I remember when this story originally came up and the owners of the patent said it wasn't to do with money, just respect for the design.
Looks like $21M paid for that respect. Good job it wasn't about the money huh!
Yeah, I see your post now. It wasn't there when I started mine. Obviously the designs are far more similar. Could the other AI one be the original 1944 design? this one looks more refined.
Clearly Apple's is not "exactly the same" as you say, but it is a very close copy. I'd have to admit that Apple's design isn't hands down supieror to this one, but they have made some different design choices which might be seen as improvements (or not.)
Anyway, they have paid for it (and rather dearly!)
I'm assuming that Apple's design boffins figured - incorrectly, as it turns out - that the design was public domain. Whoopsie!
That having been said, $21 million is probably cheap compared to the litigation costs if this thing had gone to trial. Apple would almost certainly lose, and be held liable for damages as well as being penalized.
In the end, $21 million is probably a good deal.
Also, we don't know what else might be a part of this deal. Maybe the Swiss Railway has agreed to partner with Apple on some other product - Passbook or something - which caused Apple to sweeten the deal.
Apple may have also bought exclusive digital rights to the design, so NOBODY else can have it. That's also worth some bucks.
ireland wrote: »
This clock design actually feels like an Ive decision. You don't know it was Forstall's.
If no one else is paying more than $1, Apple doesn't have to. That's sort of the idea.
This is what Steve would have done. If he liked the design he'd pay for it.
I like the new clock, but then I bought a watch like this a year ago so I would like it. Guess it shows I must be cool if Apple decided to do the same thing as me
They a branch of SBB? Hope no one claims that clock isn't a take off of SBB's or that SBB "has no ability" to sue them.
Seems like a highly unlikely number, unless the only alternative was a very expensive lawsuit. The only thing that really makes the designs significantly similar is the red circle on the second hand. Everything else is pretty standard clock stuff, and not identical.
I wonder if it wasn't just a big mistake: someone went on Wikipedia looked at the year it was designed (1944) and miscalculated 70 years of intellectual rights later...
I have been outsourcing for design for Apple several time and I can tell that they are tough as any other company when it come to the budget, so I don't think they are OK to just spend an extra $20 millions. Will this hurt them? No! But the PR was worst than paying. In the end, I am glad to see the swiss railway clock, I've always been a fan of!
nkalu wrote: »
This is irresponsible spending.