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 Pressures Pegatron into Ceasing ASUS Zenbook Production
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
this is actually illegal
under legislation no company can force another company not to serve their competitors.
that is like one restaurant saying to their food supplier that they are not allowed to have that new restaurant down the road who serves similar dishes as a client. it is flat-out illegal
if Apple believes the Zenbook is a copy of the Macbook Air then they have to do that in court with burden of proof
this is really an unacceptable and unethical business practice
under legislation no company can force another company not to serve their competitors.
that is like one restaurant saying to their food supplier that they are not allowed to have that new restaurant down the road who serves similar dishes as a client. it is flat-out illegal
if Apple believes the Zenbook is a copy of the Macbook Air then they have to do that in court with burden of proof
this is really an unacceptable and unethical business practice
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
The anti competive part is stealing apples r&d and using it for yourself. If they were legitimate competitors they would design an equal or superior product not steal from apple.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
Not true. Most competition provides no incentive.
In the tablet market the fire pushes apple, the galaxy not so much. Apple doesn't innovate because of asus.
daxomni said:
The anti competive part is stealing apples r&d and using it for yourself. If they were legitimate competitors they would design an equal or superior product not steal from apple.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
ubersoldat said:
Not true. Most competition provides no incentive.
In the tablet market the fire pushes apple, the galaxy not so much. Apple doesn't innovate because of asus.
Last edited by a moderator:
Taiwan is not China, and it is a standard of the fair trade law of pretty much every nation.
Can I ask a sincere question as I truly don't know law enough to make any educated comment?
Apple is essentially stating that company A cannot make the supplies for its product(s) as they are also manufacturing supplies for competitor company B, and certain products company B sell resemble too closely certain products Apple sell(s).
Ok, I understand the concern. Apple may chose whomever they wish to manufacture the supplies for their products. Whether or not they continue working with company A is a decision for company A.
Some questions:
- Is this strong arming by Apple, using their market leverage in order to cease company A's production of supplies of a product company B sells that competes in Apple's market or is the product really that much of a replication of Apple's product?
- Is there a suit pending against company B to cease and desist selling said questionable product by Apple?
- Is Apple's concern that using company A may impose a threat to security in regards to supplying future product development to company B?
- Where is the line drawn with regards to what companies may or may not use from other companies in product development?
Example. Henry Ford was influenced by German engineer Nicholas Otto's internal combustion engine and built a petrol-driven motor car in the late 19th century. Soon Ford propelled the industrial revolution with the assembly line and the rest is history. Given Ford's contributions, should this have happened in today's legal atmosphere, would companies have the legal right to use Ford's work on internal petrol-driven motor car's, or even assembly lines? Further, would Ford have had the legal right on working off of Otto's internal combustion engine, the basis for Ford's petrol-driven engine?
I ask only as I question when too far is too far. Intellectual property and patent law are becoming increasingly competitive between electronic manufacturers. Everyone wants to keep their piece "their piece." Heck, Xerox essentially developed the GUI that Apple and Microsoft soon built their system's around. All these suits don't seem to do much but stifle innovation, diminish competition and eventually hurt the consumer. Capitalism is built around the concept of the free market, but how free is the market when companies are squabbling over every little detail, whether it's Samsung's "design" of their Galaxy tablet or this Asus issue, who is to claim who owns what and what company can then legally work from those idea's? Nothing is truly "original", a fact I hate to admit. Fashion designers are always influenced by someone or something else. Unless something is EXACTLY like another product, guts to case to everything, I don't see a basis for alarm. The MacBook Air is a thin laptop, without a DVD drive. Aside from aesthetics, who is to state that this general idea is solely that of Apple's?
I'm not defending either side, I'm simply curious on the law and I would fear the day when less competition means more market dominance by any one company. As consumers, we should be defending the right for a truly free market, within reason, as it benefits us in the end.
Apple is essentially stating that company A cannot make the supplies for its product(s) as they are also manufacturing supplies for competitor company B, and certain products company B sell resemble too closely certain products Apple sell(s).
Ok, I understand the concern. Apple may chose whomever they wish to manufacture the supplies for their products. Whether or not they continue working with company A is a decision for company A.
Some questions:
- Is this strong arming by Apple, using their market leverage in order to cease company A's production of supplies of a product company B sells that competes in Apple's market or is the product really that much of a replication of Apple's product?
- Is there a suit pending against company B to cease and desist selling said questionable product by Apple?
- Is Apple's concern that using company A may impose a threat to security in regards to supplying future product development to company B?
- Where is the line drawn with regards to what companies may or may not use from other companies in product development?
Example. Henry Ford was influenced by German engineer Nicholas Otto's internal combustion engine and built a petrol-driven motor car in the late 19th century. Soon Ford propelled the industrial revolution with the assembly line and the rest is history. Given Ford's contributions, should this have happened in today's legal atmosphere, would companies have the legal right to use Ford's work on internal petrol-driven motor car's, or even assembly lines? Further, would Ford have had the legal right on working off of Otto's internal combustion engine, the basis for Ford's petrol-driven engine?
I ask only as I question when too far is too far. Intellectual property and patent law are becoming increasingly competitive between electronic manufacturers. Everyone wants to keep their piece "their piece." Heck, Xerox essentially developed the GUI that Apple and Microsoft soon built their system's around. All these suits don't seem to do much but stifle innovation, diminish competition and eventually hurt the consumer. Capitalism is built around the concept of the free market, but how free is the market when companies are squabbling over every little detail, whether it's Samsung's "design" of their Galaxy tablet or this Asus issue, who is to claim who owns what and what company can then legally work from those idea's? Nothing is truly "original", a fact I hate to admit. Fashion designers are always influenced by someone or something else. Unless something is EXACTLY like another product, guts to case to everything, I don't see a basis for alarm. The MacBook Air is a thin laptop, without a DVD drive. Aside from aesthetics, who is to state that this general idea is solely that of Apple's?
I'm not defending either side, I'm simply curious on the law and I would fear the day when less competition means more market dominance by any one company. As consumers, we should be defending the right for a truly free market, within reason, as it benefits us in the end.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter where it is made, Pegatron is a Taiwanese company. Although I understand what you are thinking.
However mainland China also has the same law, even though it doesn't apply in this case as neither company is Chinese.
If you are going to make inflammatory statements like this, might I suggest you cite the actual law that makes Apple's actions "illegal."
Purchasers of goods and services are perfectly free to set whatever terms and conditions they see fit when agreeing to do business with a vendor. And "non-compete" and "conflict-of-interest" clauses are common throughout many industries.
It is incumbent upon the supplier to determine whether or not it is in their own best interests to accede to the demands of their customer. Obviously Pegratron has to weigh the risks of losing Apple's manufacturing business against the costs of losing Asus business. This is the sort of decision that businesspeople have to make every day.
I love how on the ITV post a couple below this, ITV is the bad guy and apple should do whatever they can to take the name.
Yet here, Apple is on the opposite side trying to make it hard for Asus to make a similar product, yet once again Apple is in the right.
This site has become so biased it's pathetic. I love Apple, but I'm almost afraid to talk about the company in public for fear people will think I'm one of you.
Yet here, Apple is on the opposite side trying to make it hard for Asus to make a similar product, yet once again Apple is in the right.
This site has become so biased it's pathetic. I love Apple, but I'm almost afraid to talk about the company in public for fear people will think I'm one of you.
i had a good laugh with this... i like how you use fancy words and your attempt at correct english structuring etc to make yourself sound smart or well educated.
real quick answer. it falls under the anti-competitive practice called "refusal to deal"
In this instance it would be classified as a horizontal restraint, and is also a forced situation and not a voluntary contract. In the US it is a direct violation of the Sherman Act of 1890, Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 and Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914.
In Taiwan most of that would be covered in their Fair Trade Act of 1992.
Everything you said is just nonsense and your own personal opinion.
Edit: what Apple has done is illegal and more important it is an unethical business practice. Forcing a supplier to reduce its revenue to stifle their competitor, most likely costing people their jobs or reduced hours.
Last edited:
Seriously Asus is perhaps the best PC manufacturer out there. They push quality products and they are very creative, even silly sometimes (like the Padaphone). I'd even go as far as saying that Asus build quality are as good as Apple's (especially their tablets and notebooks).
The Zenbook doesn't look anything like the Macbook Air. When I first saw the picture I thought that it was the Transformer Prime with the dock (the two look exactly the same). Might as well cease production of the Prime then!
Even if this is not illegal in China, it is still unmoral and the proof that Apple is no better than Intel or Microsoft. Does Asus pose a threat to Apple's business? Not in a long shot.
The Zenbook doesn't look anything like the Macbook Air. When I first saw the picture I thought that it was the Transformer Prime with the dock (the two look exactly the same). Might as well cease production of the Prime then!
Even if this is not illegal in China, it is still unmoral and the proof that Apple is no better than Intel or Microsoft. Does Asus pose a threat to Apple's business? Not in a long shot.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)
About time Apple stood up to these mufacturers making their ultrabooks look just like the MacBook air. The Zenbook is very nice but is clearly taking design from the
Air.
About time Apple stood up to these mufacturers making their ultrabooks look just like the MacBook air. The Zenbook is very nice but is clearly taking design from the
Air.
First of all Pegatron and Asus used to be the same company and recently were broken up... so this is pretty surprising.
Second of all, if this is true you might see anti-trust lawsuits in the future. This is exactly the kind of behavior that got Intel and Microsoft in trouble... Essentially paying companies not to serve their competitors...
I don't get why all you fanboys want to see Apple have a monopoly... it is bad for everyone except Apple shareholders if there is no competition... Expect higher prices dip*****...
Second of all, if this is true you might see anti-trust lawsuits in the future. This is exactly the kind of behavior that got Intel and Microsoft in trouble... Essentially paying companies not to serve their competitors...
I don't get why all you fanboys want to see Apple have a monopoly... it is bad for everyone except Apple shareholders if there is no competition... Expect higher prices dip*****...
Laugh all you want.
"Refuse to Deal" would require the collaboration of more than one purchaser. For example, if Apple conspired with HP and Dell, and they agreed not to use Pegatron or FoxxConn unless they made price or other concessions.
Here, since you don't seem to believe t that I might know what I'm talking about is a reference:
Take a hint: Don't argue with people that know what they are talking about.
Last edited:
And Apple is the main player facilitating this.
We will see......when they eliminate the "Pro" line of products.
Yes, resistance IS Futile
Its not against the law for Apple to decide not to do business with a supplier who also provides to its competitor. They are free to choose any supplier they wish if its in their best interest.
Is it legal to force Apple to use Pegatron as a supplier if they don't want to? No!
Again, how are they forcing this company to not supply its competitor? By taking their business elsewhere? I think not!
Last edited:
Here's the simple truth. Apple was the first to this design, whether you like it or not. Does that mean I only want to ever buy Apple products, no. What that does mean is that there really isn't anything new about this ultra book in terms of design.
If I had a choice I would still choose the MacBook Air, but if Asus made something different that made it stand out as a "one of kind" ultrabook, I might be more persuaded to buy theirs.
I love innovation, regardless of what company is doing it, but Asus just doesn't seem to be coming up with anything much different from Apple design patterns. If I ever was going to switch back to Windows solely, I need a new and innovative design that will differentiate my laptop from the MacBook line.
Btw, I continue to give mad props to Microsoft for finally doing some very fresh and innovative things in both their new desktop OS and phone OS. May not exactly be my thing, but it's innovative and something new to table, which I highly respect and maybe with time, it will cause me to switch.
If I had a choice I would still choose the MacBook Air, but if Asus made something different that made it stand out as a "one of kind" ultrabook, I might be more persuaded to buy theirs.
I love innovation, regardless of what company is doing it, but Asus just doesn't seem to be coming up with anything much different from Apple design patterns. If I ever was going to switch back to Windows solely, I need a new and innovative design that will differentiate my laptop from the MacBook line.
Btw, I continue to give mad props to Microsoft for finally doing some very fresh and innovative things in both their new desktop OS and phone OS. May not exactly be my thing, but it's innovative and something new to table, which I highly respect and maybe with time, it will cause me to switch.
Like Apple have never stolen anything. EVER. They are whiter than white. Good for them indeed
hold on....on this forum Apple does not steal...it gets "inspired by"
Nope. The Zenbook is actually a tiny bit thinner, and isn't quite as rounded along the corners.
It is suspiciously close, I'll give you that. But it's hardly the exact copy you're making it out to be.
This case isn't as straightforward as you make it out to be. Apple and Pegatron have gone into business together, as they conduct business together Pegatron has gained access to Apple's IP, and Apple's corporate trade secrets which their contracts likely protect. If Pegatron reveals or worse sales that knowledge to Asus, Apple has every right to cease doing business with Pegatron or demand that the situation is resolved.
At my company we supply products to multiple companies and regularly have access to company confidential information from our customers. If our customers found out we were turning around and using that information to aid there competitors we could and would be held liable.
haha. that made me laugh even harder!! your reference (an average one at that) is simply providing examples of what could be refusal to deal. The situation doesn't require "2 collaborators" but that is known as a primary boycott which falls under refusal to deal legislation.
This situation falls under "exclusive dealing" and "misuse of market power" of the refusal to deal legislation.
Your reference even proves my statement in a latter paragraph. Quoting your reference
or it can be the use of coercion to keep an individual or business from doing business with another company. A refusal to deal may be against another competitor; for example, if one business refuses to do business with another company, customer or supplier, unless they agree to cease business with another company, the agreement would be a refusal to deal.
That is exactly what Apple has done, and suppled from your own reference. haha
and a quote straight from the Federal Trade Commission about refusal to deal http://www.ftc.gov/bc/antitrust/refusal_to_deal.shtm Sometimes the refusal to deal is with customers or suppliers, with the effect of preventing them from dealing with a rival: "I refuse to deal with you if you deal with my competitor."
oh but you know what you're talking about! hahaha
Last edited: