Jobs cleared to raze mansion as Ive loses domain name battle

[AppleInsider]

Apple chief executive Steve Jobs has again been given the go-ahead to demolish his moldering mansion in the Woodside hills. Meanwhile, Apple design chief Jonathan Ive has lost a court battle to stop a crazed fan from using his likeness in a series of domain names.

Jobs OK'd to raze mansion

The MercuryNews is reporting that Steve Jobs can move forward with a decade-long initiative to tear down his 17,250-square-foot Spanish revival mansion in California's Woodside hills following a vote of 6 to 1 in his favor during a local council meeting on Tuesday.

Only Mayor Peter Mason, a licensed architect who has reportedly done historic preservation work, opposed Jobs' motion, saying he's troubled by the number of historic properties in the area that are being demolished rather than restored.

"It's an unfortunate thing that Mr. Jobs doesn't like the house," he said. "It's really sad that we're going to continue to tear down historic resources in this town because they're old."

Last year, Jobs submitted a revised permit application to the council showing it would cost approximately $5 million more to restore sprawling mansion built in 1929 for copper mining mogul Daniel Jackling than it would to raze it and construct a smaller home for his family.

Jobs purchased the blown-out mansion in the early 1980s and lived there -- sometimes eating his evening meals on the floor -- for about 10 years before renting it out and then leaving it to deteriorate.



AppleInsider recently posted an extensive photo gallery of the house taken a couple of years ago by a photographer that stumbled onto the property to find its gates, windows and doors wide open.

Ive loses bid to take over domain names

Meanwhile, Jobs' long-time design chief friend Jonathan Ive wasn't as fortunate in one of his own legal battles this month.

Bloomberg reports that the World Intellectual Property Organization denied his claim to block London resident and fan Harry Jones from using his name in a series of four domain names, including jonathanive.com and jonyive.com.

According to WIPO's domain name dispute resolution process, Ive would have had to show proof that his trademark rights were at risk in order to gain control of the domain names. However, a WIPO panel found that the evidence provided by Ive "indicates that the complainant (and Apple Inc.) do not promote the complainant’s name as a brand or trademark, and therefore do not use it in trade or commerce."

For his part, Jones claims to have first started jonathanive.com to pay homage to the designer as part of a project when he was in college five years ago. Though the site was never meant for profit, it grew over the years to receive hundreds of thousands of hits. Two years later, he came under pressure from Apple to surrender the domain names, as he explained in a recent post to the site:

In April 2006, Apple Inc. spoke to me to ask me to post a disclaimer saying that I had no links with Apple or with Jonathan Ive. I did so here, and Apple Inc. approved of the content of the website.

In February 2008 another Apple Inc. employee got in touch and I was put under great pressure to give up my website. That Apple employee offered me an iPod (and later a Macbook) in exchange. This upset me, as I had spent a tremendous amount of time building and maintaining the website. When I declined the offer, I was told I must name a sales price if I did not want to face litigation. I reacted emotionally to the pressure, and gave a high price of US$ 400,000 to dissuade harassment. I had no desire or intention to sell my website to Apple Inc.

I would be happy to reach an amicable solution with Jonathan Ive. I have told his lawyers this and that I would be pleased to discuss this matter with him in person and to try any process that would allow an amicable settlement of this matter (e.g., mediation). I have received no response to this request so far.

As regular readers will know, I have the utmost respect for Jonathan and am one of his biggest supporters. I just want to be left alone to carry on running this website, and I hope you will continue to enjoy reading it.

As part of his complaint with WIPO’s arbitration and mediation center, Ive claimed that he is a "very private person" who has turned down all sorts of offers outside Apple to design cars, cameras and movie sets.



"My reputation has been established by the work I do, not through self-publicity. I do not usually give interviews … I seek to avoid publicity," he said, noting that the few pieces of notable work he's done outside Apple included "designing a character in a Pixar/Disney computer animated movie “Wall-e” and designing a book cover."

For those interested, the Wall-e character conceived by Ive was Wall-e's girl pal Eve.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Virgil-TB2]

All I'm going to say is that domain squatters are scum buckets.

They always say they are "fans" but at the end of the day the only entities they hurt are those they are supposedly fans of. They also always want money when it comes right down to it.

[AjitMD]

Steve Jobs better hurry and take down that old house before some other nut gets an injunction. He could order it wrecked over night. Does he need any more permits?

This went on long enough. The man is entitled to build the house of his choice and left alone. Life is short enough.

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by AjitMD

Steve Jobs better hurry and take down that old house before some other nut gets an injunction. He could order it wrecked over night. Does he need any more permits?

This went on long enough. The man is entitled to build the house of his choice and left alone. Life is short enough.

He needs a demolition permit which the town is supposedly drawing up now.

[teckstud]

Both stories - utter nonsense. Not worth my commenting on.

[bloggerblog]

I can't believe SJ bought that old, ugly, beat down, claustrophobic "mansion", and actually lived in it.

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

As regular readers will know, I have the utmost respect for Jonathan and am one of his biggest supporters.

Reading this, the picture I had was of Buddy from "The Incredibles".
"I'm you're number one fan!!!"


Yeah, I'm sure Mr. Ive is flattered nearly as much as he's creeped out by that kind of complement.

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Both stories - utter nonsense. Not worth my commenting on.

Then I obviously can't be troubled to comment on your non-comment.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by Ronbo

Then I obviously can't be troubled to comment on your non-comment.

[carloblackmore]

Any guy rude enough to squat on a domain name using another person's name (especially someone of some amount of fame), is a sad wipe of a man. Especially when the person comes to you and request to have their name back. I don't care how much work you put into it, just migrate your content to a different domain out of respect for the individual - if you truly wish to "honor" the person.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by AjitMD

Steve Jobs better hurry and take down that old house before some other nut gets an injunction. He could order it wrecked over night. Does he need any more permits?

This went on long enough. The man is entitled to build the house of his choice and left alone. Life is short enough.

I'm glad he won and I think he has the right to do with the house what he wants, but I hope he saves the organ and some of the other stuff inside before he tears it down. Irreplaceable things like that should always be saved if possible.

[Dr Millmoss]

Originally Posted by bloggerblog

I can't believe SJ bought that old, ugly, beat down, claustrophobic "mansion", and actually lived in it.

It was actually a perfectly fine house before Steve walked away from it and allowed it to fall into ruin, and its architectural significance is not a matter of dispute.

[SpamSandwich]

Word of warning to AI, calling this domain squatter a "crazed fan" could open you up to a libel lawsuit. You might want to reconsider your choice of words.

[Phone-UI-Guy]

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

It was actually a perfectly fine house before Steve walked away from it and allowed it to fall into ruin, and its architectural significance is not a matter of dispute.

I don't know that you are that accurate. Some of the information actually makes it look like that they started doing the asbestos removal and halted. Once you start opening walls up on a place like that, you are always in for a surprise. Then you end up with the question if you should dump more money in to try and fix up everything or just start over. Obviously the "start over" won out.

[carloblackmore]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Word of warning to AI, calling this domain squatter a "crazed fan" could open you up to a libel lawsuit. You might want to reconsider your choice of words.

AI could just say they meant "crazed" as a term of flattery and honor.

[DimMok]

Its sickos like this that give stalkers bad names...Dude needs to leave Ive alone and give up the domains.....

Cudos to the photographer...those were some nice creepy pics of that old house..... Great work.

[nagromme]

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

It was actually a perfectly fine house before Steve walked away from it and allowed it to fall into ruin, and its architectural significance is not a matter of dispute.

"Perfectly fine" or not, it can't be replaced and I have my doubts about the decision (though none of us know the full story).

What bothers me more is this:

sometimes eating his evening meals on the floor

Get a PLATE! Jeesh.

[bigmc6000]

It was built in 1929 (aka, not "old" even by American standards) and has the same architecture as dozens and dozens of other homes - not historic, at all. Bulldoze...

[crees!]

Dude could just get jonathanivefan.com and end it.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by carloblackmore

AI could just say they meant "crazed" as a term of flattery and honor.

Or that he just has a miriad of tiny cracks and scratches all over his body?

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Both stories - utter nonsense. Not worth my commenting on.

I am upset. You couldn't come up with a great comment?

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by bloggerblog

I can't believe SJ bought that old, ugly, beat down, claustrophobic "mansion", and actually lived in it.

I am sure it wasn't in that condition when he bought it in 1985, and lived in it.

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Word of warning to AI, calling this domain squatter a "crazed fan" could open you up to a libel lawsuit. You might want to reconsider your choice of words.

I don't think they are concerned about lawsuits, since most people don't put much weight on credibility with their articles. Their "reliable anonymous" sources are generally full of BS.

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by nagromme

"Perfectly fine" or not, it can't be replaced and I have my doubts about the decision (though none of us know the full story).

What bothers me more is this:



Get a PLATE! Jeesh.

You are forgetting that after he bought the place in 1985, he was fired from Apple.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by crees!

Dude could just get jonathanivefan.com and end it.

Good point and why the Google ads if non profit? Harry should accept the MacBook and change DN as you suggest. Too late I have it now. Kidding

[MuffinDCC]

I'd sure as hell take the iPod and Macbook over a domain anyday

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by hillstones

I am upset. You couldn't come up with a great comment?

OK I'm bored so here goes:

Jonathan Ive- Pay up or shut up. Who does he think he is- Madonna? If Madonna had do it, so can you. Besides shouldn't he just be using JonathanIve@me.com for his website?
You snooze, you loose. Pay up or shut up.

[Dr Millmoss]

Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy

I don't know that you are that accurate. Some of the information actually makes it look like that they started doing the asbestos removal and halted. Once you start opening walls up on a place like that, you are always in for a surprise. Then you end up with the question if you should dump more money in to try and fix up everything or just start over. Obviously the "start over" won out.

Steve walked away from the house. He never liked the house from the very start, so it was never a question of keeping it up. This is actually one of the more common dirty tricks used by people who waste historic buildings. They let it become such an eyesore that nobody cares anymore, or wait for a vagrant to burn it down. Happens all the time.

Originally Posted by nagromme

"Perfectly fine" or not, it can't be replaced and I have my doubts about the decision (though none of us know the full story).

The story was played out in the press in detail. Those of us who were interested followed it pretty closely.

Originally Posted by bigmc6000

It was built in 1929 (aka, not "old" even by American standards) and has the same architecture as dozens and dozens of other homes - not historic, at all. Bulldoze...

The house was historic. This was never the issue. The issue was whether the city would allow him to tear it down anyway.

[mdriftmeyer]

Not level? Not dismantle? Not demolish?

You chose the most rarely used word never used in construction or demolition to describe the action?

[Mr Underhill]

What a strange character that Jones guy is. This is virtual stalking, no wonder Johnny Ive's didn't want to meet this creep in person. As for not wanting to sell the domain, that's b*****s, this kid's intention, like all domain grabbers, is to build it up with a view to selling for big bucks.

$400,000 dollars an emotion reaction my arse.

I'm sure Johnny knows a few good hackers who could render this site useless in return for a shiny new Macbook or iPod.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer

Not level? Not dismantle? Not demolish?

You chose the most rarely used word never used in construction or demolition to describe the action?

Hmmm...... you may be right. Here are the # google search results for:

Level: 909 million
Dismantle: 4 million
Demolish: 3.42 milion
Raze: 2.17 million

[iankanderson]

While Ive may have had something to do with EVE, the actual design was done by a guy named Jay Shuster. He actually claimed how EVE was the easiest piece of design because she was allowed to be overly futuristic. He actually defended his design from Ive... Which I thought was interesting. We all just assume that Ive directly designed her... Shuster alluded to this during a lecture of his in Tulsa, OK.

[MotherBrain]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

In February 2008 another Apple Inc. employee got in touch and I was put under great pressure to give up my website. That Apple employee offered me an iPod (and later a Macbook) in exchange. This upset me, as I had spent a tremendous amount of time building and maintaining the website. When I declined the offer, I was told I must name a sales price if I did not want to face litigation. I reacted emotionally to the pressure, and gave a high price of US$ 400,000 to dissuade harassment. I had no desire or intention to sell my website to Apple Inc.

You really need to lay off bullying people who have the utmost respect for your company or for its employees. Cool off with this stuff!! It doesn't even sound like Ives was the one threatening litigation but Apple itself. Sometimes the people that Apple threatens make me wonder sometimes if they actually did some research in to who they were threatening with litigation or was it simply a knee-jerk reaction to a .com name by some corporate blowhards.

There's nothing quite like having your idols threaten you with litigation. Nice one, Apple.

[Dr Millmoss]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Raze: 2.17 million

Language fans will know that this is one of a handful of words in English with a homophone which is also an antonym.

[tmp]

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

Steve walked away from the house. He never liked the house from the very start, so it was never a question of keeping it up.

Which sort of begs the question why buy in the first place. If you buy a George Washington Smith house with the idea of tearing it down, you're going to be facing preservationists.

I respect Jobs and the work he's done, but that house is filled with irreplaceable tilework and hand crafted woods. It's a shame that he couldn't just find another lot for whatever he wants to put up and sell this one to someone who would want to restore it.

[Dr Millmoss]

Originally Posted by tmp

Which sort of begs the question why buy in the first place. If you buy a George Washington Smith house with the idea of tearing it down, you're going to be facing preservationists.

I respect Jobs and the work he's done, but that house is filled with irreplaceable tilework and hand crafted woods. It's a shame that he couldn't just find another lot for whatever he wants to put up and sell this one to someone who would want to restore it.

Right, exactly. It's also a George Washington Smith design, which are much sought after and sell for big premiums over more ordinary houses of the period and style. Steve could have sold the house for a huge profit, and bought any other piece of property on the face of the planet for his house. It staggers the imagination why someone with an infinity of options would be so insistent about being an architectural vandal. I guess I learned something about Steve I wish I hadn't.

[tmp]

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

It staggers the imagination why someone with an infinity of options would be so insistent about being an architectural vandal.

It's like buying a Picasso, claiming it isn't a good one, and asking to paint over it. Just buy a blank canvas for gods sake.

[Dr Millmoss]

Originally Posted by tmp

It's like buying a Picasso, claiming it isn't a good one, and asking to paint over it. Just buy a blank canvas for gods sake.

Even worse in Steve's case. Early on Steve claimed that Smith couldn't have been an important architect because he had never heard of him. I'll bet some people have never heard of you, Steve.

[TBell]

I think Appleinsider should be careful about calling the fan crazed. That seems like a libel suit waiting to happen. The guy seems pretty normal to me. Further, he isn't doing anything different then a lot of people do who have interest in certain celebrities.

This guy has an interest in industrial design. Ives is his hero. He has a website devoted to that. The law is also on his side. He isn't profiting from the Site at all.

If Ives would have called him up and asked for the domain name, the guy seems like he would have agreed. However, here the lawyers stepped in and tried to strong arm him.

[TBell]

BS. YOu can only be a domain squatter is you are violating somebody's trademark. Here he is not. Further, he doesn't even have Google ads installed, which is a sure mark of the domain squatter.

Originally Posted by Mr Underhill

What a strange character that Jones guy is. This is virtual stalking, no wonder Johnny Ive's didn't want to meet this creep in person. As for not wanting to sell the domain, that's b*****s, this kid's intention, like all domain grabbers, is to build it up with a view to selling for big bucks.

$400,000 dollars an emotion reaction my arse.

I'm sure Johnny knows a few good hackers who could render this site useless in return for a shiny new Macbook or iPod.