Briefly: Apple TV, QuickBooks warning, backdating suit, Triple Play

[AppleInsider]

Apple TV is leading a pack of new retail-based Internet video devices, according to one firm. Meanwhile, Intuit screws up big time and issues an update to QuickBooks that caused data loss for some users. And Apple has filed for a trademark on the phrase "Triple Play."

Apple TV leads pack

A new breed of retail-based Internet video delivery devices has emerged over the past few years, lead by the $300 Apple TV wireless set-top-box, claims ABI Research. However, the firm notes in a new report that these devices have had difficulty resonating with consumers, largely due to their higher prices and competition from legacy set-top boxes, as well as confusion over the benefits they will ultimately bring to the buyer.

Overall, ABI Research believes that this new breed of devices will see shipments of 1.2 million in 2008.

“Since this category first emerged in 2004-2005 with the debut of Akimbo’s public Internet VOD product, vendors of these products have struggled with a number of hurdles that have so far made this market relatively unsuccessful,” said research director Michael Wolf. “The high cost of these devices, their reliance on the home network, the need for consumer self-installation, and the scarcity of content have all contributed to their lack of commercial success.”

Nonetheless, ABI believes that two factors offer new hope for these devices. While early examples lacked significant amounts of content, new models such as Vudu’s video device have significant libraries, including high definition movies. Additionally, the firm noted that consumers’ growing hunger for both user-generated and professionally produced content on the Internet could create greater demand for these new devices.

“This market will continue to be challenged by traditional set-top boxes, which are incorporating more VOD and public Internet delivery features, and by the emergence of VOD services on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, and those such as the TiVo/Amazon Unbox offering,” Wolf added. “However, we believe that there is a possibility of a break-out success among these new entrants if they can create compelling content offerings, make consumer installation and management incredibly easy, and offer both the hardware and content at compelling pricing. We believe one way to achieve this is by incorporating some premium content using advertising support."

QuickBooks warning

Meanwhile, some users of Intuit's Mac QuickBooks software were blind-sided this weekend when an automatic software update to the accounting software wound up deleting the entire contents of their Mac's desktop folder.

Apparently, there was a problem with the update for QuickBooks Pro Mac for version 2006 and 2007 that displayed the following message: "there is not enough disk space to install." User's who agreed to proceed with the installation knowing they did have the required space subsequently found the contents of their Desktop folder missing upon restart.

Intuit claims to have identified and resolved the issue, removing the automatic software update from its servers. However, those users who have already installed the update should contact Intuit's technical support team, which has undoubtedly scurried into emergency damage control mode.

Pension fund to press forth with suit

The pension fund for New York City's public employees is pushing forward with its lawsuit against Apple, even though a federal judge's ruling suggests shareholders don't have a case against the company.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose granted Apple's motion for dismissal in the stock options backdating suit brought against chief executive Steve Jobs and thirteen other current and former members of the company's leadership, stating that shareholders hadn't suffered financial damages from the events because the company's shares continued to surge.

Fogel advised the shareholders to join a derivative suit, on behalf of the company, which would mean plaintiffs would not stand to receive payouts. However, the NY Sun reports that the New York City group decided not to heed the advice, and on Friday re-filed a new version of the suit seeking damages.

Apple seeks 'Triple Play' trademark

Finally, AppleInsider has learned that Apple recently filed for a trademark on the phrase 'Triple Play' through an overseas trademark office.

The filing, which remains under examination, described Triple Play as a "retail store services in the field of entertainment, namely, musical, audio and audiovisual works and related merchandise, provided via the internet and other computer and electronic communication networks."

While Apple does not offer a distinct service under the "Triple Play" name, it does currently offer "3 for 2 Triple Plays" via its iTunes download service. Essentially a video discount deal, iTunes Triple Plays offer three music videos ($1.99 each) from select artists for the price of two ($3.99).

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[lastofthebarons]

[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1185541]Apple TV is leading a pack of new retail-based Internet video devices, according to one firm. Meanwhile, Intuit screws up big time and issues an update to QuickBooks that caused data loss for some users. And Apple has filed for a trademark on the phrase "Triple Play."


Difficult for Apple to get a trademark on this phrase as it is already in use by a sportswear company of long standing.

[lastofthebarons]

[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1185541]Apple TV is leading a pack of new retail-based Internet video devices, according to one firm. Meanwhile, Intuit screws up big time and issues an update to QuickBooks that caused data loss for some users. And Apple has filed for a trademark on the phrase "Triple Play."

Oh, yes. One other thing it is also the title of a great Johnny Hodges CD

[ncee]

[QUOTE=lastofthebarons;1185555]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Apple TV is leading a pack of new retail-based Internet video devices, according to one firm. Meanwhile, Intuit screws up big time and issues an update to QuickBooks that caused data loss for some users. And Apple has filed for a trademark on the phrase "Triple Play."

Oh, yes. One other thing it is also the title of a great Johnny Hodges CD

BUT, there is a small hole in the trademark laws called "the grey area" or is it "Grey Law" (I believe) - which basically say's that if one product or service, isn't of the same nature of another then one can use something already trademark.

Case in point.

There is a famous local Hot Dog stand in Lewiston, Maine, that for sometime, marketed themself as the "Best Place to get an HD" "Serving the best HD's around" "Home of the best HD's" and a few other simular sayings. Well you guessed it, Harley-Davidson went after them, but the case was thrown out of court, once is was pointed out, that the "HD" stood for "Hot Dogs" (and these were ones that didn't leak )

At least this is what I was told by the owner of the stand.

Skip

[brianus]

[QUOTE=lastofthebarons;1185551]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Difficult for Apple to get a trademark on this phrase as it is already in use by a sportswear company of long standing.

It's also the name of Comcast's internet/voip/digital tv package

[bdkennedy1]

I'm sure Apple's major lack of interest with the Apple TV might have had something to do with the lack of excitement.

[pdoisy]

From Wikipedia:
In telecommunications, the triple play service is a marketing term for the provisioning of the two broadband services, high-speed Internet access and television, and one narrowband service, telephone, over a single broadband connection. Triple Play focuses on a combined business model rather than solving technical issues or a common standard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_...communications)

[Clive At Five]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

...iTunes Triple Plays offer three music videos ($1.99 each) from select artists for the price of two ($3.99).

$1.99 * 2 = $3.98 ≠ $3.99

Nitpick, I know, but which is it? A penny saved is a penny earned.

Originally Posted by brianus

It's also the name of Comcast's internet/voip/digital tv package

That's the first thing that came to my mind as well. And since Comcast markets internet and media services, I'm wondering if this is going to be a struggle. I wonder if Comcast has the term trademarked.....

I hope it doesn't make for a poor business relationship because I use Comcast and Macs. Last thing I need is LESS interoperability between my electronics... especially due to stupid feuds (read: Microsoft and Netscape).

-Clive

[shamino]

Originally Posted by brianus

It's also the name of Comcast's internet/voip/digital tv package

And Verizon's FiOS internet/voice/TV combo.

This is an extremely widespread term, used by a lot of different companies in a lot of different industries. Apple should not be allowed to trademark the phrase.

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Originally Posted by shamino

And Verizon's FiOS internet/voice/TV combo.

This is an extremely widespread term, used by a lot of different companies in a lot of different industries. Apple should not be allowed to trademark the phrase.

Could it be a reference to the ability to buy a digital movie on iTunes and play it on...
1) a Mac
2) an iPod/iPhone
3) an AppleTV

[nofear1az]

so, they plan to sue for damages when their were no damages...... I am confused.... say whaaaaat? I think people just like to find *any* reason to sue. Our country is retarded...

[Hattig]

Originally Posted by nofear1az

so, they plan to sue for damages when their were no damages...... I am confused.... say whaaaaat? I think people just like to find *any* reason to sue. Our country is retarded...

It's doubly retarded in this case.

1) The shares have been surging up for the past few years. They've made a boat-load of money regardless. Put up and shut up, perhaps? Maybe they lost a dollar apiece, which compared to the gains on the shares is like complaining about not getting the 1 penny change from a $99.99 purchase.

2) Any cost to Apple of defending this suit lessens the value of Apple, and thus the value of its shares ...

The judge has made his point quite clear. There are no damages. How they can hope to sue for damages now after that is quite beyond me. I think the only think damaged is their pride, since they've shown themselves to be so braindead. To think that people are entrusting their retirements to such people!

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Apple TV leads pack

A new breed of retail-based Internet video delivery devices has emerged over the past few years, lead by the $300 Apple TV wireless set-top-box, claims ABI Research.

The ABI report is titled "AppleTV leads a struggling bread..." but the report itself doesn't expand on that 'lead', except to say that there are a new breed of internet-based set top boxes and that AppleTV is the most notable of these.

http://www.abiresearch.com/abiprdisp...p?pressid=1010

I am of the opinion that the AppleTV hardware and ease of use is great... it just has no content.

[ouragan]

The pension fund for New York City's public employees is pushing forward with its lawsuit against Apple, even though a federal judge's ruling suggests shareholders don't have a case against the company.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose granted Apple's motion for dismissal in the stock options backdating suit brought against chief executive Steve Jobs and thirteen other current and former members of the company's leadership, stating that shareholders hadn't suffered financial damages from the events because the company's shares continued to surge.

Fogel advised the shareholders to join a derivative suit, on behalf of the company, which would mean plaintiffs would not stand to receive payouts. However, the NY Sun reports that the New York City group decided not to heed the advice, and on Friday re-filed a new version of the suit seeking damages.

What is needed is a corporate oppression remedy on behalf of all shareholders of Apple, inc.

My advice to the New York City's public employees' pension fund: Hire the best corporate lawyers of New York City and sue Apple for the billions Steve Jobs wrongfully took from the company. Don't let Steve Jobs get away with your money!

As a pension fund, you can afford the best lawyers that money can buy. If ever there was a case of corporate oppression, this is one.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by ouragan

My advice... sue Apple for the billions Steve Jobs wrongfully took from the company. Don't let Steve Jobs get away with your money!

What billions Steve took?
(I'm assuming your means you're joking... but I'm not positive, and others may also interpret it as serious)

Share backdating can affect the share price.. reducing the value of people's shares since somebody else gets given a huge number of cheaper shares. Just like paying someone a huge amount of cash, which can affect share price - except that the cash is obvious and well controlled, hence with backdating there is a law that Apple (or any company) should disclose what they're doing.

If Apple shares weren't going up and up and up... there'd be more of a case that they were losing money. And that's pretty well what the Judge said.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by shamino

And Verizon's FiOS internet/voice/TV combo.

This is an extremely widespread term, used by a lot of different companies in a lot of different industries. Apple should not be allowed to trademark the phrase.

I'd say. What a lame name to be trying to get a trade mark for.
What's next a "Buy One Get One Free" trademark application?
Also if you buy a movie, like a song, you should be able to play it on many devices not just Apple's.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by nofear1az

so, they plan to sue for damages when their were no damages...... I am confused.... say whaaaaat? I think people just like to find *any* reason to sue. Our country is retarded...

Damages to stock price are hard to measure but I don't think the damages were zero. There's no way to know if the stock would be 195 today if more stockholders had more confidence in the leadership's ethics. Certain people did take more from the company than the company approved, and that difference can be easily calculated. It would be the difference in value of a share from the real strike date price to the forged strike date price times the number of optioned shares in question.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by teckstud

What a lame name to be trying to get a trade mark for.
What's next a "Buy One Get One Free" trademark application?

Perhaps Apple doesn't want the trade mark.
ie: What they want is clarity on whether they can use the term.

By applying for the trademark they'll either
1) get the trademark (and use it in marketing etc)
2) get told someone else has the trademark (and NOT use it)
3) get told it's generic and open for anyone to use (and they can use it in marketing).

[JeffDM]

[QUOTE=ncee;1185558]

Originally Posted by lastofthebarons

BUT, there is a small hole in the trademark laws called "the grey area" or is it "Grey Law" (I believe) - which basically say's that if one product or service, isn't of the same nature of another then one can use something already trademark.

Case in point.

There is a famous local Hot Dog stand in Lewiston, Maine, that for sometime, marketed themself as the "Best Place to get an HD" "Serving the best HD's around" "Home of the best HD's" and a few other simular sayings. Well you guessed it, Harley-Davidson went after them, but the case was thrown out of court, once is was pointed out, that the "HD" stood for "Hot Dogs" (and these were ones that didn't leak )

At least this is what I was told by the owner of the stand.

That's true, but I don't know what it's called. Basically, when a trademark is registered, it's actually registered under one of a large number of specific categories. If "Triple Play" was registered as a media service, it's still legitimate to have footwear and clothing under the same "Triple Play" name, though I think the logo has to be distinctive and it's in an unrelated industry, i.e., not easily confused with each other.

This is all my understanding, I really don't remember how I learned about this.

[ouragan]

Originally Posted by GregAlexander

What billions Steve took?

Share backdating can affect the share price, reducing the value of people's shares since somebody else was given a huge number of cheaper shares. Just like paying someone a huge amount of cash, which can affect share price - except that the cash is obvious and well controlled, hence with backdating, there is a law that Apple (or any company) should disclose what they're doing.

What I have in mind are the bonuses paid to Steve Jobs and his pet Vice-Presidents over the last 2 years: Over one billion dollars, most of it through illegal backdating of stock options.

And it would seem that most bonuses paid since 1997, since Steve Jobs returned to Apple, were illegally backdated, billions of dollars in illegal bonuses.

Illegal means just that: illegal, forbidden.

Greedy Steve had it coming, as if the 4 billions he made from the sale of Pixar were not enough. Pixar was bought with the money Steve Jobs received from the sale of his Apple founder's shares in 1985.

Steve Jobs is paid more than $15 millions per year to be Apple's CEO. To put matters in perspective, a bank CEO is paid $6 millions per year, all bonuses included. And Steve Jobs has a high school education. Why should he run a multinational corporation? And continue to do so after a 10 and a half year tenure? A CEO's position is not for life. Otherwise, it's called a tyrany.

[Elwood]

on another completely random happenstance thought: could a "triple play" be in reference to the rumored iTunes rental service? As in, purchasing a "triple play" of an individual file?

mreh.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by ouragan

What I have in mind are the bonuses paid to Steve Jobs and his pet Vice-Presidents over the last 2 years: Over one billion dollars, most of it through illegal backdating of stock options.

I don't know if it's that high, no idea. And I don't care. Apple is doing well, share values are going up too. I do get annoyed when I see our Telstra chairman getting a 15million bonus as he (IMO) ruins the company.

So anyway, none of your reply negates what I said.

It's not illegal due to being bad for shareholders or Apple, it's illegal because the payments they made weren't made abundantly clear to shareholders.

[cutemartin]

Originally Posted by ouragan

What I have in mind are the bonuses paid to Steve Jobs and his pet Vice-Presidents over the last 2 years: Over one billion dollars, most of it through illegal backdating of stock options.

All the back-dated options of dubious nature were not from the last 2 years.

Originally Posted by ouragan

And it would seem that most bonuses paid since 1997, since Steve Jobs returned to Apple, were illegally backdated, billions of dollars in illegal bonuses.

Bull. IIRC, Apple had to account for about $84 million after they restated their accounts. A lot of money perhaps, except when you think that Apple's market capitalisation (ie shareholders' money) has more than doubled since Jan 1 2007. That's >80 billion in one year. The amount given to executives improperly over a period of a few years was thus less than 0.1% of the gain in value this year alone!!

Originally Posted by ouragan

Greedy Steve had it coming, as if the 4 billions he made from the sale of Pixar were not enough. Pixar was bought with the money Steve Jobs received from the sale of his Apple founder's shares in 1985.

Steve Jobs is paid more than $15 millions per year to be Apple's CEO. To put matters in perspective, a bank CEO is paid $6 millions per year, all bonuses included. And Steve Jobs has a high school education. Why should he run a multinational corporation? And continue to do so after a 10 and a half year tenure? A CEO's position is not for life. Otherwise, it's called a tyrany.

"Apple’s CEO, Steve Jobs, currently holds approximately 5.5 million shares of Apple common
stock. Since rejoining Apple in 1997, Mr. Jobs has never sold a share of Apple stock. His last
equity grant was awarded in 2003, and vested in full in 2006. Mr. Jobs currently holds no unvested equity awards. In fiscal 2007, Mr. Jobs’s entire compensation consisted of his $1 annual salary. " from the Apple 10-K FY07
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...L_10K_FY07.pdf

Read the effing financial statements before you spread your uninformed and malicious drivel!

[Galley]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella

Could it be a reference to the ability to buy a digital movie on iTunes and play it on...
1) a Mac
2) an iPod/iPhone
3) an AppleTV

I would bet that's exactly what it is. My source told me that the real reason for the new authentication chips required for the latest generation of iPods was that they would soon be able to output 720p video. AFAIK, the MPAA demands some type of copy-protection for anything 480p or greater.

[mzaslove]

Originally Posted by ouragan

And Steve Jobs has a high school education.

Since when did having any formal education become a prerequisite for being successful in business? Some of the stupidest financial people are the most educated, and vice-versa. There's no correlation that formal education leads to business acumen.

John D. Rockefeller -- first clerking job at 16
Howard Hughes -- dropped out of university
Andrew Carnegie -- self-taught mostly from books from Colonel James Anderson's library
Kirk Kerkorian - dropped out of the 8th grade
Sheldon Adelson -- I don't believe came anywhere near a college.
I also believe Ingvar Kamprad (whose early political affiliations I do not agree with in any way shape or form) did not go to university.

There are many more. University is a wonderful opportunity/place to learn at; a degree hardly guarantees one learned anything, though.

[iCarbon]

Originally Posted by mzaslove

Since when did having any formal education become a prerequisite for being successful in business? Some of the stupidest financial people are the most educated, and vice-versa. There's no correlation that formal education leads to business acumen.

John D. Rockefeller -- first clerking job at 16
Howard Hughes -- dropped out of university
Andrew Carnegie -- self-taught mostly from books from Colonel James Anderson's library
Kirk Kerkorian - dropped out of the 8th grade
Sheldon Adelson -- I don't believe came anywhere near a college.
I also believe Ingvar Kamprad (whose early political affiliations I do not agree with in any way shape or form) did not go to university.

There are many more. University is a wonderful opportunity/place to learn at; a degree hardly guarantees one learned anything, though.

I think you are either forgetting or intentionally leaving out one of the more famous college dropouts....

didn't the leader of the evil empire fail to finish college?

[JeffDM]

There's Bill Lear too, the list of his work looks impressive. Edison had almost no official schooling and his business became pretty powerful, might still be if he didn't become too arrogant. Tesla apparently dropped out of college, but did so pretty late, at one stage he could have owned Edison's company outright.

[zanshin]

Instead of looking skeptically at successful people without a college diploma, perhaps we should pause to consider all the highly paid university graduates in business and politics who do such a remarkable job at ruining companies and governments.

[mzaslove]

Originally Posted by iCarbon

I think you are either forgetting or intentionally leaving out one of the more famous college dropouts....

didn't the leader of the evil empire fail to finish college?

I recalled that I thought that I dreamt he went to Harvard, but I wasn't sure if he finished or not. If he didn't, another good (if evil ) example -- although no one's richer than he is.

The main thing is I hate that "college = success" smugness people try to equate to the field of business. Give me a genius who's self-taught over a "smart" college grad any day. Except maybe in the field of medicine... I do want my doctors to have their degrees... but even so many of them aren't worth their salt despite their degrees and certifications.

On the other hand, money does not equal: taste, smarts in any other field, superior moral rudders, charming personalities and many other traits that wealthy people try to comp.

[elroth]

Troy Tulowitski had an unassisted Triple Play® this year. How much is he going to have to pay Apple?

[mr_zebra]

Originally Posted by ouragan

And it would seem that most bonuses paid since 1997, since Steve Jobs returned to Apple, were illegally backdated, billions of dollars in illegal bonuses.

Illegal means just that: illegal, forbidden.

Greedy Steve had it coming, as if the 4 billions he made from the sale of Pixar were not enough. Pixar was bought with the money Steve Jobs received from the sale of his Apple founder's shares in 1985.

Steve Jobs is paid more than $15 millions per year to be Apple's CEO. To put matters in perspective, a bank CEO is paid $6 millions per year, all bonuses included. And Steve Jobs has a high school education. Why should he run a multinational corporation? And continue to do so after a 10 and a half year tenure? A CEO's position is not for life. Otherwise, it's called a tyrany.

*Most* of the bonuses are illegal? Do you work for the SEC? If you are, I'm sure you're aware that you're not allowed to discuss details of a case you're investigating...

Further, the fact that Jobs doesn't have a college education doesn't mean he isn't qualified to run a business the size of Apple. I think it's pretty clear he's a successful business man... people can be successful without a piece of paper to allow them to be, you know.

I suggest remedial maths classes, dear. You say: "... continue to do so after a 10 and a half year tenure? A CEO's position is not for life." Steve is in fact in his 50s, he's not 10.