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

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
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.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member
    The Axe..., tomorrow at dawn!

    /

    /

    /
  • Reply 2 of 46
    imoanimoan Posts: 56member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    The Axe..., tomorrow at dawn!

    /



    Take em to the roof.
  • Reply 3 of 46
    xsamplexxsamplex Posts: 214member
    Who the hell cares? It basically looks like the first one...
  • Reply 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.
  • Reply 5 of 46
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,224member
    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.
  • Reply 6 of 46
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,563member
    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.
  • Reply 7 of 46
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,563member
    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?
  • Reply 8 of 46
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Is he sure about that?



    Once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken.
  • Reply 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!
  • Reply 10 of 46
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    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.
  • Reply 11 of 46
    tleviertlevier Posts: 104member
    The Axe? No. There's 3 of them right? Apple should just make a HumanCENTiPAD!
  • Reply 12 of 46
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,563member
    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.
  • Reply 13 of 46
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    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.
  • Reply 14 of 46
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,563member
    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.
  • Reply 15 of 46
    Run over 'em with a Tank!
  • Reply 16 of 46
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,224member
    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.
  • Reply 17 of 46
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    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.
  • Reply 18 of 46
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,224member
    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?
  • Reply 19 of 46
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    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.
  • Reply 20 of 46
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,224member
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.