I'm by no means an expert on trade dress, but look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress , especially the law itself (which is pretty straightforward) and the section on distinctiveness. The key point is that to win a trade dress suit, you must prove that consumers are actually confused about who made the product.

Now look at me. Now look at the clambook pictures. See how it prominently says "clambook" when it's open, and prominently shows the clambook logo on the back? I suspect that it would be hard to find a meaningful group of people who would answer the question "who made this" with "Apple." If you know enough to associate that design with Apple, you know it's not going to have a picture of a mollusk where the Apple logo's supposed to be. No customer confusion == no trade dress problem. (This isn't a hypothetical -- they literally do this kind of survey in trademark cases.)

Incidentally, not all IP law is the same, and trademark/trade dress law in particular is a Good Thing. You don't want to buy a knockoff Apple power charger thinking you're getting the real thing. You don't want to pay French champagne prices for California bubbly, or Coke prices for store-brand soda. The basic question in trademark law is "how often does this product succeed in tricking someone into buying one thing when they meant to buy something else?" Obviously courts will get the answer wrong sometimes, and there might be areas where the line should be drawn a little differently, but for the most part this is an area of IP law you should vehemently support.

I'm on a horse.