Just like the words "app" and "store" have been around for years. Apple puts them together and it is a trademark.
See any double standards here?
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Yeah but did you actually go out and make a colour Mac classic? Of course not. No neural capacity for such a task.
That was his point. That he didn't make one and just having the idea for one doesn't give him any ownership claim. Perhaps you don't have neural capacity for understanding what he wrote.
I used to use a program under Tiger called Proximisync that would detect the Bluetooth signal from my Ericsson phone when I would come home, and automatically sync wirelessly. It was a great program (when it worked). And this was way back in the days of the Palm Pilot!
For this kid to feel ripped off is stupid. Somehow it never occurred to him that his app was rejected because Apple was already working on the functionality in the OS?
Duh.
Well, according to the article at http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=21871, he was rejected because of unspecified security concerns and whole rejection process was not standard one Apple serves to other rejects.
Have Apple told him (and were able to prove) they already have that functionality developed and integrated in iOS5, I think he wouldn't have much reason to complain. But the way it was presented, it seems that Apple, at best, had that idea in the pipeline for future iOS developments, but not working code... Which makes whole case a bit shady.
And I really don't see what Apple asking for CV has to do with anything. If Apple wanted his code, they should have paid him for that. If they considered to recruit him, they should have asked for CV. Completely different issues.
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Hit up my first post on this topic, you're not alone (sadly, AI is starting to pull dumber, single minded people now a days ). I said the only way this guy has a case is if Apple foolishly used some of his code. And there's no way they would be that dumb.
It certainly sucks that Apple incorporated the same feature and thus he lost the opportunity to profit from this app, he had to know that wireless synching would be something that Apple would surely be working on at some point in time.
However, I do not agree with Apple blocking apps and then recreating their functionality internally. Legality aside, it didn't pass the "sniff test" and Apple would have benefited if they just would have purchased his IP, if only from the developer goodwill generated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
As far as the logo, I don't think it's very similar at all.
Apple had the wireless syncing coding for years. It's the only way Apple Tv can sync with a computer. There's nothing original with this kind of coding and seems pretty obvious that Apple was going to introduce this sooner or later.
And odds are very good Apple will have planning documents to prove this function was on the drawing board before Hughes' app was submitted to the store.
How about the technology was alive, well and publically released in AppleTV while the student was still in high school and the year before iPhone was released?
Apple should sue the guy for making GBP500K from their invention especially as they told him not to.
He went with Cydia. That blew his chances of getting any compensation in any form. If he would've played it clean, then maybe. Sounds like they offered to pay him for his talents through a job, which he rejected.
He went with Cydia. That blew his chances of getting any compensation in any form. If he would've played it clean, then maybe. Sounds like they offered to pay him for his talents through a job, which he rejected.
Jailbreaking is legal. There's nothing wrong with going to Cydia...
Why do people assume that "fair" compensation (again, if you believe they did steal it) was them offering him a Job? That's idiotic. Not everyone is looking for a job.
Yeah with 10% unemployment these days. Whose looking for a job?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicNReason
Jailbreaking is legal. There's nothing wrong with going to Cydia...
Why do people assume that "fair" compensation (again, if you believe they did steal it) was them offering him a Job? That's idiotic. Not everyone is looking for a job.
As... difficult (please tell me you can pick THAT up)... as it was to tell through his misuse of grammar and spelling, yes, he's being sarcastic. Though the guy wasn't looking for a job, anyway.
As... difficult (please tell me you can pick THAT up)... as it was to tell through his misuse of grammar and spelling, yes, he's being sarcastic. Though the guy wasn't looking for a job, anyway.
Oh, the "[who's] looking for a job?" comment was clearly sarcastic, sounding like the guys should have taken the job because a lot of people don't have one. While it's unlikely, I was hoping that his stance that the guy should have taken the job was sarcastic.
Comments
Just like the words "app" and "store" have been around for years. Apple puts them together and it is a trademark.
See any double standards here?
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Precisely
Yeah but did you actually go out and make a colour Mac classic? Of course not. No neural capacity for such a task.
That was his point. That he didn't make one and just having the idea for one doesn't give him any ownership claim. Perhaps you don't have neural capacity for understanding what he wrote.
Not just other devices, but on OS X, itself.
I used to use a program under Tiger called Proximisync that would detect the Bluetooth signal from my Ericsson phone when I would come home, and automatically sync wirelessly. It was a great program (when it worked). And this was way back in the days of the Palm Pilot!
For this kid to feel ripped off is stupid. Somehow it never occurred to him that his app was rejected because Apple was already working on the functionality in the OS?
Duh.
Well, according to the article at http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=21871, he was rejected because of unspecified security concerns and whole rejection process was not standard one Apple serves to other rejects.
Have Apple told him (and were able to prove) they already have that functionality developed and integrated in iOS5, I think he wouldn't have much reason to complain. But the way it was presented, it seems that Apple, at best, had that idea in the pipeline for future iOS developments, but not working code... Which makes whole case a bit shady.
And I really don't see what Apple asking for CV has to do with anything. If Apple wanted his code, they should have paid him for that. If they considered to recruit him, they should have asked for CV. Completely different issues.
1. The name of the application is obvious and generic.
2, The App is being sold for Jail-broken phones and probably violates Apple licenses.
3. WiFi Sync-ing is done on many phones and is not patented.
4. Apple does reject apps if they duplicate existing or planned features.
5, Apple would never allow 3rd party to sync iOS
Time will tell...
How many icons are out there for wifi and sync? Anyone look around? Any of them especially different?
As for the concept? Gee - I guess Apple never would have thought of this on their own, right?
Oh come on man, I don't have a dog in either fight, and I'd like to think I come in here with a pretty objective viewpoint, but I just can't read a comment like that and think "hmm.. that's logical".
Maybe it's just my failing 24 year old memory, but I can't think of anything from anyone that was referred to as an "app store", publicly/officially, or even just by users, in the mobile device world - and as I sit here thinking about it, I can't even think of anything in the PC world either.
But let's set that aside and concentrate on the matter at hand..
So we know you (and if I'm being honest I'm really speaking to everyone) wouldn't argue that this kid invented the theory of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, because that would just be idiotic (if I'm being honest, I'd have a hard time believing "wireless syncing" wasn't on the docket since before the iPhone ever hit store shelves). Of course there is one potential reality that could exist, resulting in legitimate "injury" or "loss" (if we're speaking "lawyerese"), but the fact that not a single one of the comments I've read here refers to it, tells me that 99.9% of you people are same people that take every opportunity you get to rail against Apple simply because you don't like something about the company, not because logic or sound reasoning has anything to do with it - the same people that have no idea what Apple is getting at when the company points out that the Galaxy S is the inbred cousin of the iPhone 3G, and at the end of the day, the same people that destroy any chance of these "forums" becoming a place for intelligent discussion.
The one factor I'm referring to, and the one factor that anybody should even be discussing, is whether or not any of the actual code from the supposed "stolen app" exists in iOS 5. That's it. Because no one with a sane mind would ever conceive of arguing that the kid invented the idea of wirelessly syncing an iPhone, but on the other hand, if that copied code exists, none of that even matters because Apple is then morally, but more importantly (in court), legally, bound to pay the kid for his work.
Hit up my first post on this topic, you're not alone (sadly, AI is starting to pull dumber, single minded people now a days
Apple just expanded what is being synced and to what.
However, I do not agree with Apple blocking apps and then recreating their functionality internally. Legality aside, it didn't pass the "sniff test" and Apple would have benefited if they just would have purchased his IP, if only from the developer goodwill generated.
As far as the logo, I don't think it's very similar at all.
Now that is just a stupid statement.
1. Apple stole "my" icon. Which is derived from two of Apple's previously used icons (wifi and iSync)
2. Apple stole my app or code. Prove it.
3. Apple stole "my" idea. So he has a patent on wifi syncing? I doubt it.
The f-ing hubris of some developers. Sheesh! I'm sure the FSF-loving liberanarchists over at /. are eating this story up.
And odds are very good Apple will have planning documents to prove this function was on the drawing board before Hughes' app was submitted to the store.
How about the technology was alive, well and publically released in AppleTV while the student was still in high school and the year before iPhone was released?
Apple should sue the guy for making GBP500K from their invention especially as they told him not to.
McD
He went with Cydia. That blew his chances of getting any compensation in any form. If he would've played it clean, then maybe. Sounds like they offered to pay him for his talents through a job, which he rejected.
Jailbreaking is legal. There's nothing wrong with going to Cydia...
Why do people assume that "fair" compensation (again, if you believe they did steal it) was them offering him a Job? That's idiotic. Not everyone is looking for a job.
Jailbreaking is legal. There's nothing wrong with going to Cydia...
Why do people assume that "fair" compensation (again, if you believe they did steal it) was them offering him a Job? That's idiotic. Not everyone is looking for a job.
Yeah with 10% unemployment these days. Whose looking for a job?
For your sake, I hope you were being sarcastic...
It certainly sucks that Apple incorporated the same feature and thus he lost the opportunity to profit from this app,
It's not the same feature, for goodness sake. People need to go back to the keynote and look at what iCloud is/does again.
For your sake, I hope you were being sarcastic...
As... difficult (please tell me you can pick THAT up)... as it was to tell through his misuse of grammar and spelling, yes, he's being sarcastic. Though the guy wasn't looking for a job, anyway.
As... difficult (please tell me you can pick THAT up)... as it was to tell through his misuse of grammar and spelling, yes, he's being sarcastic. Though the guy wasn't looking for a job, anyway.
Oh, the "[who's] looking for a job?" comment was clearly sarcastic, sounding like the guys should have taken the job because a lot of people don't have one. While it's unlikely, I was hoping that his stance that the guy should have taken the job was sarcastic.