Department of Styling and Cosmetology Tainan University of Technology Tainan, Taiwan 710, R.O.C. Key Words: design patent, image interface, image icon, and interface patent. ABSTRACT Designing patent image interface research has been done for many years and in many different ways. The research samples in this study were selected from 2006 to 2014 from the United States of America (USA) patents official image database. The study aims to analyze image interface patents within the USA to give an expected development outline for other countries what interested in such design patents. A total of 373 samples were selected for this study. The research results were concluded as follows: (1) The application categories of image interface focus more on tablet computers and no-vectors. It is also worth noting that quantity of image interface patents of no-vectors has been the fastest diversifying development trend of image interface and is greater than that of any other tablet computers applications. (2) In regard to the analysis of patentees, Microsoft was the first enterprise to present its patent layout for image interface, and to certain extent, it had created barriers blocking the entry of other enterprises. (3) As for quantity of design patents, seven drawings are most commonly found in the USA s image patent gazette. Such a result also conforms with European Union s regulations. I. INTRODUCTION With the rapid development and maturity of industrial and technology, more consumers begin to put more demand on exterior design of the products. Therefore, many mobile manufacturers such as Apple, Samsung, HTC, Sony, etc. all started to compete in patent design domain, and product s exterior design is considered as a major protection object for them. In the past 10 years, many important studies had published on patents design but most only focus on the scope of similarity within design patents [1] and patent layouts using the design patent map [2, 3]. Therefore, in this research we focus on the gradually increasing design patents as a product for competitive tactic. There re so many laws which are related to intellectual property right, such as Patent Act [4], Trademark Act [5], and Copyright Act [6] just to name a few, but the rights which it protect are very different among them. Hence, Patent Act *Corresponding author: Rain Chen, e-mail: ocean@stust.edu.tw

252 Journal of Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4 Fig. 2 Cell phone interface design Fig. 1 Design patent schematic diagram is to protect inventors rights. Trademark Act is to protect commercial usage. The Copyright Act protects creators economic rights. Concerning design patents, they all fall under the same Patent Act, nevertheless, the essentials of what it protects intersect parts of the Patent Act, Trademark Act, and Copyright Act [7]. What is most in common with most design patent laws among different countries, is that they all only focus on the visual appearance of products [8]. We used USA cell phone design patents [9] as an example here to explain how patents work (See Fig. 1 for method of manifestation). The schematic diagram shows the appearance from all visual aspects; however, it does not include the functionality aspects of the design. In 2013, Gartner identified the Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends of the future, predicting that smart phones and tablet computers would be one of main development trends of the future. In the future mobile devices would become prevalent. They would replace computers and become a major web-browsing tool [10]. Fig. 2 is a famous mobile interface design case [11]. In 2013, Gartner identified the Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends. At the same time, he also forecasted that the market would move more and more toward social networking, mobile devices, cloud usage, and information, and it would drive ongoing changes, provide new opportunities, and create demands for advanced programmable infrastructure that can execute at web-scale. Gartner suggested that developers who focus on expanding user interface models would include voice and video functions that can connect people through a variety of new ways [12]. Such forecasts may prompt organizations to revise their design patent strategies. With the above development trends and forecasts, developers should pay more attention to the design of image interfaces and icons that can be applied directly by users. The design of image interfaces and icons should stress a user-friendly interface and how effective icon recognition is because these features are directly related to the operation of image interfaces and image icons. In the high-tech world of the 21 st century, new types of design patents for image interfaces and icons have become increasingly popular in the countries such as USA, Japan, Korean, etc. The evidence has showed many companies have begun to focus more and more on patent analysis only for the strategic value of their products. A famous case which can demonstrating this point is the ongoing patent infringement between Apple Inc. and Samsung Inc., in which several design patents are involved to its image interfaces and icons. Hence, other large companies such as Microsoft and Sony are also active in the patent protection of image interfaces and icons. In addition, on January 1, 2013, the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) announced the new version of substantive examination guidelines for invention patents. In 1996, the United States Patent and Trademark Office first issued an examination guideline for images and icons, in which images and icons were granted as a design patent. However, was not until 2005 that the image interfaces were further granted as a design patent, and the examination guidelines concerning changeable images and icons were later included in 2006 by the United States Patent and Trademark Office [13, 14]. However, the ripple effect also had an impact on Japan Patent Office. Which in adopt the concept registration and application guides for design patent in 2004, which not only loosened the definition of design patent but had display covered in the design patent morphology. In 2006, Japan design patent regulations were once again further revised to include icon design.

Chen R., T. C. Blair, S.-Y. Shen & H.-C. Lu: Design Patents for Image Interfaces 253 Fig. 4 Example of image icon Fig. 3 Example of image interface In 2001, the European Union had passed a European Union community design regulations which can officially protect image interfaces and viewing image symbols as products. Then in 2003, the Korean Intellectual Property Office revised the examination guidelines for design patent to cover products with icon design in design patent protection. This ripple effect affected many other countries such as Australia, Brazil, and Canada which all had included image interfaces or icons in design patent in 2004, 2005, and 2010 respectively [15]. After 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office presented the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, in which image and icons become defined as 2D images. Since a patentable design is inseparable from the object which is applied to, and cannot exist alone as a scheme of surface ornamentation, an image therefore and icon must be shown on a computer screen, monitor, and/or other displays to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 171 [16]. However, in new versions of the TIPO s Invention Patent Substantive Examination Guidelines, image interfaces and icons were defined as interfaces that display virtual graphics through electronics, computers, or other information product devices [17]. The image interface is a complete frame composed of several icons and a background, as shown in Fig. 3 [18]; an image and icon, on the other hand, is a single icon, as shown in Fig. 4 [19]. The focus on design patents of image interfaces and icons has pushed by many modern researchers to explore this field more and more in depth. Some of the topics are the segments of image interfaces and icons by the coding and patent application cases in the USA [20]. According to past research analyses, design patents of image interface and icons had been developed rapidly within the USA [21]. Hence, smart phone lawsuits between Samsung and Apple over past 10 years have driven both enterprises to strive for design patents, and several of those patents are related to image interfaces [22]. However, in the field of design patent research, there is still a great lack of discussion on how design patent applications of image interface design should be viewed. Therefore, this research attempts to analyze the graphical patent gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office and uses the keyword animated to search for patents with the keywords within their names. All collected patent samples must have the keywords within their patent names. These samples were then analyzed to understand the development trend of design patents for image interfaces in the USA after the design patent was open to application. II. DESIGN PATENT SAMPLE OF IMAGE INTERFACE The international classification of the Locarno Agreement in industrial design was first used in 1968 [23]. Nowadays, monitor displays and icons are also included in the category D14 of Locarno Agreement and are further divided into image interfaces and icons according to their serial numbers. However, there are two big problems when screening and analyzing the USA patent data with the Locarno Agreement. First, design patents of image interfaces and icons are not necessarily classified into the category of D14. Secondly, because the Locarno Agreement classification serial numbers are not recorded in the USA patent data, the image interfaces and icons therefore cannot be easily distinguished [20]. In this research, the samples were acquired from the patent gazette on the United States Patent and Trademark Office s patent database. In order to define the source samples, this study used the U.S. Patent Classification for sample screening and analysis, which includes U.S. Patent Classification s D14 class as well as No. 485, 486, 487, and 488, which are of the image interface category. The content of No. 485 is Generated image. The content of No. 486 is

254 Journal of Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4 Table 1 Sample of Image Interface PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs D677678 14-04 C-485 9 D651609 14-04 A-486 12 D678899 14-04 C-487 9 D698799 14-04 C-486 10 D678301 14-04 C-485 7 D654504 14-04 A-486 26 D679723 14-04 C-487 10 D698811 14-04 C-488 20 D691617 14-04 C-485 6 D654925 32-00 D-488 2 D679724 14-04 C-488 12 D698812 14-04 D-488 7 D703220 14-04 C-485 3 D655719 14-04 D-486 7 D679725 14-04 C-488 5 D698813 14-04 C-488 10 D708192 14-04 D-485 3 D656504 32-00 D-485 8 D681051 14-04 D-487 10 D698814 14-04 C-488 4 D522016 14-04 A-488 40 D656505 32-00 D-485 23 D681660 14-04 D-488 3 D698815 14-04 C-488 5 D524322 14-04 A-488 30 D656506 32-00 D-485 26 D681660 14-04 B-488 3 D699739 14-04 C-486 7 D525985 14-04 A-488 24 D656507 32-00 D-485 9 D682847 14-04 C-485 22 D699743 14-04 B-488 12 D526325 14-04 A-486 50 D656941 32-00 D-485 16 D682873 14-04 B-488 16 D699744 14-04 C-488 18 D526327 14-04 A-488 34 D656942 32-00 D-485 4 D682874 14-04 B-488 20 D699745 14-04 C-488 9 D527010 14-04 A-486 16 D656950 32-00 D-488 6 D682875 14-04 B-488 14 D699746 14-04 C-488 10 D528123 14-04 A-486 8 D656952 32-00 D-488 4 D683356 14-04 C-486 1 D699747 14-04 C-488 6 D528554 14-04 A-486 16 D657367 32-00 E-485 17 D684988 14-02 C-486 6 D699748 14-04 C-488 10 D529040 14-04 D-488 10 D658195 32-00 D-486 4 D684989 14-02 C-486 5 D699749 14-04 C-488 13 D530339 14-04 B-488 3 D658199 32-00 A-486 19 D685389 14-02 C-486 13 D699750 14-04 C-488 5 D539299 14-04 D-485 10 D658201 14-04 A-486 26 D685817 14-04 D-487 2 D699751 14-04 C-488 14 D539300 14-04 D-485 8 D658203 14-04 D-488 12 D686223 14-02 C-486 23 D699752 14-04 C-488 6 D539301 14-04 D-485 15 D658673 14-04 A-488 5 D686224 14-02 C-486 7 D700207 14-04 C-488 21 D539302 14-04 D-485 9 D658674 14-04 A-488 6 D686231 14-02 C-486 12 D701238 14-04 D-488 11 D540810 14-04 D-485 7 D658675 14-04 A-488 24 D686235 14-02 C-486 18 D701517 14-04 B-486 36 D544492 14-04 D-485 9 D658676 14-04 A-488 28 D686236 14-02 C-486 9 D701518 14-04 B-486 22 D550238 14-04 D-488 7 D658677 14-04 A-488 26 D686237 14-02 C-486 13 D701866 14-04 C-485 9 D557272 14-04 E-487 7 D658678 14-04 A-488 18 D686633 14-04 A-485 2 D703689 14-04 B-486 3 D558220 14-04 E-487 7 D660860 32-00 D-485 22 D687047 14-04 E-485 9 D703691 14-04 C-488 5 D565579 14-04 E-485 13 D661702 32-00 D-488 10 D687051 14-02 C-486 6 D704720 14-04 B-485 3 D567249 14-04 E-485 23 D662942 14-04 A-488 48 D687056 14-04 D-488 8 D704726 14-04 B-486 3 D570364 14-04 D-487 7 D663311 32-00 D-487 5 D687057 14-04 D-488 6 D704729 14-04 B-488 33 D593578 14-04 A-488 7 D663312 32-00 D-487 4 D687058 14-04 D-488 11 D704730 14-04 C-488 13 D594022 14-04 A-488 6 D663314 32-00 D-487 7 D687059 14-04 D-488 8 D704731 14-04 C-488 10 D594023 14-04 A-488 6 D663740 32-00 A-486 21 D687446 14-04 B-485 30 D706788 14-04 C-485 3 D594024 14-04 A-488 6 D664550 14-04 A-485 8 D687448 14-04 B-485 14 D706806 14-04 E-488 4 D594026 14-04 A-488 7 D664552 32-00 A-486 21 D687453 14-02 C-486 7 D706808 14-04 C-488 7 D597101 32-00 B-488 7 D664553 32-00 A-486 21 D687840 14-04 B-485 14 D707235 14-04 B-485 10 D598460 32-00 D-485 8 D664555 32-00 A-487 13 D688264 14-04 D-488 5 D707249 14-04 D-488 22 D598466 32-00 D-485 7 D664558 32-00 A-487 8 D688676 14-04 D-486 2 D707251 14-04 D-488 4 D598925 32-00 D-485 7 D664561 14-04 A-488 48 D688680 14-02 C-486 20 D707252 14-04 D-488 4 D598926 32-00 D-485 7 D664967 14-04 A-485 6 D688690 14-04 D-488 6 D707253 14-04 D-488 5 D598928 32-00 D-485 6 D664968 14-04 A-485 10 D688691 14-04 C-488 20 D708206 14-04 D-488 6 D599812 32-00 D-488 6 D664971 32-00 A-486 17 D688692 14-04 C-488 5 D708207 14-04 D-488 3 D599813 32-00 D-488 6 D664972 32-00 A-486 9 D689063 14-04 C-485 6 D708630 14-04 D-486 4 D601573 32-00 D-488 8 D664973 14-04 A-486 26 D689070 14-04 C-486 7 D708631 14-04 D-486 4 D601574 32-00 D-488 10 D664975 32-00 B-487 10 D689079 14-04 C-486 6 D708632 14-04 D-488 16 D601575 32-00 D-488 10 D664984 14-04 A-488 17 D689080 14-04 C-486 6 D709082 14-04 C-486 6 D601576 32-00 D-488 7 D664986 14-04 C-488 7 D689083 14-04 C-486 12 D709083 14-04 C-486 6 D601577 32-00 D-488 13 D664987 14-04 A-488 48 D689084 14-04 C-486 12 D709086 14-04 D-488 8 D602027 32-00 D-485 5 D664988 14-04 A-488 26 D689085 14-04 C-486 14 D709517 14-04 C-486 16 D602028 32-00 D-485 8 D665395 14-04 A-485 9 D689505 14-04 B-485 9 D709518 14-04 C-486 6 D602497 32-00 D-488 10 D665414 32-00 A-488 4 D689885 14-04 C-485 6 D709519 14-04 C-486 3 D602498 32-00 D-488 89 D666625 14-04 A-485 6 D689889 14-04 B-486 10 D710367 14-04 B-485 4 D604308 32-00 E-486 3 D667422 14-04 D-488 19 D689890 14-04 B-486 20 D710373 14-04 C-486 4 D604319 32-00 A-488 5 D667423 14-04 D-488 16 D689891 14-04 C-486 6 D710374 14-04 C-486 16 D604321 32-00 A-488 6 D667424 14-04 C-488 5 D689895 32-00 D-486 3 D710376 14-04 D-487 7 D604323 32-00 A-488 7 D668260 14-04 B-488 18 D689899 14-04 C-488 11 D710877 14-04 D-488 8 D604324 32-00 A-488 5 D668261 14-04 B-488 16 D689900 14-04 C-488 10 D711396 14-04 C-485 10 D609715 32-00 B-486 3 D668262 14-04 C-488 24 D689901 14-04 C-488 22 D711419 14-04 A-487 16 D613300 32-00 B-488 18 D668671 14-04 A-488 10 D690320 14-04 B-488 20 D711908 14-04 D-487 14 D614640 14-04 D-486 7 D669486 14-04 D-485 16 D690719 14-04 E-485 6 D712422 14-04 D-486 12 D614641 14-04 D-486 5 D669906 14-04 D-485 3 D690727 14-04 D-487 4 D712426 14-04 E-486 4 D614643 14-04 D-486 5 D670713 14-04 D-485 3 D691170 14-04 D-487 17 D712429 14-04 C-488 6 D615989 32-00 B-488 13 D670726 32-00 D-487 7 D691173 14-04 D-488 5 D712912 14-04 B-486 3 D616458 32-00 D-488 7 D671127 14-04 B-487 24 D691629 14-04 D-488 8 D712920 14-04 D-487 5 D616460 32-00 D-488 7 D671134 14-04 B-487 10 D692019 14-04 D-488 14 D712921 14-04 C-488 69

Chen R., T. C. Blair, S.-Y. Shen & H.-C. Lu: Design Patents for Image Interfaces 255 PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs PN LA SC IMs D621848 14-04 B-488 4 D671141 14-04 B-487 10 D692448 14-04 C-486 11 D712922 14-04 C-488 36 D621849 14-04 B-488 2 D671557 14-04 B-487 8 D693354 14-02 C-486 12 D713412 14-04 E-485 2 D624557 14-04 A-488 9 D673167 14-04 B-487 28 D693356 14-04 C-486 9 D714314 14-04 C-485 4 D624932 14-04 B-488 18 D673168 14-04 B-487 20 D693359 14-04 D-486 1 D714320 14-04 C-485 7 D625326 14-04 A-488 21 D673172 14-04 B-487 18 D693363 14-04 D-488 5 D714322 14-04 C-485 22 D626131 32-00 B-485 12 D674406 14-04 D-488 7 D693829 14-04 C-485 4 D714324 14-04 C-485 8 D627361 32-00 A-485 7 D675222 14-04 B-487 18 D693830 14-04 C-485 7 D714325 14-04 C-485 6 D627364 14-04 D-488 3 D675222 14-04 B-487 18 D693831 14-04 C-485 7 D714821 14-04 C-487 5 D628580 32-00 D-488 18 D675223 14-02 B-487 20 D693832 14-04 C-485 5 D715317 14-04 D-486 7 D634753 32-00 A-488 5 D675223 14-02 B-487 20 D693833 14-04 E-485 5 D715827 14-04 D-487 14 D635990 32-00 D-485 24 D675224 14-04 C-488 6 D693840 14-04 C-486 1 D715829 14-04 E-488 4 D640272 32-00 B-487 24 D675224 14-04 C-488 6 D693841 14-04 D-488 5 D715830 14-04 E-488 4 D640273 32-00 B-487 10 D675225 14-04 D-488 14 D694770 14-04 C-485 6 D716318 14-04 B-485 3 D640274 32-00 B-487 18 D675226 14-04 D-488 9 D694775 14-02 C-486 6 D716319 14-04 B-485 4 D640282 32-00 B-487 18 D675227 14-04 D-488 7 D695775 14-04 D-488 28 D716320 14-04 B-485 5 D640283 32-00 B-487 10 D675228 14-04 D-488 8 D695776 14-04 C-488 10 D716321 14-04 B-485 4 D640284 32-00 B-487 22 D675638 14-02 B-487 22 D695777 14-04 C-488 10 D716322 14-04 E-485 2 D641372 32-00 A-486 14 D675638 14-02 B-487 22 D695778 14-04 C-488 14 D716340 14-04 D-488 3 D642192 32-00 B-487 10 D675640 14-04 D-488 12 D695779 14-04 C-488 14 D717312 14-04 D-485 7 D642587 14-04 D-485 8 D675641 14-04 D-488 12 D695780 14-04 C-488 14 D717336 14-04 D-487 11 D643438 32-00 A-486 8 D675642 14-04 D-488 5 D695781 14-04 C-488 14 D717826 14-04 D-487 5 D643850 32-00 B-487 28 D675643 14-04 D-488 8 D697525 14-04 E-487 7 D717827 14-04 D-487 11 D643851 32-00 B-487 18 D675644 14-04 D-488 30 D697526 14-04 D-487 6 D717828 14-04 D-487 5 D644240 32-00 B-487 18 D676457 14-04 D-488 9 D697528 14-04 C-488 25 D718328 14-04 B-486 10 D648344 14-04 B-486 34 D676861 14-02 C-486 4 D697924 14-04 E-485 7 D718329 14-04 B-487 3 D648345 14-04 B-486 24 D676862 14-02 C-486 6 D697925 14-04 E-485 6 D718330 14-04 B-487 4 D648347 14-04 B-488 6 D676864 14-02 C-486 7 D697926 14-04 E-485 4 D718331 14-04 D-487 5 D648735 14-04 B-486 32 D677180 10-04 E-486 9 D697927 14-04 E-485 2 D718332 14-04 D-487 11 D649155 14-04 B-488 26 D677677 14-04 C-485 3 D697940 14-04 D-487 7 D718333 14-04 D-487 11 D650790 32-00 D-488 25 D677679 14-04 C-485 6 D698360 14-04 E-485 3 D650791 32-00 A-488 22 D677680 14-04 C-485 10 D698797 14-02 C-486 20 D651608 32-00 E-485 15 D678899 14-04 C-487 7 D698798 14-02 C-486 15 * PN: Patent Number; LA: Locarno Agreement; SC: Sample Code; IMs: Images Drop down menu or full screen menu category. The content of No. 487 is Button bar or scroll category. The content of No. 486 is Plural image or array. Next, open patent cases between 1976 and 2014 related to D14/485, D14/486, D14/487, and D14/488 in the United States Patent Classification were manually retrieved, with repeat patents removed. This part of the study explored image interfaces, and the patent retrieval scope focused on patent titles with animated keywords. Finally, a total of 373 image interface design patent cases from 2006 to 2014 were picked as research samples (See Table 1). Frequency Fig. 5 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 113 104 68 27 22 17 10 9 3 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year Application frequency of image interface design patents III. RESULTS In this research, 373 samples were analyzed for image interfaces related to the US design patents in terms of (1) the application categories of image interfaces, (2) patentee(s), and (3) drawings that included in patent cases. 1. Analysis of Annual Growth Trend of Image Interface Patent The analysis is based on data regarding the frequency within image interface patent between 2006 and 2014. The highest image interface application frequency (N = 113) happened in 2013, while the lowest (N = 3) happened in 2008. The frequency of image design patent applications was plotted to show the yearly growth trend from 2006 to 2014 (See Fig. 5).

256 Journal of Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4 Table 2 Frequency Analysis of Image Interface Application Categories Sample Code 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Rank A-485 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 1 0 7 15 A-486 4 0 0 0 0 2 10 0 0 16 10 A-487 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 18 A-488 4 0 0 9 2 2 13 0 0 30 4 B-485 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 7 12 12 B-486 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 6 12 13 B-487 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 2 26 6 B-488 1 0 0 1 5 2 2 5 2 18 9 C-485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 9 23 7 C-486 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 11 39 3 C-487 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 16 C-488 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 15 22 40 2 D-485 0 6 0 7 0 2 10 0 2 27 5 D-486 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 3 4 12 14 D-487 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4 13 22 8 D-488 1 1 0 9 4 1 7 24 12 59 1 E-485 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 3 7 14 11 E-486 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 3 17 E-487 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 19 E-488 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 20 Total 10 9 3 27 17 22 68 113 104 373 - Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 - - Frequency Category A 60 50 40 Category B Category C Category D Category E 39 40 30 30 27 26 23 22 20 14 16 18 12 12 12 10 7 3 3 4 3 3 0 485 486 487 488 U.S.P.C. Generated image Fig. 6 Drop down menu or full screen menu categore Button bar or scroll category 59 Plural image or array Category and frequency of image interface patent 2. Analysis of Application Category of Image Interface Patent Based on Table 1, No. 485, 486, 487, and 488 in the United States Patent Classification of D14 were analyzed for image interface patents. According to the application categories, the researchers manually picked the research samples and classified image interface into (1) Category A: PC, (2) Category B: cell phone, (3) Category C: tablet computers, (4) Category D: no-vectors, and (5) Category E: other vectors. The image interface classification statistics are shown in Fig. 6. In regard to the image interface classification, the top four classification numbers with the highest frequency in a descending order are No. 488 (frequency = 150), 485 (frequency = 83), 486 (frequency = 82), and 487 (frequency = 58). The C-486 (frequency = 28) was the most frequently applied category in 2013, and drop down menu or full screen menu category design for tablet computers (Category C) was the most popular category. The C-488 (frequency = 22) was the most frequently applied category in 2014, and plural image or array design for tablet computers (Category C) was the most popular category. The A-488 (frequency = 13) was the most frequently applied category in 2012, and plural image or array design for PC (Category A) was the most

Chen R., T. C. Blair, S.-Y. Shen & H.-C. Lu: Design Patents for Image Interfaces 257 Frequency Fig. 7 Frequency Fig. 8 240 200 160 120 80 40 0 Microsoft 240 200 160 120 80 40 0 242(64.88%) 22(5.90%) 15(4.02%) Apple NIKE Samaung Cisco Technology 7(1.88%) 7(1.88%) 14(3.75%) 10(2.68%) 9(2.41%) Nest Labs 8(2.14%) American Sony 7(1.88%) Teleconferencing Service Deere & Company PepsiCo Company Application frequency of image interface design patents of patentees 41(10.99%) 39(10.46%) 7 drawings 6 drawings 5 drawings 29(7.77%) 29(7.77%) 25(6.70%) 23(6.17%) 19(5.09%) 14(3.75%) 14(3.75%) 12(3.22%) 10 drawings 4 drawings 3 drawings 8 drawings 14 drawings 18 drawings 12 drawings Number of drawings Number of drawings in image interface patents (top 10) popular category. The D-488 (frequency = 9) and A-488 (frequency = 9) were the most frequently applied categories in 2009, and plural image or array design for no-vectors (Category D) and PC (Category A) were the most popular categories. The B-487 (frequency = 10) was the most frequently applied category in 2011, and button bar or scroll category design for cell phone (Category B) was the most popular category. The B-488 (frequency = 5) was the most frequently applied category in 2010, and plural image or array for cell phone (Category B) was the most popular category. More details are shown in Table 2. The image interface application categories for C-486 (frequency = 28), D-488 (frequency = 24), C-488 (frequency = 22) etc. between 2006 and 2014 accounts for 48.79% of the total research samples. 3. Analysis of Patentees Regarding the analysis on patentees, Microsoft was the first to apply for image design patents in 2006; Apple was the second. Microsoft (frequency = 242) was the most frequent applicant, and Apple was the second (frequency = 22). Detailed data are shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 9 No-vectors (Category D) sample 4. Analysis of Design Patent Drawing In terms of image, patent drawing is considered critical in design patent lawsuits. However, except European Union, no other countries, regulate the number of drawings to be included in design patent cases. The number of drawings of image interface patents was analyzed in this study, and seven drawings (10.99%) were treated as the focus here. It was found from analyzing samples that 10.46% of them had six drawings, 7.77% with five and ten drawings, 6.70% with four drawings, 6.17% with three drawings, and 5.09% with eight drawings. Over half of patent applications for image interfaces include three to ten drawings with 54.95% of the studied samples. See Fig. 8 for more details. IV. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION As far as the 373 USA image patent samples between 2006 and 2014 is concerned, 120 of them applied for image interface of no-vectors (Category D) and are classified into No. 485, 486, 487, and 488 (See Fig. 9) [23]. From the above, it showed that unspecified objects are actually an optimal method for design patent protection. As all possible objects of an image can be protected, the protection scope of design patent is expanded. Unspecified objects are likely to be a development trend for image design patents in the future. When analyzing the USA image patent samples between 2006 to 2014, it was found that the application frequency of image patents increased annually. In the analysis of annual image interface, the annual quantity of image interface increases. It showed that image interface patent applications might continue to increase in the future. On other hand, analysis of patentees showed that Microsoft had the highest number of image interface design patents; Apple was the second. In addition, Microsoft presented the image interface patent layout earlier in 2006, while Apple only started to apply for the design patent of image interfaces and icons in 2009. The number of drawings included in design patent cases

258 Journal of Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4 was analyzed in this study, with most cases containing seven drawings. Such a result had conformed to the regulations on the number of drawings regulated by the European Union. The results showed that for an image interface, patent systems worldwide should allow between three to ten drawings, and that is suitable for over 54% of patent applications. Apart from the European Union restricting the number of drawings for images and Japan s regulations on the drawings of the objects (a six-sided figure and a reference diagram), there is no relevant number of drawings restrictions in the USA, Taiwan, and Korea. The research results could be an important reference for cross-border patent applications of image interfaces all over the world. In most cases, the USA s image design patents have two key categories of image interfaces, which are tablet computers (Category C) and no-vectors (Category D). Image interfaces would be the global mainstream of image design patent applications in the future. Design patent layouts would be more important as image interface design patents have become recognized as a key competitive strategy. In addition to technological patents, image interface design patents are likely to be another highly competitive patent domain in the future. The key focus of this study is on image interface patents under design patents. In the past, core protection of design patents focused entirely on the appearance and shape of an object. But with the increasing prevalence and maturity of mobile user interface design, computer games, virtual reality, and augmented reality, design patents no longer play a minor role in the field of patents, but has rather become an important player. It will lead product design trends and come into the mainstream market in the future. Based on the research results, image interface patents shall be climbing up to the peak period of patent application, and there shall be changes in the industry of fashion goods design in virtue of this patent category. REFERENCES 1. Chen, R., H. T. Kuo, and M. H. Wang. 2013. Determining Design Patent Similarity Based on the Ordinary Observer Test. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 18 (6): 548-555. 2. Chen, R., C. C. Chen, and B. B. Yau. 2014. Patent Anaysis with Innovative Patent Map System. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 12 (2): 917-923. doi: 10.11591/telkomnika.v12i2.4175. 3. Chen, R., and C. C. Chen. 2013. Framework of Populace Survey-enabled Design Patent Map Systems. Information- An International Interdisciplinary Journal 16 (1): 549-554. 4. Patent Act, R.O.C., 21, 58, 59, 104, 121, 122, 124, 127 (2014). 5. Trademark Act, R.O.C., 18 (2011). 6. Copyright Act, R.O.C., 5 (2014). 7. Chen, R. 2014. Intellectual Property Right Course Teaching Using Infringement Practice as the Core. Journal of Communications and Networking 4 (9): 56-67. 8. Chen, Y. M. 2012. A Study on the Differences of the Amended Design Patent Law. Master Thesis, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology. 9. Lee, K. J. 2014. Mobile Terminal. US Patent D701,846. 10. Gartner. 2012. Gartner Identifies the Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2013. Gartner. Accessed February 18. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2209615. 11. Dellinger, R. 2014. Display Screen or Portion Thereof with Graphical User Interface. US Patent D704,212. 12. Gartner. 2013. Gartner Identifies the Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2014. Gartner. Accessed February 18. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2603623. 13. Yeh, H. M. 2009. Parsing the U.S., Japan and the EU s Design Patent Application Practice of GUI and ICONS (I) - Part U.S. Journal of North America Intellectual Property 30: 1-16. 14. Yeh, H. M. 2011. Parsing the Animated Image and Computer Graphics on Design Patent Protection. Journal of North America Intellectual Property 49: 1-26. 15. Wei, H. L. 2013. Design Patent Trend Analysis of GUI and ICONS. Journal of Intellectual Property Right 169: 6-54. 16. United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2014. 1504.01(a) Computer-Generated Icons [R-07.2015]. United States Patent and Trademark Office. Accessed March 1. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/ s1504.html#d0e152415. 17. Taiwan Intellectual Property Office. 2017. Design Patent Examination Guidelines. Taiwan Intellectual Property Office. Accessed June 5. https://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp? xitem=522507&ctnode=6680&mp=1. 18. Ibsies, F. 2017. Display Screen with Transitional Dental Structure Graphical User Interface. US Patent D779,558. 19. Masaki, T., and M. Nishio, 2016. Display Screen with Computer-Generated Icon Images. US Patent D765,680. 20. Wideband IP Office. 2013. Icon Design of Design Patent. Wideband IP Office. Accessed March 1. http:// www.wipo.com.tw/wio/?p=3585.

Chen R., T. C. Blair, S.-Y. Shen & H.-C. Lu: Design Patents for Image Interfaces 259 21. Lin, P. F., C. Y. Chang, and M. Y. Xu. 2012. Design Patent Analysis of Graphical User Interface. 2012 Conference on Services and Technology Management: 1-12. 22. Pulse UX Blog. 2012. Apple v. Samsung: Impact and Implications for Product Design, User Interface Design (UX), Software Development and the Future of High-Technology Consumer Products. Pulse UX Blog. Accessed June 5. http://www.mauronewmedia. com/blog/apple-v-samsung-implications-for-product-d esign-user-interface-ux-design-software-developmentand-the-future-of-high-technology-consumer-products/. 23. Jones, B. T., D. M. Guthrie, and E. Petrik. 2012. Display Screen Portion with an Animated Image. US Patent D656, 504. Manuscript Received: Nov. 04, 2016 First Revision Received: Nov. 23, 2016 Second Revision Received: Feb. 09, 2017 and Accepted: Mar. 10, 2017