Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Marcus-k

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2011
111
0
Showing people that they respect to patents is more valuable than $21 million for Apple in this case.

Once again, a nice move from Apple.

But apparently they have no respect for stealing since they did that in the first place and didn't pay untill they were caught.
 

Fruit Cake

macrumors 6502a
Mar 31, 2012
597
20
Wow that's almost as wasteful as farcebook buying instagram for $1billion. Wtf is it with these tech companies pissing away money like that? Is this another dot com bubble about to burst?
 

Ferry13

macrumors newbie
Feb 14, 2012
3
0
What it really means...

...Apple isn't paying this kind of money for a clock app. Obviously, they want to use the design for something else as well. My bet: they're still working on a nano watch.
 

NutsNGum

macrumors 68030
Jul 30, 2010
2,856
367
Glasgow, Scotland
...Apple isn't paying this kind of money for a clock app. Obviously, they want to use the design for something else as well. My bet: they're still working on a nano watch.

Retrospective haggling doesn't make for the strongest bargaining position. That 21 Mil is for that clockface.
 

MarcelEdward

macrumors member
Sep 24, 2012
46
0
Oh please, what a stupid statement. I hope you have donated every cent you earn that doesn't go directly to something that you absolutely cannot live without.

I suppose Apple should also buy a house for every homeless person in the country. They can technically afford it, so why don't they?

You mean that one big company has the technical afford solution to solve the homeless problem and there still are homeless people in the US ?
 

BuckusToothnail

macrumors member
Nov 11, 2012
72
0
Okay looking clock but definitely not worth $20 million.

I'm fine with skeuomorphism mostly but a clock like that? I can't image they couldn't do a design in-house that looked just as good or better.

How many graphic designers can you hire for $20 million?

This isn't a design or feature that was so special that people would be buying more Macs or IOS products because of the clock. I think most people wound't even notice this design.
 

yearofthe

macrumors regular
May 23, 2010
160
0
Earth
So Apple paid 21 Million for a flippin' clock and only paid 2.5 million to help Hurricane Sandy victims?


What a load of BS...shows how much Apple cares.

Apple had to pay $21M for clock design after they were called out for using it without licensing as far as I understand.
 

5534929

Cancelled
Jun 24, 2009
50
0
There probably paying for a penalty for using the clock with out permission all that time, if they came to the door wanting to use the clock in the first place it would be 1/10 that cost.
 

tekno

macrumors 6502a
Oct 15, 2011
842
4
Apple had to pay $21M for clock design after they were called out for using it without licensing as far as I understand.

This is what I think. At a time when Apple are pointing the finger at everyone else, I guess they had no option but to pay-up for such blatant copyright theft. Mondaine undoubtedly saw that and absolutely took Apple to the cleaners.

And good on 'em.
 

kalsta

macrumors 68000
May 17, 2010
1,676
573
Australia
I wonder if that was yet another thing that led to Forstall's departure.

Again a useless and this time very expensive use of skeuomorphism...Apple will need to sell some iPads to refinance that Forstall decision....

Scott Forstall, the new Emmanuel Goldstein of the Apple rumours community.

Anyway, I agree that Apple made a cock-up by running with that design, and I suppose the buck has to stop with someone. 21 million is too much for the licensing of an iPad clock-face design, but let's look on the bright side… I'd rather see the money go to one country's public transport system than some patent vultures like Lodsys.
 

avanpelt

macrumors 68030
Jun 2, 2010
2,956
3,877
I hope the Swiss clock shows up on the iPhone. Not sure why they didn't incorporate it into the iPhone already for consistency.
 

cheesymogul

macrumors regular
Sep 14, 2008
213
0
Sure, NOW the clock face is generic, but it's from 1944. Look at all other clock faces from the 1940's and you'll know why this one is an exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art. It has influenced every other clock face you've seen. Apple made the mistake of ripping the original.
This clock face design is about as iconic and copy-protected as any Omega Speedmaster or Rolex Oyster. And Apple wouldn't have copied these either without facing legal consequences.
Swiss Railway is by the way a large Apple customer. Their management staff is equipped with iPhones and iPads. Had Apple asked politely, they probably would have gotten a license in exchange for a few pallets of iPhones and iPads...
 

jmcrutch

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2010
249
79
to those saying "why didn't Apple just change the clock design (or use the iPhone's design) and not pay the 21mm" ... you have to realize that once the infringement had occurred, it wouldn't suffice to simply just stop infringing. Millions of iPads had the clock on it and Apple can't force an update to remove the clock (users have to agree to upgrade iOS versions). So, whether by intention or mistake, Apple infringed and they realized it. The 21mm is the value of the infringement to the Swiss Railway. Story over.
 

richardw

macrumors member
Jul 13, 2011
87
7
Oh please, what dumb logic and rebuttle; just look at the damn facts, why the hell would Apple waste that much money on a damn clock vs. helping victims?

Because licensing the clock design they ripped off is their problem. Helping natural disaster victims is not, even if it might be nice to help them out.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.