Apple sues "inferior quality" iPod, iPhone and iPad accessory makers

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 95
    lowededwookielowededwookie Posts: 1,001member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    After all, Sony doesn't sue the Joe Blow cable company if they make an inferior RCA audio cable or mini-to-mini stereo phone jack.



    It's a little different actually. RCA is a standard that is used in many products. The Dock Connector is only used in Apple products.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    The question is how will Apple handle this. My guess is that they simply change the USB jack on their chargers to a micro-USB and they don't change the Apple dock on their devices, which kind of misses the point. That would enable another phone to use the Apple charger, but it wouldn't enable another charger to charge an Apple phone without having to buy a micro-USB to Apple dock connector.



    Thing is Apple is using a universal power adapter. The USB charging lead is used in iPads, iPods, and iPhones. That's over 100 million products that are using the one connector. There will be at least one other person in the area that will have USB charging cable that you could use even though it is a proprietary standard.
  • Reply 42 of 95
    prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    ... Same goes for a USB wall charger -- it cost $30 from Apple plus the $19 for the plain USB sync cable. $50 for a wall charger for a $200 phone. ...



    This is completely misleading and inaccurate.



    In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.



    It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.



    Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"



    As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.
  • Reply 43 of 95
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much: This is completely misleading and inaccurate.



    In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.



    It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.



    Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"



    As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.



    Are you a teacher ??
  • Reply 44 of 95
    sofabuttsofabutt Posts: 99member
    Still, I am happy with my really cheap and inferior cables and accessories...
  • Reply 45 of 95
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,578member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much: This is completely misleading and inaccurate.



    In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.



    It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.



    Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"



    As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.



    1) So because I don't suck down everything Apple says without questioning them, I'm a prolific troll? I'm sorry, I love Apple (I'm typing this on my MBP), but I also hold their feet to the fire if I think they need it.



    2) As for the USB chargers, if you only need ONE set, yes, it comes in the box. But if you need multiples, you're going to be paying Apple prices for it. As for us, my wife has an iPhone and I have an iPhone. So that means that we each have a wall charger set to use. But when we travel, instead of having to unplug stuff and pack it away, we keep extra sets with our luggage.



    An extra USB cable plus an extra wall charger x 2 people isn't exactly cheap from Apple. A quick trip to eBay and I can have us two wall chargers, two car chargers, and two USB cables for less than $12 shipped free from EverydaySource on eBay.



    If I go "The Apple Way" for my wife and I and I want an extra USB cable, wall charger, and a car charger (going from Apple's website):



    (2x) USB cable: $38

    (2x) Wall charger: $58

    (2x) Auto adapter (Belkin): $50

    Total: $146



    I'm no rocket scientist, but that to me is a shocking difference



    As for having a few cables left laying around from other Apple products (i.e., the OEM cables in the box), for me, not so much. When I sell an old Apple device, I sell all of the original accessories with it that came in the box on eBay (when I replace one of my Apple products with a newer model, the old one gets sold -- i.e. iPhone 3GS to iPhone 4). So the only cables I have at any time are what came in the box with the latest Apple gadget I have plus whatever third-party cables I've bought from eBay.
  • Reply 46 of 95
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,578member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sofabutt View Post


    Still, I am happy with my really cheap and inferior cables and accessories...



    Where do you get your cables?
  • Reply 47 of 95
    Irony = Apple suing vendors over quality issues while Apple releases a phone you can't hold and an IOS4 "upgrade" that makes 3GS phones almost unusable.
  • Reply 48 of 95
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,022member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post


    Umm actually there is because Apple invented the Dock Connector and the Dock Connector port. It is not a simple USB charging cable because there are all sorts of things to take into account. For example pin layouts according to the type of device is being hooked up to.



    For example I have the Apple media cable which has USB and RCAs to allow me to hook up to my TV. There has to be pin layouts to compensate for the USB as well as the video signals. These are not standard USB. Only 4 pins of the 30 are for USB.



    which is all well and good but really means nothing when you're talking about a simple sync cable. Like you say there are only four wires. Kinda difficult to get wrong
  • Reply 49 of 95
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    But if they're going after non-licensed vendors who don't use "Made for iPod" on the packaging, then I think they're over-reaching.



    And whatever happened to the "universal charger" and standard connections that was being pushed by the EU and that Apple promised to support? I realize the final implementation date is not until January 2012, but you would think that the more advanced companies would implement in advance of that date.



    So please explain why Apple shouldn't be able to defend their intellectual property? The connector is patented and involves proprietary Apple technology. Why should they allow any John, Dick, and Harry to make products using patented technology without remuneration?



    As for the universal charger, I don't have any idea how Apple will handle it. If I had to guess, it could be by separating the charging port from the data port, so the charger will use micro-USB while the data cable will continue to use 30 pin (or maybe an entirely new connection). In that scenario, Apple will not be able to stop people from using generic micro-USB chargers on the iPhone. They may well be able to stop them from advertising them as such (if the ads imply in any way that Apple approved them).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    If you want to purchase Apple chargers at full retail, that's well within your rights. I just personally have a problem with paying Apple $19 for a simple USB sync cable. There's nothing special about it at all. You can get them for $1.00 or less (if you watch Slickdeals.net).



    And that's exactly the point you keep ignoring. How much royalty do you think that $1 sync cable supplier paid Apple for use of the proprietary and patented 30 pin connection? Obviously none. Apple has every right to protect its technology and its investment. They have the right to go after criminals - which is what they did here.
  • Reply 50 of 95
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,022member
    Quote:

    How much royalty do you think that $1 sync cable supplier paid Apple for use of the proprietary and patented 30 pin connection? Obviously none. Apple has every right to protect its technology and its investment. They have the right to go after criminals - which is what they did here.



    They're not criminals. If you're going to have a spray at least get the terminology right.
  • Reply 51 of 95
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,322member
    Cats and Dogs living together. Mass hysteria!
  • Reply 52 of 95
    I thought it was considered fair game to design, make, and sell products that interoperate with another companies offerings. Wouldn't these sorts of devices qualify? If this is about the words "made for iPod" being stuck on the side of the box without licensing the ability to do so - that seems equally as silly to me. It's a descriptive sentence in plain English that describes it's function.
  • Reply 53 of 95
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post


    I thought it was considered fair game to design, make, and sell products that interoperate with another companies offerings. Wouldn't these sorts of devices qualify? If this is about the words "made for iPod" being stuck on the side of the box without licensing the ability to do so - that seems equally as silly to me. It's a descriptive sentence in plain English that describes it's function.



    No. It's a copyright logo stating that a device id endorsed by apple.
  • Reply 54 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    No. It's a copyright logo stating that a device id endorsed by apple.



    Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.



    From http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

    How do I copyright a name, title, slogan or logo?

    Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. Contact the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, 800-786-9199, for further information. However, copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.



    How do I protect my idea?

    Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.




    So what about a trademark. Given the following, it seems to be a descriptive mark though I don't think it meets the requirement for having achieved secondary meaning. When I read 'made for iPod' I don't think 'certified by apple'. I think nothing more than what it says - that someone made this to work with an iPod. If the mark was 'certified by apple' I would agree, it would be misleading for a 3rd party to display without authorization. As it stands though, I don't see how it meets the requirements for either trademark or copyright.



    From http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metasch.../domain/tm.htm

    A descriptive mark is a mark that directly describes, rather than suggests, a characteristic or quality of the underlying product (e.g. its color, odor, function, dimensions, or ingredients). For example, "Holiday Inn," "All Bran," and "Vision Center" all describe some aspect of the underlying product or service (respectively, hotel rooms, breakfast cereal, optical services). They tell us something about the product. Unlike arbitrary or suggestive marks, descriptive marks are not inherently distinctive and are protected only if they have acquired "secondary meaning." Descriptive marks must clear this additional hurdle because they are terms that are useful for describing the underlying product, and giving a particular manufacturer the exclusive right to use the term could confer an unfair advantage.



    A descriptive mark acquires secondary meaning when the consuming public primarily associates that mark with a particular producer, rather than the underlying product. Thus, for example, the term "Holiday Inn" has acquired secondary meaning because the consuming public associates that term with a particular provider of hotel services, and not with hotel services in general. The public need not be able to identify the specific producer; only that the product or service comes from a single producer. When trying to determine whether a given term has acquired secondary meaning, courts will often look to the following factors: (1) the amount and manner of advertising; (2) the volume of sales; (3) the length and manner of the term's use; (4) results of consumer surveys. Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983).
  • Reply 55 of 95
    Dear Mr. Steve Jobs,



    I am an Apple fan, promoter, and also a stock holder in your company. I was by your side, when you dealt with the antenna issue and when you were trying to push Adobe to fix their flash problems. But, this latest stunt, I don't approve of. I do agree with your concerns about quality of some of this vendor. I don't agree with the fact that you trying to make your cables and accessories incompatible with earlier versions. I just upgraded my iPhone to latest version, but forcing me to go buy new car adapters and cable is just not cool. The problem is that you are making your own accessories incompatibles in the process. For example, thanks for the free iPhone 4 bumper, but guess what, now I have to go buy a new set of docking cables. I have one adapter and the cable that came with the iPhone 4 at office, which works fine. I took my set from my older iPhone 3G and kept it at home for charging. Here comes the bumper and I am happy and excited to install it. It looks great! But as soon as I try to charge my phone using my iPhone 3G cable and "Wham!" I can't anymore. The plastic on the bumper case is blocking to completely made the contact. So, now I have a problem on hand - Either I sand down the plastic on the bumper, or remove the bumper when charging, or spend $30 bugs to get new charger/new cable. So my $30 free bumper is actually costing me more. You have just created incompatibility with your own product. How can you expect all these small companies to compete?



    Do you remember that TV spot you did when you introduced the new Mac? With this latest stunt you are now looking like the guy on the big screen - The "Big Brother"! Please don't take this road!
  • Reply 56 of 95
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post


    Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.



    From http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

    How do I copyright a name, title, slogan or logo?

    Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. Contact the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, 800-786-9199, for further information. However, copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.



    How do I protect my idea?

    Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.




    So what about a trademark. Given the following, it seems to be a descriptive mark though I don't think it meets the requirement for having achieved secondary meaning. When I read 'made for iPod' I don't think 'certified by apple'. I think nothing more than what it says - that someone made this to work with an iPod. If the mark was 'certified by apple' I would agree, it would be misleading for a 3rd party to display without authorization. As it stands though, I don't see how it meets the requirements for either trademark or copyright.



    From http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metasch.../domain/tm.htm

    A descriptive mark is a mark that directly describes, rather than suggests, a characteristic or quality of the underlying product (e.g. its color, odor, function, dimensions, or ingredients). For example, "Holiday Inn," "All Bran," and "Vision Center" all describe some aspect of the underlying product or service (respectively, hotel rooms, breakfast cereal, optical services). They tell us something about the product. Unlike arbitrary or suggestive marks, descriptive marks are not inherently distinctive and are protected only if they have acquired "secondary meaning." Descriptive marks must clear this additional hurdle because they are terms that are useful for describing the underlying product, and giving a particular manufacturer the exclusive right to use the term could confer an unfair advantage.



    A descriptive mark acquires secondary meaning when the consuming public primarily associates that mark with a particular producer, rather than the underlying product. Thus, for example, the term "Holiday Inn" has acquired secondary meaning because the consuming public associates that term with a particular provider of hotel services, and not with hotel services in general. The public need not be able to identify the specific producer; only that the product or service comes from a single producer. When trying to determine whether a given term has acquired secondary meaning, courts will often look to the following factors: (1) the amount and manner of advertising; (2) the volume of sales; (3) the length and manner of the term's use; (4) results of consumer surveys. Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983).




    This law suit is about third party manufacturers using apples 'made for ipod' logo without permission. didn't really need the copy and paste. The mark is a registered trademark and it cannot be used without permission.



    Apple's customers see this mark and know the product us guaranteed to work with their iDevice and that it will be of a certain quality.



    Apple have every right to defend their reputation, their customers and their proprietary technology. If people don't like it - tough.
  • Reply 57 of 95
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by radster360 View Post


    Dear Mr. Steve Jobs,



    I am an Apple fan, promoter, and also a stock holder in your company. I was by your side, when you dealt with the antenna issue and when you were trying to push Adobe to fix their flash problems. But, this latest stunt, I don't approve of. I do agree with your concerns about quality of some of this vendor. I don't agree with the fact that you trying to make your cables and accessories incompatible with earlier versions. I just upgraded my iPhone to latest version, but forcing me to go buy new car adapters and cable is just not cool. The problem is that you are making your own accessories incompatibles in the process. For example, thanks for the free iPhone 4 bumper, but guess what, now I have to go buy a new set of docking cables. I have one adapter and the cable that came with the iPhone 4 at office, which works fine. I took my set from my older iPhone 3G and kept it at home for charging. Here comes the bumper and I am happy and excited to install it. It looks great! But as soon as I try to charge my phone using my iPhone 3G cable and "Wham!" I can't anymore. The plastic on the bumper case is blocking to completely made the contact. So, now I have a problem on hand - Either I sand down the plastic on the bumper, or remove the bumper when charging, or spend $30 bugs to get new charger/new cable. So my $30 free bumper is actually costing me more. You have just created incompatibility with your own product. How can you expect all these small companies to compete?



    Do you remember that TV spot you did when you introduced the new Mac? With this latest stunt you are now looking like the guy on the big screen - The "Big Brother"! Please don't take this road!



    So apple shouldn't develop their products and introduce new technologies any more? You've got your year old car adapter, so product development must now stop? Seriously?! And Introducing new products, n3w technologies and making improvements makes the company big brother? Did anyone force you to upgrade? If you want to keep your legacy accessories, keep your legacy technology. Simple.



    Nonsense.



    People criticise product quality. Apple strive to improve it, both internally and through third party companies and they still get criticised?



    Edit: ps, your new phone came with a cable, use that. Or take the (free) bumper off to charge using your old (free) cable. What's the big deal?!



    Laughable. If you want to spend ninety cents on a cable, then enjoy. If this develops a fault and fries your computer/peripheral, you get everything you deserve.



    You get what you pay for.
  • Reply 58 of 95
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post


    Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.



    The Made for iPod logo is a trademark. They are not just a "simple phrase".





    http://developer.apple.com/programs/mfi/

    "MFi Logos

    The Made for iPod, Made for iPhone, and Made for iPad logos mean that an electronic accessory has been designed to connect specifically to iPod, iPhone, or iPad and has been certified by the developer to meet Apple performance standards."
  • Reply 59 of 95
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cubert View Post


    "The suit names Accstation, Boxware Corporation, Crazyondigital, Eforcity Corporation, Everydaysource, Itrimming, and United Integral"



    Isn't Itrimming an escort service company?



    Play tell, kind sir, just as to how you know that?
  • Reply 60 of 95
    I have mixed feelings. I thought I'd lost my USB connector for my 3rd gen Shuffle. I was going to order one on line, for $1 plus $3 shipping, compared to the $20 Apple charges. But I was unsure about whether there is a difference between the identical-looking cable for a 2nd gen versus 3rd gen Shuffle. I was at the Apple store and mentioned my loss to an Apple Associate, and he immediately offered me one, no charge. I have had a number of experiences like this with Apple; and all considered, I'll acccept their business practices as overall very good for the Consumer.
Sign In or Register to comment.