Unfortunately neither the tech-press, nor the anti-IP-period crowd have a particularly good grasp on just what utility patents cover, nor any apparent interest in learning.
So hoping they'll recognize, learn and appreciate the difference between a utility and a design patent seems a bit optimistic.
Design patents are only granted if the design is novel and not obvious for all items. Utility patent must be novel, non-obvious, and be useful (legal defined term).
Both has requirements that must be fulfilled. non-novel and obvious design can not, should not, would not if the patent system worked, be granted as a design patent.
If our Patent laws allow for Patents (of any variety) that are this painfully and blisteringly obvious and come with 1,000+ years of prior art, then the law is more broken than I thought.
Amazon design patented the original kindle shape and then boasted about using it to prevent others from making kindle-compatible covers, in clear violation of design patent law.
Companies are using similar abuses of both patent systems.
So hoping they'll recognize, learn and appreciate the difference between a utility and a design patent seems a bit optimistic.