True is not the correct term, since the Three Laws of Robotics were created, not observed. If the question is "are they sufficient and self-consistent" then the answer is the subject of much debate.
Yes, lots of them. Most of his robotic stories revolve around the laws and the flaws in the laws were built in on purpose
A robotic device can do whatever it's designed to do. There are robotic devices that are designed to paint vehicles in an automobile manufacturing facility, and those robotic devices simply paint vehicles. There are robotic devices that are used to cut metal shapes and others that are designed to cut wooden shapes. There are robotic devices that are used to laser etch, and others that are designed to carve shapes. So far, there are no true "general purpose" robotic devices.
They are not trademarked as far as I am aware though, of course, they are copyrighted. The have come to be a standard fare in robotic stories. No doubt they will also be incorporated into robots if we ever progress that far.
robotic
It depends on what they are being used for. It is not always or even mostly true.
A standard robotic arm will consists of seven metal segments and six appendages, which includes a 'shoulder', 'elbow' and 'wrist'. It has six degrees of freedom corresponding to the three appendages.
True.
Robotic scarecrow
Giovanni Cattaneo has written: 'The Source, the Strength, and the True Spirit of Laws: In Three Parts. In which the Errors of M ..'
The three laws of mathematics are: Distributive, Communitative and Associative.
Interpret laws and determine if laws are unconstitutional.
True