It's absolutely derogatory against them and it should be. It's a culture of being proud of stealing and cheating. That shouldn't be celebrated or excused because "oh thats just how they are". No. It should be understood that this is how they are, but not excused or accepted.Exactly. It’s not derogatory at all to say that a predominant business model there is to copy the best out there. (I also have personal experience in design school with Chinese students in my cohort.)
Is “clever” the right word, though? Maybe. If you mean it in the way of “good idea”.
It’s like how Apple (can’t believe I’m typing this) will take an existing product/concept and make it better, or outright buy the company or copy their concept in the next version of iOS. (RIP FlikType on Apple Watch. Go give em’ $8 if you own a watch S6 and below to get typing on the watch instead of the S7)
Granted Apple has iterative improvements to whatever came before, and Chinese business model is to copy completely and add extra useful things that weren’t on the Apple’s product (better camera, better screen, etc.).
It’s a business model 🤷♂️ See who is making the most money and just copy copy copy! Then the copier makes money. Easy.
Again, I want to reiterate: this is NOT DEROGATORY against Chinese folks, and shouldn’t be read that wayI just hope that they aren’t too successful at it and put the innovators out of business
Maybe a third time I’ll say it: it is fine that Chinese companies approach things this way
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.
'LeBest X14 Pro Max' Imitates iPhone Design Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, you're *****ing him. Apple had more than 250 prior art patents referenced in their D618,677 patent, including all those other electronic devices you seem to want to imply invalidate Apple's patents. They still got the patent.
Furthermore, the lawsuit involved Apple patent 7,469,381 Scroll back and bounce design for scrolling a document, 7,844,915 Pinch to zoom, 7,864,163 Touch to zoom, D618,677 Ornamental design of an electronic device (the screen), D593,087 Ornamental design of an electronic device (outer part), D504,899 Ornamental design for an electronic device, substantially as shown (the exterior), D604,305 Graphical user interface for a display screen (screen itself). Some patents were invalidated, but the look-and-feel ('677) was not.
Apple was awarded USD $1.05 billion for Samsung infringements, and Samsung was awarded a few hundred thousand dollars for infringement by Apple on technical patents. Actual amounts were settled out of court several years later.
I don’t really see how it’s a waste of energy. Sure it might be distasteful from an IP perspective, but at $150 it‘s not even close to competing with any iPhones and gives people who can’t afford it a little of the look and feel of something better.
And there are iPhone generations that copied features from those same phones. As I said, works both ways.
Wow, I cant wait to get one of these, When this hits the shops look out Apple, your run is over !
They won’t sue in an Asian country as there is no point as it would be a waste of time.
Unfortunately it is far too easy to copy an object.
The good thing is they can't copy the ecosystem, brand or experience.
Hence the use of ‘suggestion’.Copyright laws are taken seriously in China.... for local companies. The government ensures copyright protection for local companies. Foreign companies, that's not their priority.
This just in:
One eBay buyer won a iPhone in a heated auction. After receiving it via China Express a month later, he became angry upon seeing his new $1,500 phone for the first time - a $150 iPhone look-like called LeBest.
One eBay buyer won a iPhone in a heated auction. After receiving it via China Express a month later, he became angry upon seeing his new $1,500 phone for the first time - a $150 iPhone look-like called LeBest.
Less than 5% of Chinese customers ever heard of this brand before, not to mention customers in other countries..
Other than the wallpaper, there’s probably nothing here that’s infringing on anything. It’s not like they’re claiming it’s an Apple product and the Android skin isn’t similar enough to be copyright infringement. While it’s obviously trying to invoke Apple’s brand image, there is nothing tangible here to bring them to court.
I’m not sure why macrumors thinks this particular phone is newsworthy. This is just one of dozens and dozens of no-name generic phone brands that pop up all the time online that not even Chinese consumers have heard about. Heck, they don’t even have a website.
LeBest is such a hilariously bad name.
That said, it amazes me how people don't realize how bad the notch is going to be viewed in the future. People accept it only because it's Apple and they'll accept anything Apple does, but holy hell is that thing ugly - having a giant notch cut into your display... just LOL. And now they are doing it on laptops, which is beyond hilarious. "Muh screen real estate!"
Even using a hole punch is really stupid. Just put the front-facing camera in the top bezel. A few mm is completely irrelevant. But the same dweeb that screams "muh screen real estate!" for an extra 64 pixels (LOL) on a laptop with scream "muh screen-to-body ratio!" because the chin in 2mm instead of 4mm.
That said, it amazes me how people don't realize how bad the notch is going to be viewed in the future. People accept it only because it's Apple and they'll accept anything Apple does, but holy hell is that thing ugly - having a giant notch cut into your display... just LOL. And now they are doing it on laptops, which is beyond hilarious. "Muh screen real estate!"
Even using a hole punch is really stupid. Just put the front-facing camera in the top bezel. A few mm is completely irrelevant. But the same dweeb that screams "muh screen real estate!" for an extra 64 pixels (LOL) on a laptop with scream "muh screen-to-body ratio!" because the chin in 2mm instead of 4mm.
It’s crazy to me that they didn’t even mirror the wallpaper so the light in the upper left corner wasn’t covered by the clock.
