Users who Dugg This
Ahmed Umer Anees
73 Followers
SleepingZombie
331 Followers
"ⓒⓗⓡⓞⓝⓘⓒ!"
5592 Followers
Kip Linski
1307 Followers
Jan in Colorado
7722 Followers
Michael Westen
2692 Followers
quickdigger
5220 Followers
aforsbergJul 31, 2010
I made my own iPod remote wireless using a RF keyboard and an inline remote. Am I going to get hauled off?
If you don't buy a product labeled "Made for iPod", you're taking a gamble. I think it's silly for Apple to do this. There will always be a market for cheaper products that work just as well. That's how a free market economy works.
spuy767Jul 31, 2010
Are you selling it under the Apple brand? Didn't think so. It's not about manufacturing, it's about trademarks. You can't use the Apple trademark without paying to use it.
fuzzynyankoJul 31, 2010
I remember the IBM PC/XT compatible computers, which in turn the modern Macs are
rolfJul 31, 2010
Macs don't have bios, but EFI, one of the primary requirements to be IBM PC compatible. Apple also doesn't use ACPI.
That's why Boot Camp must be used if installing Windows as another bootable OS, or Parallels if virtualized within OS X, either software emulates these requirements.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
doctordbxJul 31, 2010
Window 7 supports EFI computers, BootCamp is not required.
rolfAug 1, 2010
Anything later than 2008 Windows Server or Vista SP1 supports 64 bit EFI (not 32 bit). For XP, you need Bootcamp.
factsahoyJul 31, 2010
I seriously doubt any of these companies are selling their products under the Apple brand. Apple is using the pathetically broken patent system to stifle innovators, just like every other big company.
If every company behaved like this, stores like AutoZone wouldn't exist. A floor-mat company wouldn't be able to list the cars its product fits. You wouldn't be able to look up an oil filter by car make and model. You wouldn't be able to sell aftermarket accessories.
Now that the sham healthcare bill has passed, patent reform should be on top of the U.S. administration's list of priorities. Nothing is killing American ingenuity and innovation more than patent abuse.
explodingzebrasAug 1, 2010
exactly, Apple want you to buy their overpriced accessories or out-sourced licensed Apple branded accessories, either way, Apple want every bit of your money.
severinggeckoAug 1, 2010
Stealing the tech in apples dock connector to interface with the iPod is not innovation, it's theft
juliusthecatJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
aforsbergJul 31, 2010
fapple
boogie606Jul 31, 2010
fap fap fap...
dafragstaJul 31, 2010
I don't like the word "knock-off" as applied to a f**king CASE for something. Knock-of means imitating the style of the product itself in form and function, not simply making an accessory for it. How proprietary can a case be anyway? You just put holes in all the right places.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You would be amazed how many case manufacturers can mess that up.
spuy767Jul 31, 2010
The bottom line here is that you can't use the iPhone/Pad/Pod moniker without licensing it. People are selling cases that are branded as such, without paying royalties to Apple. If they were branding their cases as "Smart Phone" cases, it wouldn't be a problem, but then, people wouldn't be buying them, because they wouldn't know what they fit.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
punkcatJul 31, 2010
what if you put the Apple logo on it?
or used Apple's name to sell it?
buttu4uJul 31, 2010
if someone wants to use accessory outside MADE FOR iPod apple can't stop it no matter how much they spend on lawsuits ....
bugalouJul 31, 2010
Apple needs to be very careful with actions like these among the others they have done recently. It will only further an anti-trust lawsuit against them.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You need to look up what words mean before you try to use them!
badgerbusAug 1, 2010
You need to look up actual anti-trust suits that have been filed and see just how loosely the definition of monopoly can be interpreted.
lightstabJul 31, 2010
First of all, you don't have any idea what "Anti-Trust" means and secondly, how many rumors have we heard about Apple being sued for Anti-Trust and nothing happens?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bugalouJul 31, 2010
What?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
Seems to be what I am trying to say. Do clarify.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
Go Apple!
tehphri4rJul 31, 2010
Why isn't the iPhone 4 included?
bjornskiJul 31, 2010
Because anything which makes the "death grip" go away is saving their reputation.
blacklilyninjaJul 31, 2010
now that its officially legal to jailbreak the ipod they can't successfully sue the unauthorized accessory people. How much does apple take for "official" accessories? something like 10%? this is pretty much extortion and I can't wait for someone to get angry enough to use it as ammo for another antitrust suit.
apple needs to lighten up. until they do i refuse to use their mobile iOS based products.
cheviotJul 31, 2010
The fact that you can now legally jailbreak the iPod has no bearing on whether or not Apple can sue those who use their patents to make iPod accessories without a license.
krazydlJul 31, 2010
Apple needs to make up for loss on iPhone 4 problems.
punkcatJul 31, 2010
what loss?
krazydlJul 31, 2010
Free cases for iPhone 4 ring a bell????
kvachonJul 31, 2010
Law works both ways. Customers have the right to sue companies for possibly shotty products. And companies have the right to sue others for infringing on their copyrightComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
factsahoyJul 31, 2010
"Shotty"?
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"The company reportedly receives royalties ranging from 20 to 25 percent for any product sold through the licensing program"
brownrecluse888Jul 31, 2010
At least with chargers I would stick with the made for iPod/iPhone label, I was driving up to canada on a mountain bike trip and forgot my charger, a truck stop had one for $1.99 and I plugged it in, and within a few seconds it got very hot and then killed my iPhone.
the good thing was that even though it was 5 months out of warranty apple 2nd day aired me a new iPhone, no questions asked.
andreoJul 31, 2010
I would agree with you. I would even stay away from sync cables also. I bought some off E-Bay (I think they were 3 for $5). I tried one and it would charge but the computer didn't know anything was plugged in. The second one worked fine though.
I figure when it comes to $500+ device, perhaps going the cheap route with some things isn't good.
badgerbusAug 1, 2010
Wow guys, there's going the cheap route then there's just being ridiculous. I wouldn't even expect cables that cheap to work let alone buy them and plug them into my phone...
morpheousmartyJul 31, 2010
Hmmm, I wonder if you could run IOS 4 on a non apple device... What do we call it? A Hackintosh? Taken. Hackios?
rckola911Jul 31, 2010
i have a Dlo rubber grib for my pod i dont think its authorized? DOnt give a s**t either , i payed 10 bucks vs 30 because it doesnt say apple on it. pisses me off
punkcatJul 31, 2010
if it makes so mad, get one that does say apple on it.
nicko68Jul 31, 2010
Apple continues to suck more and more.
danielphermousAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
chikutenJul 31, 2010
Anti-Apple fanboys: f**k APPLE.
From the original Bloomberg article: "Kesslen, who has represented clients seeking licensing agreements with Apple, said it’s trying to prevent unauthorized products from being marketed as endorsed by the company because these sales could harm its brand."
Anti-Apple fanboys: LICENSING NAZIS!
Seriously, guys, Apple is well within their rights. Even if you hate Apple for whatever reason, you can't be that stupid as to believe you can get away with selling 3rd party accessories under Apple's name. Put the hate down for a minute because it's making you all you fanboys really retarded.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
smogerJul 31, 2010
..without seeing the packages of these products it's hard to say.
"marketed as endorsed by the company" from Apple's viewpoint could simply mean that the package says "for iPod" on it.. (because apple's licensing program is "made for ipod")
in that case, a bit of a stretch and a dick move by apple.
if these products actually have Apple's logo or something.. then yeah by all means sue away.
philbertJul 31, 2010
Sounds like when they tried shutting down everybody that used the word "pod" for anything. Though podcasts in particular.
alexweiskerJul 31, 2010
I have no problem if accessories say "For iphone *not licenced by Apple". I want to as consumer by things for brands even if they aren't endorsed by the same company. If a product has other companies producing for it that makes it stronger for me. If products not made by Apple (or whatever) are pretending to be then Apple has the right to sue.
lukychmzJul 31, 2010
they need to sue themselves for making a knock off of the iphone 3gs
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You can tell it's a knockoff accessory if it's priced reasonably.
cubs0110Aug 1, 2010
As long as they don't touch propane and propane accessories.
danielphermousAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
badgerbusAug 1, 2010
Uh, can you actually back up this statement? Because from reading the article it sounds like Apple is going after companies selling accessories...you know...like headphones and stuff.
The last time I checked I could get a wide variety of bluetooth headsets for my phone, not the those licensed by the manufacturer, I can also go to a "cheap plastic crap" store and get some of those lame non-Nintendo approved Wii controller accessories easily enough...as for cars...uhh, you realize the entire after-market car part industry is full of non-authorized hardware right?
Oh, but this is Apple, I guess you have to stand up for them not matter what.
danielphermousAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
badgerbusAug 1, 2010
Blu-ray may have to be licensed, but Blu-ray *accessories* don't.
Do you have to buy "Blu-ray Approved" speakers to attach to your player? No, of course you don't. Your TV doesn't have to be Blu-Ray approved either, and you can use any universal remote you want.
I'm not blindly attacking Apple, I'm sticking up for reason here. The idea that one company can sue another for making a product compatible with theirs is ridiculous, just think about the number of products you use in conjunction with each other but are made by different companies; imagine if everyone started following Apple's lead here.
bhartsbAug 7, 2010
myideawiki.com when it picks up steam, is going to throw some sand in Apple's and other big company's patent everything gears.