or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple sues 'HyperMac' accessory maker over MagSafe, iPod cables
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sues 'HyperMac' accessory maker over MagSafe, iPod cables - Page 4

post #121 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by hodgkin View Post

Most external chargers require electricity. It's true that there's no reason why a AA battery hookup couldn't be made legitimately by using the licensed dock connector, but it's also relatively difficult to find a AA battery backup for the iPhone out in the middle of Nowheresville.

I have an external AA charger. I don't know what Newtron's problem is.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #122 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Worse, file a court approved form with a bank, provide a copy of the judgement, and seize your assets or garnish your wages. All without you even having to be present if you lose your case.

And by the time it gets to this the judge would be pretty pissed off because the loser has failed to pay the judgement willingly.

It is you that is injecting the words enforce and force here. I didn't, and can't be held liable for your lack of knowledge for how the civil system actually works. So take your high-hobby horse language parsing elsewhere, it broke.

I think it comes down to when the civil case crosses over to a criminal case. That is where the gun comes into effect.

Cease and desist > failure to comply > contempt of court > under arrest

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #123 of 173
Two things are true...

1. Apple doesn't license the MagSafe connector to third-parties

AND

2. Apple no longer sells any laptops with user-swappable batteries.

Imagine being on a trans-Pacific flight with your MacBook. Even with Apple's new battery technology you'd be lucky to get 4-5 hours of work time. So without a solution similar to HyperMac, you're out of luck. This is not consumer-friendly. In fact, it's Apple-centric and would 'seem' to be designed to protect Apple and not the users of their products.

On a side note, it's really sad how vitriolic some of the 'pro-Apple' posts on this list have become.
post #124 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen Meaney View Post

Two things are true...

1. Apple doesn't license the MagSafe connector to third-parties

AND

2. Apple no longer sells any laptops with user-swappable batteries.

Imagine being on a trans-Pacific flight with your MacBook. Even with Apple's new battery technology you'd be lucky to get 4-5 hours of work time. So without a solution similar to HyperMac, you're out of luck. This is not consumer-friendly. In fact, it's Apple-centric and would 'seem' to be designed to protect Apple and not the users of their products.

On a side note, it's really sad how vitriolic some of the 'pro-Apple' posts on this list have become.

If you are on a trans-pacific flight you should conserve your own biological resources. Sleep. This I know first hand.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #125 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I tried and tried to find an external disposable battery charger in a local store and went empty-handed into the electricity-free camping zone. No plugging my iPhone into AA power.

Make your own -> Minty Boost: Portable USB power
Buy one -> Duracell Instant Charger
-> Duracell Powerhouse USB charger
-> Zen Universal Battery Charger
-> Portable Charger iPOD Touch Apple iPod or MP3 Player
post #126 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen Meaney View Post

On a side note, it's really sad how vitriolic some of the 'pro-Apple' posts on this list have become.

Out of context, that may seem true. But in most cases they are in response to a few relentless trolls whose only purpose in posting is to trash anything and everything Apple. If you want to see vitriol, review some of their posts.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #127 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron;

It's really too bad that Apple refuses to allow their proprietary connector to have much of an ecosystem.

It sounds to me like these products are in a woefully underserved category. I tried and tried to find an external disposable battery charger in a local store and went empty-handed into the electricity-free camping zone. No plugging my iPhone into AA power. No nothing until I got back with a dead phone and saw some obscure stuff on the 'web.

Apple's lockdowns and their proprietary ways both just plain suck.

A quick search online will show that there are an enormous amount of of USB socket battery powered chargers and solar chargers available in the US and around the world.

You just need this USB socket, and then plug in your iPhone USB cable into the iPhone on one end, and the other end into the USB socket of the battery pack.

Your statements above, appear to be 100% invalid.
post #128 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron;

Thank you.

And BTW, I was looking in a suburb of one of the top-10 biggest cities in the US. The suburb alone has a population of over 100k. I went to both a Radio Shack and a well-stocked specialty electronics store, as well as lesser, but more local possibilities, like Walgreens.

Nothing.

Did you look for a USB socket charger? There are also numerous, well-documented and available external battery packs for iPhone. Any Mac or iPhone related magazine will show many available brands and products.
post #129 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by MenLoveToys;

You are just a mean ASS. Chill the hell out. The guy was making a comment and you say LIE and incompetent.

You need to take your meds and a nap.

Newtron was the first to post on this thread. I believe the post he made was highly incorrect due to the wide availability of iPhone external battery packs.

I do not think your accusations of someone to "take their meds" is appropriate.

Invalid and clearly incendiary posts on these forums are reducing the quality of our experience.
post #130 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Well, this thread is officially overrun by the troll army.

We should take the necessary steps to get rid of this problem.
post #131 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Do tell! I want to hear all about this. This indeed IS something I know nothing about!

Yer a riot, kid. Please don't ever change.

This is an insubstantial post.
post #132 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen Meaney View Post

Two things are true...

1. Apple doesn't license the MagSafe connector to third-parties

AND

2. Apple no longer sells any laptops with user-swappable batteries.

Imagine being on a trans-Pacific flight with your MacBook. Even with Apple's new battery technology you'd be lucky to get 4-5 hours of work time. So without a solution similar to HyperMac, you're out of luck. This is not consumer-friendly. In fact, it's Apple-centric and would 'seem' to be designed to protect Apple and not the users of their products.

On a side note, it's really sad how vitriolic some of the 'pro-Apple' posts on this list have become.

A quick search of the Apple store yields this result which will not charge your battery but will allow you to use your Macbook for the entire flight if needed. Cost is also reasonable IMO.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB...co=MTA4NDgxNDk
post #133 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Would like to inform you that I intend file an official complaint to the site management for each of these kinds of posts that are made.

I have retracted this statement as it may be viewed as threat/ intimidation.
post #134 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKRick View Post

A quick search of the Apple store yields this result which will not charge your battery but will allow you to use your Macbook for the entire flight if needed. Cost is also reasonable IMO.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB...co=MTA4NDgxNDk

I frequently fly long-haul, living in Hong Kong. Very few airlines have power sockets in economy, and those that do often have tickets that are twice as expensive.
post #135 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I frequently fly long-haul, living in Hong Kong. Very few airlines have power sockets in economy, and those that do often have tickets that are twice as expensive.

As a frequent traveler as well I know this to be somewhat true but in that case you cannot use any laptop for such extended periods including Windows PCs so this is not a issue that Apple should be bashed for.
I can say that my Macbook Pro will yield a solid 6+ hours of use vs. my PC which I'm lucky to get 3 hours of use.
post #136 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Who says the products are banned? Why is everyone, including the moderator taking the unfounded word of a known BS artist like Newtron as gospel? He's factually incorrect on every point.

Further proof: http://www.quickertek.com/products/apple_juicz.php

Apple doesn't license the magsafe adaptor so if manufacturers make knock-offs, they violate the patent and if they use Apple's own parts, they don't like that either. If Apple are suing this maker, they have every reason to sue any and every other manufacturer selling magsafe-compatible products because they have to be building them one way or the other, both without a license.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42

As for iOS devices, solutions are plentiful since is uses the industry defacto standard iPod dock connector for which there are a plethora of devices. I can recharge my iPad with a $25 eneloop battery pack and a standard iPod cable.

Ok, that pretty much limits the issue to just magsafe devices and I agree a camping trip is not a great example but if it applies to all magsafe products that 3rd party manufacturers can make, it's not a good thing.
post #137 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKRick View Post

As a frequent traveler as well I know this to be somewhat true but in that case you cannot use any laptop for such extended periods including Windows PCs so this is not a issue that Apple should be bashed for.
I can say that my Macbook Pro will yield a solid 6+ hours of use vs. my PC which I'm lucky to get 3 hours of use.

Except their argument is that with a PC, you can just swap out a fresh battery.
post #138 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKRick View Post

As a frequent traveler as well I know this to be somewhat true but in that case you cannot use any laptop for such extended periods including Windows PCs so this is not a issue that Apple should be bashed for.
I can say that my Macbook Pro will yield a solid 6+ hours of use vs. my PC which I'm lucky to get 3 hours of use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Except their argument is that with a PC, you can just swap out a fresh battery.

But that would still equate to having the same battery life as the Mac. 2 PC batteries = 6 hours = one charge on MacBook Pro. So for PC users they would have to bring 2 extra batteries to get an advantage over the Mac.

However I hope this Magsafe thing is clarified, do we know for sure whether Apple licenses it or not? Maybe Apple is annoyed in this case that they are using actual Apple parts.
post #139 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

But that would still equate to having the same battery life as the Mac. 2 PC batteries = 6 hours = one charge on MacBook Pro. So for PC users they would have to bring 2 extra batteries to get an advantage over the Mac.

Its great when you can smash down the strawman that you painstakingly built.

Not all PC's have the same battery life as your example. In fact, some have much longer battery lives. If I have an ASUS UL80, I could get over 8hrs of general usage out of one battery. Two batteries would get me through a long haul trip quite comfortably.
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #140 of 173
Don't sue them, buy them!
post #141 of 173
I just want to add that Hypermac does plainly state that they are using actual purchased Apple magsafe adaptors. They do not present them as their own.
I just got back from Africa, and their product functioned very well. It was crucial in a safari setting.
Additionally, I have tried to use the airline flight adaptor in the past. Very problematic.
Regardless of the outcome of this suit, I am glad I got mine.
post #142 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcahill009 View Post

Newtron you simply miss the point almost always. Yes you can buy a civic paint it and resell it (as long as you are selling your property and are still calling it a civic)

What you can't do it buy a civic, take out the engine put it into a new car and say your selling a new line of cars called hypercivics. Do you get it??

Other than the Trademark issue, why not?

What patent issues are raised by your example?
post #143 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

But you can't just build your own brand of car using other company's patented components and then mass market it as something new.


Thompson

I believe that you are incorrect. Got any support for your statement?

I believe that I can take any car, modify it however I wish, and sell it. I believe I can take many other cars, combine them and sell the creation.

Hot Rod and Custom Shops do exactly that, every day. Carrol Shelby did exactly that. He still does.
post #144 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Typically the term "patent troll" is applied to persons or companies that have no intention of using the intellectual property (IP).


Thompson

That definition is correct, but too narrow. Here's the Wiki def:

Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company that enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention.

So often the term is used in the manner you identify, and the use may be "typical", but it is far from exclusive. According to Wiki, my usage was correct. I'll admit that Wikipedia is not authoritative.
post #145 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

But you cannot buy wrecked cars and tear down any undamaged Koni Macpherson struts for the special Koni valve and put that into your own Macpherson strut that you say can replace the stock struts. Then say they are great compatible struts because you salvaged the special patented part you know you are not allowed to produce.

Got any support for that contention?

I think that you can reuse parts from wrecked cars without obtaining any license. I think that you can sell a used car which includes non-oem salvaged parts. I am aware of no impediments to that at all.

Is it the trademark issues which concern you? That the seller here is "saying you can replace the stock struts"?

Using a big block Chevy engine in a car not designed for it was a popular thing to do in the 1970's. Many of those cars were sold, and the seller most likely bragged about using the engine in the car. And I am unaware of any legal impediments to doing exactly the same sort of thing you describe.

Got any support for your contention?
post #146 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko;

Its great when you can smash down the strawman that you painstakingly built.

Not all PC's have the same battery life as your example. In fact, some have much longer battery lives. If I have an ASUS UL80, I could get over 8hrs of general usage out of one battery. Two batteries would get me through a long haul trip quite comfortably.

Actually, that was something I was thinking about. Fair enough. It is an advantage over Macs. But besides Hypermac, does anyone else know what other external battery packs there are for Macs?
post #147 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Kind of like undercover law enforcement having to admit they're cops if challenged.

Why do you think undercover cops admit the truth if challenged? Are the rules designed to ensure that they get killed by the bad guys? "Oh yeah - I'm a cop. I'm alone, surrounded by all you guys and your guns. And yes, I am indeed a cop, trying to make sure that very bad things happen to all you murderers."

You may want to recheck some facts before you use them as a basis for your opinion.
post #148 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Not all PC's have the same battery life as your example. In fact, some have much longer battery lives. If I have an ASUS UL80, I could get over 8hrs of general usage out of one battery. Two batteries would get me through a long haul trip quite comfortably.


My Dell gets many, many hours from its 9 cell battery. I've never timed it, as it has never been an issue.
post #149 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Why do you think undercover cops admit the truth if challenged?

I saw it on TV.

Do you receive consideration or any other form of compensation for the posts you make on this forum?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #150 of 173
Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on with the MagSafe issue here.

And I can't believe anyone here is truly stupid enough to think otherwise.

You see, when you have a patent on something, you can restrict who manufactures something. And you can restrict who sells it - THE FIRST TIME.

But HyperMac is buying the connectors either directly from Apple, or after they've already been purchased from Apple by someone else. The first sale has already happened. And the first sale is all that Apple gets to legally control.

And if you want to use the Honda example, I can't build a clone of a Honda car. But I can buy a Honda car, disassemble it, and use the parts to build a new car. I can then sell that car, and because it's then true, I can tell you I've made it from Honda parts. And there's nothing Honda can do about it.

If what some of you were claiming is true, it would be illegal to sell your used computer when you're done with it. Ebay would be illegal. Used car dealers wouldn't be in business. Think, people. What Apple is trying to do with MagSafe here is beyond stupid.
post #151 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

My Dell gets many, many hours from its 9 cell battery. I've never timed it, as it has never been an issue.

What model is it? Would help to have more information. You mention it has never been an issue... Is this daily use, or on flights, or something else? Which is what we are actually talking about with regard to external battery packs.
post #152 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen Meaney;

Two things are true...

1. Apple doesn't license the MagSafe connector to third-parties

AND

2. Apple no longer sells any laptops with user-swappable batteries.

Imagine being on a trans-Pacific flight with your MacBook. Even with Apple's new battery technology you'd be lucky to get 4-5 hours of work time. So without a solution similar to HyperMac, you're out of luck. This is not consumer-friendly. In fact, it's Apple-centric and would 'seem' to be designed to protect Apple and not the users of their products.

On a side note, it's really sad how vitriolic some of the 'pro-Apple' posts on this list have become.

Does anyone know of any third-party battery packs besides Hypermac. It seems strange if they are the only ones doing it.

I agree though Apple should license the Magsafe.
post #153 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post

Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on with the MagSafe issue here.

And I can't believe anyone here is truly stupid enough to think otherwise.

You see, when you have a patent on something, you can restrict who manufactures something. And you can restrict who sells it - THE FIRST TIME.

But HyperMac is buying the connectors either directly from Apple, or after they've already been purchased from Apple by someone else. The first sale has already happened. And the first sale is all that Apple gets to legally control.

Of all the things cloned and copied in technology you can't perceive of a simple 4 prong power plug with a magnetic end being built, that this could only mean it came from Apple and with their blessing for first sale?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #154 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I believe that you are incorrect. Got any support for your statement?

I believe that I can take any car, modify it however I wish, and sell it. I believe I can take many other cars, combine them and sell the creation.

Hot Rod and Custom Shops do exactly that, every day. Carrol Shelby did exactly that. He still does.

Ah, but when you modify said car, are you introducing components that are patented (and which you have not received a license for)?

Do Hot Rod and Custom Shops use unlicensed patented components in their modifications? Does Carroll Shelby?

Do you have any support for why these are even analogous to the current discussion?

Thompson
post #155 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard View Post

Maybe in Texas, but in most states and countries, it's enforced by a judicial system which does not involve a gun.

And judges aren't armed like Judge Dredd.

Think it through completely. If someone doesn't comply with a verdict, eventually that verdict will be enforced with a gun. Or at least action will be taken against the non-compliance. And that action will be enforced with a gun unless you submit.

Don't believe me? Try it sometime, you'll have a gun pointed at you as you try to prevent being taken into custodial arrest.

People sometimes like to abstract away what it means to enact laws. It is good to occasionally pause and acknowledge what is actually going on.

With that said.... It is my opinion that people should be free to make a power cord for any product they want. I don't feel that it is beneficial to our society or economy to have government enforced power-plug monopolies. It simply isn't just to have the government come and stick a gun in your face because you dared to solder something onto a power plug.

I'll grant that this criticism could be levied against just about any law that someone disagrees with. But it is still important to occasionally puts laws in their true context. It motivates us to more carefully consider if each law is justified.
post #156 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryb View Post

Your morality must be pretty fuzzy. If I make a port system, anyone can use it to piggy back on the products that I market. Why can't they just clone my product that uses that port? What's the difference? I invented both of them. Port systems are just not important as a part of the way I want to make money from my invention. Really, Apple is not bound to license any of their inventions, they only do so because they believe it will increase their profits for the items that they are marketing. Most of what they do is amoral, profit motivated, not immoral. Unless you think that profit is bad, most people don't think it is.

Disagreeing with the current patent system does not make someone's morals any more or less "fuzzy".

One could choose to draw the line in a variety of different places. It is easy to blindly assume that the status-quo is the pinnacle of morality. But given how much the status-quo has changed over the decades or centuries, that would seem to be a fault assumption.

It is my opinion that the current level of government enforced idea-ownership is unjust. The balance of power has shifted such that rich and powerful people/organizations can leverage the legal system in an unjust manner. That's certainly a broader argument than what is being waged here.

Specifically, I think it is wrong for the government to prevent people from building product accessories. I don't think connectors for consumer product accessories should be patentable.

To some, this may seem like an extremist's position. I disagree, and this is why I pointed out how the status-quo, while taken for granted, isn't static. It is guaranteed to change. My bet is that eventually people will wake up to the power shift that has already happened, and start to scale back what qualifies as "intellectual property".
post #157 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

With that said.... It is my opinion that people should be free to make a power cord for any product they want. I don't feel that it is beneficial to our society or economy to have government enforced power-plug monopolies. It simply isn't just to have the government come and stick a gun in your face because you dared to solder something onto a power plug.

I'll grant that this criticism could be levied against just about any law that someone disagrees with. But it is still important to occasionally puts laws in their true context. It motivates us to more carefully consider if each law is justified.

Sometimes court cases result in the overturning of laws. Other than when laws are originally made, or in this case when patents are pending, what entity besides the courts typically considers the justification for specific laws?

So it seems to me that bringing the case forward is a perfectly acceptable thing for Apple to do, unless your contention is that the lawsuit itself is frivolous. (And I don't think you are going there.) If this even gets to court, HyperMac can call into question whether this invention was patentable in the first place. If they do, then the courts will perform the "careful consideration" that you seek.

Letting the case run its course may result in exactly what you want, i.e. the "power-plug monopoly" is rejected, and a precedent is set that allows people to "make a power cord for any product they want".

It's all good.

Thompson
post #158 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Ah, but when you modify said car, are you introducing components that are patented (and which you have not received a license for)?



Thompson

Are you under the impression that you must receive a license in order to use a patented invention after you purchase it?

This premise is begging your question. It is the area in dispute.

And if you think about it for a moment, you will realize that reselling patented objects is not illegal.
post #159 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Disagreeing with the current patent system does not make someone's morals any more or less "fuzzy".

One could choose to draw the line in a variety of different places. It is easy to blindly assume that the status-quo is the pinnacle of morality. But given how much the status-quo has changed over the decades or centuries, that would seem to be a fault assumption.

It is my opinion that the current level of government enforced idea-ownership is unjust. The balance of power has shifted such that rich and powerful people/organizations can leverage the legal system in an unjust manner. That's certainly a broader argument than what is being waged here.

Specifically, I think it is wrong for the government to prevent people from building product accessories. I don't think connectors for consumer product accessories should be patentable.

To some, this may seem like an extremist's position. I disagree, and this is why I pointed out how the status-quo, while taken for granted, isn't static. It is guaranteed to change. My bet is that eventually people will wake up to the power shift that has already happened, and start to scale back what qualifies as "intellectual property".

Dfiler,

Patents are not permanently set in stone. There is a mechanism in place that can (and has) rejected them after-the-fact. The mechanism is the very system that Apple is employing, so what's the big deal?

In my mind, there are two opportunities to apply the consideration you seek: (1) the patent approval process, and (2) in courts later. In this case, we are already past the first opportunity. If you feel strongly about it, then you should see this case as a GOOD thing. Without it, nobody will ever question the patent, and too few vendors will do what HyperMac had the cojones to do.


Thompson
post #160 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Are you under the impression that you must receive a license in order to use a patented invention after you purchase it?

This premise is begging your question. It is the area in dispute.

And if you think about it for a moment, you will realize that reselling patented objects is not illegal.

This exercise has prompted me to seek information on patent laws, and I must confess that things are much more complex than either one of us have made them out to be. I believe now that we have staked our claims to opposite ends of a spectrum, and that we are each right under some specific circumstances, but we are both wrong in general.

Thompson
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple sues 'HyperMac' accessory maker over MagSafe, iPod cables