<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Patent Lawsuit Is About More Than the Hinge	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.designwhine.com/samsung-foldable-phone-patent-lawsuit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.designwhine.com/samsung-foldable-phone-patent-lawsuit/</link>
	<description>Tech Through A Design Lens</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2026 11:19:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: DesignWhine Editorial Team		</title>
		<link>https://www.designwhine.com/samsung-foldable-phone-patent-lawsuit/#comment-269</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DesignWhine Editorial Team]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 16:07:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.designwhine.com/?p=17081#comment-269</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The part of this case that interests us most is not the hinge. It is the possibility that behaviors like app continuity and posture-aware UI can sit inside patent claims. At what point does a foldable interaction stop being an invention and become a category convention?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The part of this case that interests us most is not the hinge. It is the possibility that behaviors like app continuity and posture-aware UI can sit inside patent claims. At what point does a foldable interaction stop being an invention and become a category convention?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
