or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Three Foxconn employees charged with leaking design of Apple's iPad 2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Three Foxconn employees charged with leaking design of Apple's iPad 2

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
Local authorities in China arrested three Foxconn employees months ago, and in March officially charged them with leaking the design of Apple's iPad 2 before the device was unveiled.

Local police arrested the three employees back on Dec. 26, 2010, after they were suspected of leaking the design. They were formally charged with violating trade secrets on March 23, 2011, according to a Chinese newspaper translation from DigiTimes.

The employees worked at Foxconn's plants in Shenzhen, China. Authorities allege that the three workers leaked the design of the iPad 2 to third-party accessory makers.

Cases that accurately depicted the external shape and design of the iPad 2 first surfaced in early December. As the design specifications for the second-generation iPad made the rounds, more Chinese suppliers began advertising more cases for the iPad 2.

Many of the cases accurately portrayed the redesigned exterior of the iPad 2, including its 33 percent thinner frame, rear-facing camera, and larger speaker grille that extends to the back of the device. They also accounted for the new location of the integrated microphone, which now sits centered atop the device.

The accuracy of those cases led Foxconn to reportedly suspect that its employees may have had a hand in leaking the design of the iPad 2. Apple's overseas manufacturing partner then reported its suspicions to local police.



Apple didn't announce the iPad 2 or unveil its updated design until early March. Its thinner profile, just 8mm thick, was touted as one of the biggest improvements from the first-generation device.

Foxconn gained publicity in 2009 after an incident occurred in 2009 where a worker committed suicide after a prototype fourth-generation iPhone they were responsible for went missing. And earlier this year, a claimed iPhone 4 prototype from Foxconn showed a test device with 64GB of capacity.
post #2 of 46
The Axe..., tomorrow at dawn!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #3 of 46
Who the hell cares? It basically looks like the first one...
post #4 of 46
For a communist country, the PRC sure is quick to look after corporate interests. Any sense of altruism in the communist regime disappeared the moment Mao took power and communism has only served an oligarchy. Go capitalism and go Republic.
post #5 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by bedarddc View Post

For a communist country, the PRC sure is quick to look after corporate interests. Any sense of altruism in the communist regime disappeared the moment Mao took power and communism has only served an oligarchy. Go capitalism and go Republic.

In PRC the government controls the corporations behind the veil of socialist altruism, in USA the corporations control the government behind the veil of democracy.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #6 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by bedarddc View Post

For a communist country, the PRC sure is quick to look after corporate interests. Any sense of altruism in the communist regime disappeared the moment Mao took power and communism has only served an oligarchy. Go capitalism and go Republic.

Disregarding the issue of "altruism", there is little in the current policies of the PRC that resembles Mao's China, and the Maoists were purged from the ruling party years ago. Modern day China is not, however, a "communist" country in any way. It's an authoritarian regime that uses state controlled capitalism to further its perceived interests. If you really want to slap a label on it, Fascist would be the most accurate description of the current regime.
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

"I despise certainty. I think the willingness to believe the likelihood that you could be wrong about something . . . is a virtue." Anthony Bourdain

Is he sure about that?
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Is he sure about that?

Once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

In PRC the government controls the corporations behind the veil of socialist altruism, in USA the corporations control the government behind the veil of democracy.

Well said. The net result is an oligarchy in both countries.

In the US, 97 families made over $500 million last year. 31 of them paid zero tax. The average was 17% tax.

GE made $14 billion last year and paid zero tax. The average for US Corporations was 6%.


Something is amiss, afoot, alas!
post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Disregarding the issue of "altruism", there is little in the current policies of the PRC that resembles Mao's China, and the Maoists were purged from the ruling party years ago. Modern day China is not, however, a "communist" country in any way. It's an authoritarian regime that uses state controlled capitalism to further its perceived interests. If you really want to slap a label on it, Fascist would be the most accurate description of the current regime.

They say that ignorance is bliss. Fortunately, in most cases it can be cured.

But to say that, "Fascist would be the most accurate description of the current regime" is just plain stupidity.

Unfortunately, in most cases it can't be cured.
post #11 of 46
The Axe? No. There's 3 of them right? Apple should just make a HumanCENTiPAD!
post #12 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

... to say that, "…Fascist would be the most accurate description of the current [Chinese] regime" is just plain stupidity. ...

Let's hear your choice of existing political labels and why you think it's more accurate. To call them "Communist" is simply fantasy today.

The current regime, and political-economic system in the PRC today, seems to match pretty closely the general description of Fascism at Wikipedia, much more closely than it matches any other political-economic system.
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Let's hear your choice of existing political labels and why you think it's more accurate. To call them "Communist" is simply fantasy today.

The current regime, and political-economic system in the PRC today, seems to match pretty closely the general description of Fascism at Wikipedia, much more closely than it matches any other political-economic system.

I can't say that anything in your link would draw anyone to your conclusion.

If you want to continue to cite Wikipedia perhaps a reading at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ublic_of_China would be in order.

Then there's the CIA's report: https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/ch.html ; or for an even better read William Joseph's Politics in China.
post #14 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

I can't say that anything in your link would draw anyone to your conclusion.

No one who's in denial about the realities of China. The description matches almost perfectly.

Quote:
If you want to continue to cite Wikipedia perhaps a reading at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ublic_of_China would be in order.

That reads like a PR piece, and says little of value on this question.

Quote:

For diplomatic reasons, a public U.S. government document is not going to label any country's government with anything but that country's preferred designation, so, as a source, it's a useless citation.

Modern day China exhibits most of the characteristics of a classically fascist state. I don't think there's any reason to try to cover that up or ignore it.
post #15 of 46
Run over 'em with a Tank!
post #16 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber
"I despise certainty. I think the willingness to believe the likelihood that you could be wrong about something . . . is a virtue." Anthony Bourdain

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Is he sure about that?

I'm uncertain about that, ask him.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Modern day China exhibits most of the characteristics of a classically fascist state. I don't think there's any reason to try to cover that up or ignore it.

I thought one of the most predominate characteristics of Fascism was the view that war waging was a character building virtue. China has not really exhibited this type of philosophy.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #18 of 46
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Let's hear your choice of existing political labels and why you think it's more accurate. To call them "Communist" is simply fantasy today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

I can't say that anything in your link would draw anyone to your conclusion.

If you want to continue to cite Wikipedia perhaps a reading at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ublic_of_China would be in order.

Then there's the CIA's report: https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/ch.html ; or for an even better read William Joseph's Politics in China.

That's all well and good, but you avoided a direct answer to his question. I was very curious to hear it. Just what would be your descriptor label for the PRC today?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

No one who's in denial about the realities of China. The description matches almost perfectly.

That reads like a PR piece, and says little of value on this question.

For diplomatic reasons, a public U.S. government document is not going to label any country's government with anything but that country's preferred designation, so, as a source, it's a useless citation.

Modern day China exhibits most of the characteristics of a classically fascist state. I don't think there's any reason to try to cover that up or ignore it.

Perhaps you could lend some support to your position.

My Cantonese grandfather, a landowner and my uncles, aunts, and cousins doctors, lawyers and one of which, a mayor, were all executed in 1949 to Mao's dictates; my continued interest in political science; my commercial dealings and educational involvement; and personal visits to China, particularly in the past 20 years, and 'Fascism' never a description, heard or ventured.
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I thought one of the most predominate characteristics of Fascism was the view that war waging was a character building virtue. China has not really exhibited this type of philosophy.

That raises an interesting point. Maybe China doesn't currently exhibit that behavior, but the People's Liberation Army certainly did. Remember all the operas in which the female soldier was a heroine? If you include waging war against your own, then there is a core of this in China. But you point is well taken. Perhaps you are reading 'mouse too literally. The classic definition of fascism may be too tightly bound to the Italian and German experience of it. One can still label the PRC fascist relatively.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

That raises an interesting point. Maybe China doesn't currently exhibit that behavior, but the People's Liberation Army certainly did. Remember all the operas in which the female soldier was a heroine? If you include waging war against your own, then there is a core of this in China. But you point is well taken. Perhaps you are reading 'mouse too literally. The classic definition of fascism may be too tightly bound to the Italian and German experience of it. One can still label the PRC fascist relatively.


Maybe, but at that time China was firmly in the Communist camp. The discussion at present is what political label we should put on China as of recent times.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #22 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Perhaps you could lend some support to your position.

I don't wish to answer for him, but after checking the Wikipedia citation for fascism I cannot help but see support:

"Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics. Fascists seek to purge forces and ideas deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood". Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state."

Seems to me that quite a bit of this would seem to apply. Based on your experience perhaps you could offer some reasons as to how these elements don't apply to the PRC?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #23 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Perhaps you could lend some support to your position.

My Cantonese grandfather, a landowner and my uncles, aunts, and cousins doctors, lawyers and one of which, a mayor, were all executed in 1949 to Mao's dictates; my continued interest in political science; my commercial dealings and educational involvement; and personal visits to China, particularly in the past 20 years, and 'Fascism' never a description, heard or ventured.

The father of one of my close friends was also executed. He was a property owner, banker, and finance minister.

Later on the day of the execution they came to the family's home and demanded payment for the bullet used in the execution. Something like 5 cents, just as an insult to injury.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I thought one of the most predominate characteristics of Fascism was the view that war waging was a character building virtue. China has not really exhibited this type of philosophy.

I wouldn't consider that a necessary characteristic, to an extraordinary degree, unless one wishes to define fascism so narrowly that it applies only to historical states. On the other hand, they aren't exactly an entirely pacific regime. The point, though, is that they aren't Communist, they are a brutal, repressive, authoritarian regime that shares more characteristics of Fascism than of anything else.
post #25 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Perhaps you could lend some support to your position.

My Cantonese grandfather, a landowner and my uncles, aunts, and cousins doctors, lawyers and one of which, a mayor, were all executed in 1949 to Mao's dictates; my continued interest in political science; my commercial dealings and educational involvement; and personal visits to China, particularly in the past 20 years, and 'Fascism' never a description, heard or ventured.

None of the above lends support to your position. It's simply become convention to refer to China as a communist state, even when the actions and policies of the regime no longer bear any resemblance to the same.
post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMoan View Post

Take em to the roof.

Take em to the Aperture science and learning center. Cake will be served.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #27 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I wouldn't consider that a necessary characteristic, to an extraordinary degree, unless one wishes to define fascism so narrowly that it applies only to historical states. On the other hand, they aren't exactly an entirely pacific regime. The point, though, is that they aren't Communist, they are a brutal, repressive, authoritarian regime that shares more characteristics of Fascism than of anything else.

Comparatively the most obvious differences between Communism and Fascism as it relates to China is that in China there are some elements of capitalism and private property ownership but aside from that what are the other differences within your description of 'brutal, authoritarian and repressive' that makes them any more or less objectionable than those same characteristics in Communism?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #28 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

I don't wish to answer for him, but after checking the Wikipedia citation for fascism I cannot help but see support:

"Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics. Fascists seek to purge forces and ideas deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood". Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state."

Seems to me that quite a bit of this would seem to apply. Based on your experience perhaps you could offer some reasons as to how these elements don't apply to the PRC?

Exactly. Compare for example to this entry:

Quote:
Communism

Communism is a sociopolitical movement that aims for a classless and stateless society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, and the end of wage labour and private property in the means of production and real estate...

Now, which of these sounds more like present day China?
post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlevier View Post

The Axe? No. There's 3 of them right? Apple should just make a HumanCENTiPAD!

LOL. Why won't it read???

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #30 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

LOL. Why won't it read???

"Mom, give me your lipstick. Because I want to look pretty when I get...."
post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Originally Posted by anonymouse
Let's hear your choice of existing political labels and why you think it's more accurate. To call them "Communist" is simply fantasy today.

That's all well and good, but you avoided a direct answer to his question. I was very curious to hear it. Just what would be your descriptor label for the PRC today?

I had never called them "Communist." Well, not exactly true. I did prior to NIxon's visit in 1972. Up to that time, I had spent most of my leisure time perusing military and socio-political studies outside of China. But after reading most of the books, particularly on the generals of World War II, my interest turned towards Vietnam. It was after reading on Ho Chi Min and how Truman turned him away when he asked for help to repatriate Vietnam from the French. So 7 years of combat and 50,000 American lies later, a conflict that could have been prevented because of a fear of communism that didn't represent China's or Russia's form of government.

Today, I try not to label anybody. But for China, it is 'communist' with a lower case 'c' as the US is a democracy with a lower case 'd'. There is no society true or perfect to either.

And to call China a Fascist state is ludicrous.
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Today, I try not to label anybody. But for China, it is 'communist' with a lower case 'c' as the US is a democracy with a lower case 'd'. There is no society true or perfect to either.

And to call China a Fascist state is ludicrous.

It makes more sense than calling them anything else. Why is it even, "'communist' with a lower case 'c'?" They have absolutely no characteristics that would make them a communist state. Just because the ruling party is named the "Communist Party"? That's ludicrous.
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

I don't wish to answer for him, but after checking the Wikipedia citation for fascism I cannot help but see support:

"Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics. Fascists seek to purge forces and ideas deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and

[Fascists ]produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood".

Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state."

Seems to me that quite a bit of this would seem to apply. Based on your experience perhaps you could offer some reasons as to how these elements don't apply to the PRC?

Do you know what eugenics means. Certainly a policy that China has not proposed or the "…rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood".

Sounds like 'Fascism' could well be a label for many of the 'white' supremacy groups in America.

FYI: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/18902.htm
post #34 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Do you know what eugenics means. Certainly a policy that China has not proposed or the "rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and "blood".

Sounds like 'Fascism' could well be a label for many of the 'white' supremacy groups in America.

FYI: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/18902.htm

No need to be insulting, I really was curious to hear what you had to say, not being snarky.

Sorry my basic intelligence was not evident in my previous posts. Yes, eugenics was practiced by those of my racial background (German) in WWII. I don't think it is too big a stretch to include the Chinese policy of limiting the number of children, and the common practice of limiting female births within the rubric of eugenics. Anyway, that's what passed through my mind as I read the fascism definition I posted. Also resonating from your quote above is the fact that China is a pretty homogeneous society, and that members of minority groups (Uighurs for instance) are routinely looked upon as outsiders. Certainly China is much less diverse than the U.S. And let's not even get into how mixed "blood" Chinese are received at home.

As for Fascism being a label for American white supremacists--no argument from me there.

But all this is really irrelevant to main points of the definition of fascism--read the first (and primary) parts of the definition and tell me how they don't apply. You keep avoiding the main points of our (Anonymouse and me) argument.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

But all this is really irrelevant to main points of the definition of fascism--read the first (and primary) parts of the definition and tell me how they don't apply. You keep avoiding the main points of our (Anonymouse and me) argument.

By selectively picking just the parts you want to apply, your definition could hold true for many governments of the world.

Worse, such a loose meaning could equally help to justify Carl Herman's discern that, "American fascism: by political definition the US is now fascist, not a constitutional republic worthy of consideration.

Something I would equally oppose on your categorization of China.

http://www.examiner.com/la-county-no...ional-republic
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

By selectively picking just the parts you want to apply, your definition could hold true for many governments of the world.

Worse, such a loose meaning could equally help to justify Carl Herman's discern that, "American fascism: by political definition the US is now fascist, not a constitutional republic worthy of consideration.

The U.S. may be in grave danger of slipping into fascism, but that has absolutely no relevance to the question of whether China is. You've dodged questions, selectively picked your own "parts", tried to distract from the issue. Your assertion that China is communist is patently absurd. China is now, in all meaningful ways a fascist state.
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Well said. The net result is an oligarchy in both countries.

In the US, 97 families made over $500 million last year. 31 of them paid zero tax. The average was 17% tax.

GE made $14 billion last year and paid zero tax. The average for US Corporations was 6%.


Something is amiss, afoot, alas!

They paid zero tax because of tax loopholes on subsidiary or overseas operations.

Any money generated from a companies external or overseas operations are not taxed by US law. Even if they are US headquartered companies.

There are billions upon billions of dollars just sitting in foreign bank accounts under US companies ownership. Nobody wants to brings these cash into the US for fear of them getting taxed.

There are talks in congress of plugging this loophole for good. But there is heavy opposition, as expected, from the business community.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

By selectively picking just the parts you want to apply, your definition could hold true for many governments of the world.

Worse, such a loose meaning could equally help to justify Carl Herman's discern that, "American fascism: by political definition the US is now fascist, not a constitutional republic worthy of consideration.

Something I would equally oppose on your categorization of China.

http://www.examiner.com/la-county-no...ional-republic

Carl Herman is a fringe-oid and his argument embodies a common fallacy: being wrong by degrees of magnitude. I like black music and soul food, by Carl's line of reasoning that would make me African-American.

I haven't been selective, I've supplied Chinese examples for every part of the definition that you've questioned. It's you who persists in failing to address those parts of the definition that are mentioned first in the list and I would argue are there because they are the primary ones.

Yes, my "loose" definition could allow the label of fascism to be applied to other governments, if they were as good a fit. But I don't think many are.

I can't help but wonder why someone whose family has been so victimized by the PRC regime is so keen on protecting them from a negative moniker. Or is your argument purely academic--what you see as the misapplication of a term?

For what it's worth, I don't think China is necessarily going to remain fascistic forever. I am an optimist. And to put an appropriately ludicrous closing punctuation on this pleasant exchange let me leave you with a quote from Ferris Buehler's Day Off:

"Ferris: I do have a test today, that wasn't bullshit. It's on European socialism. I mean, really, what's the point? I'm not European. I don't plan on being European. So who gives a crap if they're socialists? They could be fascist anarchists, it still doesn't change the fact that I don't own a car."

Peace out.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

I can't help but wonder why someone whose family has been so victimized by the PRC regime is so keen on protecting them from a negative moniker.

Having a father who expound daily the doctrine of Confucius.

Shortly after receiving the tragic news, my dad expounded, "You don't tear down your house because of a bad brick." And, "In time it will be replaced. Perhaps not in mine, but hopefully yours."

Again he was right, as we now see a resurgence and even an acceptance in China today.

Confucius: Peace
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

... Again he was right, as we now see a resurgence and even an acceptance in China today.

Almost as though the government has purged forces and ideas deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community.

Of course, those who died in Tiananmen Square were perhaps not as sanguine as you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Three Foxconn employees charged with leaking design of Apple's iPad 2
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Three Foxconn employees charged with leaking design of Apple's iPad 2