Originally Posted by jetlaw
While I passionately support the exchange and debate of ideas, I also think it is important to remember that, under our current legal system, it is impossible to determine a person's entitlement to a legal remedy merely by discussing the matter on an online forum.
This has not gone to trial and it is highly improbable it ever will as the developer doesn't have even close to the resources that would be required. Instead we have an attempt to smear apple in the geek-press, perhaps in the hopes of a payoff for shutting up. Trial by public.
I guess my point is simply this: Regardless of whether this kid is a "Lodesys Lite," or the next Woz, we should all consider the degree to which we conclusorily assume that we "know" who the wrongdoer is in a particular case. We all may potentially end up in a situation where we depend on the impartiality of others for justice to be done.
Given that he has already gone to the press, and that the reporters he has spoken to seem to have uncritically accepted his version of events it's entirely appropriate from a journalistic stand point for bloggers, forum posters etc to rip those articles apart.
The article says that Apple copied his name, but we know that the name is 'Wi-Fi Sync', so that's enough information to judge on that matter.
The article says that Apple copied his icon, but we know that they were actually combining two of their existing icons, so again we can judge on that matter.
The article says that Apple copied his idea. That is unprovable, but irrelevant as we know from long case law that copying unpatented ideas has no legal recourse.
We also know that there are years of prior art for wireless syncing.
Those are all facts that do not appear to be subject to any dispute.
The only remaining points are why did Apple reject the app, and did Apple actually steal some of the source-code. Again, it's entirely reasonable from a journalistic point of view for people to present information as to possible valid reasons for such an App's rejection, and to point out that usually at least submissions to the App Store do not include source code - especially when the reporters are failing to do so.
If this was actually sub judice then I'd agree that such discussions were irrelevant or even harmful, but then they would still be less bad than the original articles.