I smell some Apple legal Smackdown in the Future....

[Moxiemike]

http://www.edig.com/news/releases/pr072202.html

I found this lil' bugger yesterday. it's quite an ugly iPod Ripoff. Bums me out.

It's pretty darn blatant, even in the interface.... but didn't Apple license the interface software from a third party??? I could see them getting in a tangle over the body shape and design, but what of the interface? Anyone know?

In any case, it's UGLY.

 

[iGav]

That's pretty nasty......

Pink logo anyone???

 

[Moxiemike]

Originally posted by iGAV
That's pretty nasty......

Pink logo anyone???

Pink elephants. I wonder if it's just the iridescent (sp?) logo shining pink.... Now, I can deal with pink elephant logos on Delirium Begian Stout but not on my mp3 player. heeehee

Ugly. Still in shock.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

ooh, that's painful - what were they thinking?

I hope Apple wades in and starts swinging - sheesh, at least have the decency to redesign the damn thing.....

D

 

[Ensign Paris]

I think Apple will react soon, come on Apple DEFEND YOUR DESIGNS!

Hey iGav, you are almost at 1000 posts!

Ensign

 

[Taft]

I does have a few cool features the iPod doesn't have.

FM tuner.
Ability to issue commands via voice.
Ability to create a Playlist from the interface.

But its still a blatent rip off of the iPod. And the iPod is just soooooo cool. Plus it uses Firewire, which is more ubiquitous at the moment (no macs come with USB 2).

Taft

 

[iGav]

Originally posted by Moxiemike


Pink elephants. I wonder if it's just the iridescent (sp?) logo shining pink.... Now, I can deal with pink elephant logos on Delirium Begian Stout but not on my mp3 player. heeehee

Ugly. Still in shock.

That Pink and Blue combo.... Definitely a 'Miami Vice' thing going down........

I reckon Apple will probably take action on this one..... failing that I'm sure the 'Good Taste Police' will have em'........

 

[Backtothemac]

Damn, I wonder why no one has ever copied Flower Power, or Blue Dalmation?

 

[mcrain]

The specs indicate that this thing is iTunes compatible. That means that apple had to have licensed its iTunes to them. I would strongly doubt that they would do that and then turn around and sue them for a design that mimicks what they have.

In addition, I'm not sure there is a suit anyway. The iPod is composed of very little protectable intellectual property. I mean, it's a rectangle, has some buttons, a screen, and plays mp3s. In addition, it hasn't been around so long that the design is so associated with apple that there would be material confusion in the average consumer.

So, if you want a lawsuit, you'll probably have to wait, this probably isn't it.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

But, it looks like an iPod its compatible with iTunes - it just seems to me it will take sales away from Apple, they can't be happy with that. Why would they license the iTunes bit and let the design be so influenced by the iPod - it just doesn't make sense. There are quite a few options in designing the case - the resemblance is just not right.

D

 

[Backtothemac]

They would sue this company the same way that they sued eMachines in that it is a violation of their intellectual property. They patent everything on the iPod. Believe me, if they wanted to they could. Also, it doesn't mean that they licensed anything from apple. My two year old mp3 player worked with iTunes. Nomad support was built into it. It would be that they licensed the support from Creative or someone, and built there MP3 player on it. Apple may not even know this thing exists, although I am sure they do now.

 

[iGav]

Originally posted by Ensign Paris
I think Apple will react soon, come on Apple DEFEND YOUR DESIGNS!

Hey iGav, you are almost at 1000 posts!

Ensign

I've just noticed........ that means I should try to come up with a tar' to celebrate.......

 

[mcrain]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
They would sue this company the same way that they sued eMachines in that it is a violation of their intellectual property. They patent everything on the iPod. Believe me, if they wanted to they could.

I don't disagree with you, and am sure that apple patents all that they can, however, you can not patent the shape of a porsche. You can not patent the shape of a common item. You can only patent new and novel things. For example, a button that plays a song, no matter how different it looks, can't be patented, but if the button was, let's say, heat sensitive, and played a different song depending on what it reads your mood to be, that heat sensor would be patentable (assuming no one else has that).

What did they sue emachines for?

As far as copying, it happens all the time, especially with apple's stuff.

 

[iGav]

Originally posted by mcrain


I don't disagree with you, and am sure that apple patents all that they can, however, you can not patent the shape of a porsche. You can not patent the shape of a common item. You can only patent new and novel things. For example, a button that plays a song, no matter how different it looks, can't be patented, but if the button was, let's say, heat sensitive, and played a different song depending on what it reads your mood to be, that heat sensor would be patentable (assuming no one else has that).

What did they sue emachines for?

As far as copying, it happens all the time, especially with apple's stuff.

You could well be right....... it's very difficult to patent a style..... look at how every single trainer (sneaker) maker copied Accupuncture's Beefer shoes.......

The problem I think comes when a company copies a style of a machine, so that it may detract from sales of the original product and thus cause harm to sales..... or that people may buy it believeing it to be another product.......

It's quite a grey area... ultimately though if Apple and their lawyers feel something is not right... I'm sure they'll go after them.......