There are similarities in the designs that go well beyond the fact they are both firebowls nor do I think he could achieve that. The definition for substantially similar would prevent that as it is important to note, as mentioned above, the copyright only applies to the decorative elements of the bowl not needed for its function.

In short, one would be free, even with a victory by Unger, to create firebowls with very different decorations. For example, I don't think Unger would ever have a case if you decorated your bowl with Christmas trees.

It's also not true that copyrights never expires. They expires 70 years after the death of the author or 95 years after creation in case of works of corporate authorship. Yes, that is much longer than patents and, yes, recent copyright extensions have kept works out of the public domain that would have fallen into it, but copyrights do expire and there are many works in the public domain currently.

The real question in this case is how similar are the new bowls to Unger's and was the intent to mimic his designs. Those are things we will have to learn later.

Most of Ungers works are, let us be frank, hardly the heights of human creativity. In fact, the only designs that were not taken verbatim by Wittrig were the more complex works. The “copied” works were geometrically trivial.

Unger's purpose is clear. He intends to assert absolute control over the very idea of making “firebowls”. He intends to use copyright to enforce what is normally granted by patents; a monopoly over an entire market. Our modern copyright law is so loose in its interpretations, and so absolute in its judgments, that he could well end up achieving this. No one will ever be able to make a similar sized or shaped firebowl without permission from, and a kickback to, Unger.

Here's the kicker. Patents typically expire after ~20 years. Copyrights never expire. If he wins his case, Unger will obtain an absolute monopoly over all firebowls and their sale, worldwide, for himself and his heirs in perpetuity, all at a single stroke.

So the question becomes; why should looking to start a firebowl business pay any heed to Unger's “copyrights”?

There are similarities in the designs that go well beyond the fact they are both firebowls nor do I think he could achieve that. The definition for substantially similar would prevent that as it is important to note, as mentioned above, the copyright only applies to the decorative elements of the bowl not needed for its function.

In short, one would be free, even with a victory by Unger, to create firebowls with very different decorations. For example, I don't think Unger would ever have a case if you decorated your bowl with Christmas trees.

It's also not true that copyrights never expires. They expires 70 years after the death of the author or 95 years after creation in case of works of corporate authorship. Yes, that is much longer than patents and, yes, recent copyright extensions have kept works out of the public domain that would have fallen into it, but copyrights do expire and there are many works in the public domain currently.

The real question in this case is how similar are the new bowls to Unger's and was the intent to mimic his designs. Those are things we will have to learn later.

Most of Ungers works are, let us be frank, hardly the heights of human creativity. In fact, the only designs that were not taken verbatim by Wittrig were the more complex works. The “copied” works were geometrically trivial.

Unger's purpose is clear. He intends to assert absolute control over the very idea of making “firebowls”. He intends to use copyright to enforce what is normally granted by patents; a monopoly over an entire market. Our modern copyright law is so loose in its interpretations, and so absolute in its judgments, that he could well end up achieving this. No one will ever be able to make a similar sized or shaped firebowl without permission from, and a kickback to, Unger.

Here's the kicker. Patents typically expire after ~20 years. Copyrights never expire. If he wins his case, Unger will obtain an absolute monopoly over all firebowls and their sale, worldwide, for himself and his heirs in perpetuity, all at a single stroke.

So the question becomes; why should looking to start a firebowl business pay any heed to Unger's “copyrights”?