Luxpro finally sues Apple to defend iPod shuffle clone

[AppleInsider]

Living up to a promise it made in January 2007, Taiwanese electronics maker Luxpro has at last filed a lawsuit against Apple claiming that the American company was plotting a multinational scheme when it sued Luxpro over its iPod shuffle doppelganger.

The 19-page suit, submitted on Tuesday to a court in Texarkana, Arkansas, not only accuses Apple of trying to unlawfully interfere with Luxpro's business but of an "unending aspiration" to hold a monopoly over the entire world's supply of portable media players that crushes smaller players underfoot.

Reading more as a promotional piece for the company's business than a direct complaint, the lawsuit says Apple's own legal action in 2005 to shut down sales of the allegedly infringing Super Tangent stemmed from a need to "crush" smaller manufacturers before they became larger, which Luxpro insists was well underway thanks to features Apple didn't have and distribution deals in Canada, China and the US -- a 7,000 unit trial with The Source (Radio Shack) in Canada saw the similarly-designed Top Tangent 'fly' off of shelves, Luxpro is proud to state.

The smaller player does take care to formally charge Apple, insisting the iPod maker is interfering with lawful contracts and violating California's Unfair Competition Law to get its monopoly, but is more concerned with the motives.

Besides tying purchased iTunes Store songs to the iPod, Apple has allegedly used "unfair" legal tactics simply to squash competitors, including countersuing Creative in a patent dispute to force a settlement and let it use licenses for the ZEN maker's patents to subdue competitors. Apple knows many smaller companies are growing faster and can't let that happen, Luxpro claims.

And though the purportedly offending Super Tangent player shipped months after the first iPod shuffle, was originally called the Super Shuffle, and bore an uncanny resemblance to the iPod, Apple was reportedly attempting solely to intimidate and take down Luxpro when it took action at trade shows and in the marketplace to stop the 'obviously' different Tangent series of players from being marketed and sold.



This is also said to have included bullying by proxy: Apple allegedly went through ASUS to force a Polish importer to stop carrying Luxpro's goods, achieving the intended effect while letting Apple "erase its fingerprints" left on the affair.

That hurt Luxpro's chances to get on the GraTei securities market and soured deals with suppliers, the plaintiff adds. Even after Taiwan's Fair Trade Commission exonerated Luxpro, the company had lost months of player orders. Apple is now known to be continuing appeals in court against the FTC that have been submitted as recently as February of this year.

For all its certainty regarding Apple's intent and approach, Luxpro has notably backed off from its aggressive damage claims: where it once said it would ask for as much as $100 million from Apple for lost business, the Taiwan company now says the final amount should be determined by a jury at trial.

In its typical fashion, Apple hasn't commented on the lawsuit or Luxpro's accusations.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[ThinkingDifferent]

Oh boo hoo. Haven't they heard, iPods are old school. Maybe they should develop an original product.

[CREB]

I fail to see any similarities between the Shuffle and Super Tangent. Am I alone on this issue?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by CREB

I fail to see any similarities between the Shuffle and Super Tangent. Am I alone on this issue?

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by CREB

I fail to see any similarities between the Shuffle and Super Tangent. Am I alone on this issue?

The last time this came up, there really were people that said there weren't any similarities other than the color.

Frankly, the kind of tone they use here and the last time a couple years ago sounds more like children complaining than professionals trying to make a case.

[CREB]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

The last time this came up, there really were people that said there weren't any similarities other than the color.

Frankly, the kind of tone they use here and the last time a couple years ago sounds more like children complaining than professionals trying to make a case.

I don't doubt anything you stated...it is beyond me that companies like Luxpro actually take the time to file complaints. I can only guess that they are looking for free publicity. Apple will again mop the floor with this legal case.

[wheelhot]

I don't doubt anything you stated...it is beyond me that companies like Luxpro actually take the time to file complaints. I can only guess that they are looking for free publicity. Apple will again mop the floor with this legal case.

Yeah, the product is release a month after the iPod Shuffle (im not sure who invent which first), and it looks cheap....

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

The last time this came up, there really were people that said there weren't any similarities other than the color.

Frankly, the kind of tone they use here and the last time a couple years ago sounds more like children complaining than professionals trying to make a case.

Here is the thread from the January 2007 article. I've linked it directly to one of your posts because you link to an Ars article that show the Luxpro packaging with an Apple-like fruit on it and a pic with iPod-like headphones placed in a way that could be construed as Apple-like, as well.

• http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...87#post1019587

[applebook]

This lawsuit is as idiotic as imbeciles who sue fast food joints because they ate too many of their cheeseburgers and are now obese.

I don't understand the gall of a lame, imitation company that illegally rips off another company's product and then proceeds to try and sue the source of the imitation! What a laugh!

[irnchriz]

Of course the fact that they released a carbon copy of an Apple product had nothing to do with Apple going after them to prevent them from muddying Apples market.


What a bunch of dicks.

[bloggerblog]

That sounds more like an envy rant than a law suit.

[applgeek]

: Apple allegedly went through ASUS to force a Polish importer to stop carrying Luxpro's goods

Now we know why apple isn't making a netbook!

[William John]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Living up to a promise it made in January 2007, Taiwanese electronics maker Luxpro has at last filed a lawsuit against Apple claiming that the American company was plotting a multinational scheme when it sued Luxpro over its iPod shuffle doppelganger.

Doppelganger? German is not your first language I see. You might want to check a dictionary for the definition for doppelganger, sure doesn't work the way you used it. Cute but wrong.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by William John

Doppelganger? German is not your first language I see. You might want to check a dictionary for the definition for doppelganger, sure doesn't work the way you used it. Cute but wrong.

While the definition originally referred a double of an actual person, it's not uncommon for anthropomorphic or "figure of speech" usage to refer to an object, especially an iconic one like the iPod. This usage falls into the latter category, not the former, but both are relevant with the overall evolution of the language. This may even be considered a polyseme, but it doesn't really matter what we call it or how we define it since the use is easy connected to the original form, and I'm certain you see the connection by your "cute" comment, thus making it apropos.

If we are going to condemn the author, we can go after the lack of the Germanic umlaut being used. However, in defense of the author, in English the use of diacritics aren't as common, could cause confusion for English speakers and the words are usually well known without them. There was an even a reform act in the 1990s to phase out of the eszett (double-s; ß), which I recall upset many people. Ain't languistics grande?



Some quotes from my favorite linguist...

While slang may be condemned by purists and schoolteachers, it should be remembered that it is a monument to the language's force of growth by creative innovation, a living example of the democratic, normally anonymous process of language change, and the chief means whereby all the languages spoken today have evolved from earlier tongues.

"Of all the words that exist in any language only a bare minority are pure, unadulterated, original roots. The majority are "coined" words, forms that have been in one way or another created, augmented, cut down, combined, and recombined to convey new needed meanings, The language mint is more than a mint; it is a great manufacturing center, where all sorts of productive activities go on unceasingly."
—Mario Pei, American linguist, The Story of Language, 1949

[bloggerblog]

I just erased a bad joke, it's passed my bedtime.

[applebook]

Also, "doppelganger" has been anglicized for many years, so it's no longer just a "German" word.

I see little problem with the loose usage applied in this article.

Anyway, if one wants to criticize the grammar and word usage of everything, then even dissertation papers and scholarly journals will fail on many, many levels. Most English professors whom I've met and studied under have fairly sub-par grammatical knowledge for their experience and credentials.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by applebook

Also, "doppelganger" has been anglicized for many years, so it's no longer just a "German" word.

"Anglicized" is a much better usage than my relatively unknown "polyseme" neologism.

Anyway, if one wants to criticize the grammar and word usage of everything, then even dissertation papers and scholarly journals will fail on many, many levels. Most English professors whom I've met and studied under have fairly sub-par grammatical knowledge for their experience and credentials.

That depends on how the level of "purity" one expects. if we didn't use coined terms we wouldn't have a language to speak of, literally. My personal favorites, are words coined from characters in books or just completely made up by authors which happen to catch on. I wonder if Bill Maher's recent movie and made up word "Religulous" will make it into the common dictionaries some time in the future.

It's amazing how long some of these words are in circulation and well known before actually being accepted into a bona fide dictionary.

• http://jaggerkieth.wordpress.com/200...ords-for-2008/

[mjtomlin]

Here's a link to the original product and packaging, anyone who thinks Apple doesn't have a leg to stand is either really blind or just plain stupid...

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.ph...hufle_rip_off/

Looks like they tried to change it to "not exactly" look like the original shuffle. Now that Apple has moved on to a newer, better design, they probably think they can get away with it.

[wheelhot]

Lol, now they add 2 buttons on the back with something called super shuffle? The front look exactly the same as the Shuffle.

[BdeRWest]

It really says something about copyright law in today's world that Monster, a cable-making company can sue anything that sounds like "monster" (including Disney/Pixar for "Monsters, Inc.") but when a product is LEGITIMATELY ripping something off, the person with the offending product can sue.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by BdeRWest

It really says something about copyright law in today's world that Monster, a cable-making company can sue anything that sounds like "monster" (including Disney/Pixar for "Monsters, Inc.") but when a product is LEGITIMATELY ripping something off, the person with the offending product can sue.

Those examples are more a matter of trademarks than copyright.

It's more a problem of litigation being a free-for-all to file than solely about copyright or trademark law. Though copyright and trademark laws have significant problems too.