Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Paid $21 Million for Rights to Swiss Railways Clock Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1) Expanding and exploding are two very different things.
2) For $100, how do you know it's a rebuilt pack?
I'm sure somebody at Apple could have designed another clock that looks good and replaced it.
But then people would say they're trying to dodge paying the Swiss Railways.
Or people would then ask why they don't simply license it?
Or complain about using somebody else's iconic design and it being morally wrong to only fix it after getting caught.
I'm not one to judge whether $21M is the correct price.
But I, for one, think that if I were truly appreciative of the field of design, I'd fork out the money to license a design because I think it's a good design. And because disrespecting other iconic designs while trying to be a producer of good designs would be pretty dumb.
Battery price included or not?What investors would have really wanted is Apple to get one of their own designers to come up with an original clock design. Not illegally copy someone else's design. Apple has hired probably hundreds of designers. Were not one of them available to draw a clock?
It was no doubt a matter of an oversight. Designer not realizing the design was protected, and nobody in management making sure it was.
Then because Apple sold millions of devices, and upgraded previous devices, they brought the number of infringing devices into the "Hundreds of Millions" numbers.
Thats not going to be cheap. Even at 21 million USD though, thats less than 10 cents per device. And apple most certainly already has many more expensive licenses than that.
Then because Apple sold millions of devices, and upgraded previous devices, they brought the number of infringing devices into the "Hundreds of Millions" numbers.
Thats not going to be cheap. Even at 21 million USD though, thats less than 10 cents per device. And apple most certainly already has many more expensive licenses than that.
Exactly, it's different.
Apple copied the look of Dieter Rams' design for a Braun calculator:
Rams didn't sue, he actually said he takes it as a complement. Ives has also copied other Braun products:
Not only is Rams still not suing or asking for money, he says Apple is one of the few big companies in the world that actually takes good design seriously:
The big difference here is that Braun still licenses some classic Dieter Rams and Dietrich Lubs products for sale, but only clocks and watches. Meanwhile, Mondaine still sells this classic clock design. Rams isn't losing any money if Apple halfway copies his non-clock, non-watch designs.
It's all about the money; the Swiss clock designer, Hans Hilfiker, died in 1993. He would most likely be flattered though.
Here is a clock from 1900 (predating the Mondaine design) with a very similar red circle on the second hand.
But I doubt Smiths of Astral are still around to sue Mondaine.
Just because they have money doesn't mean they *have* to spend it, especially in such a wasteful thing as this clock.
Is it me but should the Swiss now demand a new Terminal in a newly built-up area, now that they are flush with Apple money?
Hilarious! I read that comment and thought to myself "I should go and find a picture of a foil hat to reply to that.."
It's amazing how people trivialize the clock design down to an 'icon'. That's about the same attitude as when people keep saying Apple patented 'rounded rectangles'.
The clock is unique for many reasons, not just for the design of the seconds arm with red circle at the end. It is the movement of the clockwork where the seconds arm moves smoothly and not in steps every second, it is the way the minutes arm only changes once per minute and also in a smooth way, not in an arbitrary jump. These things taken together plus the actual graphical design give a feeling of class and refinement. Just look at the analog clock in Windows to get an idea.
Someone at Apple has/had a very good taste and the software implementation was meticulous, closely emulating the real-world original. The fact that they did not ask for permission before the rollout is a poor judgement and hence the consequences. While it's cool, it's not essential and as such not worth paying $21M for. Their bad.
The clock is unique for many reasons, not just for the design of the seconds arm with red circle at the end. It is the movement of the clockwork where the seconds arm moves smoothly and not in steps every second, it is the way the minutes arm only changes once per minute and also in a smooth way, not in an arbitrary jump. These things taken together plus the actual graphical design give a feeling of class and refinement. Just look at the analog clock in Windows to get an idea.
Someone at Apple has/had a very good taste and the software implementation was meticulous, closely emulating the real-world original. The fact that they did not ask for permission before the rollout is a poor judgement and hence the consequences. While it's cool, it's not essential and as such not worth paying $21M for. Their bad.
Never launched the clock app. Not even once after all this fiasco. To me, it's just an icon on the home screen that they ended up paying a lot of money for. Could end up in history as the company's worst expense ever. Almost zero ROI.
So many people on here are missing the point. Apple didn't pay $21 million to use the clock design.
They paid $21 million BECAUSE they used the clock design. It's the penalty for infringing a copyright.
They paid $21 million BECAUSE they used the clock design. It's the penalty for infringing a copyright.
Less than $1 each.
http://ipod.about.com/od/ipadmodelsandterms/f/ipad-sales-to-date.htm
Even if you assume that half of that all-time total can't or won't run iOS6 (only iPad 1 is not iOS6-capable, but let's grant that millions people are all stung out about iOS6 Maps and refuse to upgrade), it's still less than a dollar.
All of you on a rage about the $21 million for "a clock", no, they bought millions of clocks (licensing millions of seats/instances of the clock's likeness), for less than $1 each and handed them out. Your rage is misplaced.
Clearly, now they're going to screw the consumer over to recoup that, and the price of iPad will leap.
Everybody get out an extra 50c.
Last edited:
I don't think that is relevant. Apple has billions of dollar they could use but they don't and it's not like they cut these 21 millions from any existing budget of a completely different product.
How well Final Cut Pro X develops is a matter of management, what the leadership thinks is best and how much resources the team has. But just adding more developers is seldom a good way to make software better. And these resources are not affected by how much another part of Apple pays for lawsuits, licensing etc.
Are they not paying what "you" deem their fair share, or what they are legally obligated to pay. I am sure your friends at Google don't pay more in taxes than they have to.
Deduction for Apple, yes. But the homeless person would then have to pay income tax on the value of the home, plus property taxes, and I am sure they couldn't afford that. (I wonder how many people will misinterpret this ?)
Competitors sould start making better products, then they will be allowed to make profit. People or companies shouldn't make money selling crappy "me too" products.
Stealing is such a strong word, what do you think their intent was ? And then someone came along and told them, " Hey, this looks a lot like our protected design." Apple agreed, thus the pay out, no courts involved.
You don't understand homelessness. The short answer is no, they don't have the technical afford solution to solve the homeless problem.
Or instead of charity, how about using to create some more jobs and make people work for their food, shelter, and clothing ?
Are they overpaid ? How much do you spend to goto a professional sporting event ? Let me guess, people go to these events to see the owners of the teams, right ? It's a multi billion dollar industry. If you brought 100 million or so of profit to your place of employment, wouldn't you expect to be compensated accordingly ? Pretty sad how backwards liberals are these days.
Wow, there's so much wrong with that statement. Do you really think apple has put Mac Pro and Final Cut Pro x on hold because they lack money?