Slashdot Mirror


xtunes Forced to Change Name, Appearance by Apple Lawyers

A user writes, "xTunes was an Open Source project that replicated much of the interface, functionality, and ease of use of iTunes. Apple's army of lawyers has forced them to change their name and redesign the interface." The new name of the project is sumi.

70 comments

  1. Sumi? Sosumi! by Xenex · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hell, even their 'witty' name is ripping off the name Apple Computer came up with for a system sound after predicting a lawsuit from Apple Records.

    These guys at from the app-formerly-known-as-xtunes project need to learn a thing or two about originality!

    1. Re:Sumi? Sosumi! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      I rather think that the similarity was the point. What, you don't find it funny?

      I mean, that's a rather effective use of irony...

  2. Good thing too by Capt.+Mubbers · · Score: 0, Troll

    They tried to copy the whole iTunes interface, failed miserably and should be thankful to Apple for forcing them to "think differently"

    --
    "Watch the skies, keep watching the skies"
  3. Ugh by Your_Mom · · Score: 0, Redundant

    1. Apple comes out with cool software product
    2. People who don't want to spend $1k for single piece of software clamour for Apple to port it to different operating systems
    3. Apple sez "No way Jose"
    4. Developers create clone of said software so people can use it cross platform
    5. Apple attacks with lawyers
    6. ...
    7. Profit

    Honestly, unless Apple comes out with a x86 port this claim is one of the most anal around.

    Of course, I wonder when Apple will send a letter to Microsoft demanding they stop production fo Windows?

    --
    Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    1. Re:Ugh by Captain+Pedantic · · Score: 0, Troll

      >Of course, I wonder when Apple will send a letter to Microsoft demanding they stop production fo Windows?

      Wasn't it some time in the early to mid eighties?

      --

      None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
    2. Re:Ugh by babbage · · Score: 4, Interesting
      1. Apple comes out with cool software product

      This isn't entirely correct. Yes, iTunes is Apple's product, and I don't doubt that they've put a good deal of work into it. However, the foundation isn't theirs, they just bought it off the people that developed the MP3 player SoundJam. I can't find a link with the details at the moment, but this will do for now:

      By the way, if iTunes sounds a lot like SoundJam (reviewed here in October 1999), it is. SoundJam has some additional features -- a graphic equalizer, custom "themes" (a.k.a. "skins"), more visual effects, and better sound quality. But it also costs $50 and doesn't have iTunes' cool browser or fast search features. Frankly, I think iTunes is all the MP3 player most people will ever want or need. (For what it's worth, the same programmers wrote both iTunes and SoundJam.)

      Ahh, of couse, also see SoundJam.com:

      Important Information for Our Customers

      Casady & Greene, Inc. ceased publication of SoundJam MP on June 1, 2001 at the request of its developers. We believe that SoundJam MP will continue to give our customers long and useful service, and, in keeping with our philosophy of putting our customers first, Casady & Greene will continue to offer tech support to SoundJam MP owners. The SoundJam development team is now working for Apple on their popular iTunes jukebox software, and will continue to work on exciting and innovative products for Mac users.

      Anyway, I thought there may have been a Windows version of SoundJam, but at the moment I'm not turning anything up, Mac or otherwise....

    3. Re:Ugh by Twylite · · Score: 2

      Too many people are under the impression that implementing a clone is not an infringement of Copyright. Mistake. Copyright doesn't just cover a work, it covers derivative works too. Take the functionality and interface, and you're creating a derivative.

      I haven't used either product, so I'm not going to state that they are similar. Clearly Apple thinks so, and a number of users on this and other forums think so as well. The developer's response also makes it clear they were out to achieve the same ease of use - which often comes down to interface design (functionality wise, not necessarily look and feel).

      Software design, much like the plot of a book, is protected by Copyright. Interface design, much like the cover of a book, is too. Create a new plot or cover art from scratch, which is different to the original but uses conceptual elements from it, is not a violation of Copyright. It can be a fine line at times.

      --
      i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
    4. Re:Ugh by camelrider · · Score: 1

      Apple tried this with Microsoft some years ago in the first "look 'n' feel" lawsuit I'd ever heard of. Microsoft had the resources to prevail in that one, but the fur really flew there for a while....I don't remember if MS used the 'prior art' argument since there had been some windowing systems (and mice) around Unix shops for a while before Apple went GUI.

      When did you last see Steve Jobs and Bill Gates sharing a hug?

    5. Re:Ugh by Maserati · · Score: 1

      Double Ugh. I paid for a copy of SoundJam right before iTunes was announced.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    6. Re:Ugh by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 1

      Your Mom wrote:

      > Honestly, unless Apple comes out with a x86 port
      > this claim is one of the most anal around.

      They already did that (http://www.apple.com/ipod/).

      So have a couple of third party players, who were original enough not to get sued for exactly duplicating iTunes in all including name.

      If the world is ever going to believe in the superiority of open source or free software, the apps are going to have to be original, innovative, and better than the existing proprietary apps.

      There are some such apps out there. Xtunes is apparently not one of them.

      "What I'm thinking is different from what you are."
      Belabera, "Mothra 3" 1998

    7. Re:Ugh by EvlG · · Score: 2

      There is no x86 port of iTunes.

      The Windows iPod is just a driver to allow Musicmatch to work with it, and changes to the firmware to allow it to read/write a FAT32 disk.

      iTunes is still only on the mac. I doubt it would ever be ported to PC, because the iApps are a huge selling point of buying a mac.

  4. Clever by Captain+Pedantic · · Score: 0, Troll

    Link to Freshmeat as the link for xTunes/Sumi.

    Two OSDN banner ads for the price of one!

    --

    None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
  5. great name by babbage · · Score: 3, Informative
    "sumi"? Wow, that's even better than BHA!

    See, several years ago, Apple used Sagan as a codename for one of their prototype systems, after the well-known astronomer Carl Sagan. After they got sued for using the namee without his permission, engineers started calling their prototype BHA instead -- as in, "Butt Head Astronomer". :-)

    I like the way the Sumi people are tweaking Apple back now... :-)

    1. Re:great name by rcs2 · · Score: 1

      And then, of course, they added the system sound "Sosumi". What, you thought that was an actual instrument?

      --
      This is not a signature.
  6. Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Of course, I wonder when Apple will send a letter to Microsoft demanding they stop production fo Windows?"

    Windows is why Apple use lawyers on anything that is copying the "look and feel" of their operating system or applications.

    Windows has taught Apple not to let anything that is ripping them off get a chance to take off. Like it or not, Apple will go after anything taking ideas from them, and the Windows lawsuit (which they settled with Microsoft out of court as an undisclosed sum, at the same time the $120m non-voting stock/IE default/Office port things happened) is why.

    1. Re:Windows. by phillymjs · · Score: 2

      and the Windows lawsuit (which they settled with Microsoft out of court as an undisclosed sum, at the same time the $120m non-voting stock/IE default/Office port things happened) is why.

      Wrong. Two separate things.

      The infamous 'look-and-feel' lawsuit was filed in 1988 and lasted until 1993. Apple lost the case, and their defeat was ultimately upheld after several appeals. They were willing to take it all the way, but the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

      In 1997, Apple had compiled quite a large list of lawsuit-worthy beefs with Microsoft, most if not all of which centered around Microsoft's infringement of some Apple patents. In return for Apple not suing (because apparently Gates was convinced Apple would've had a pretty good case this time), Microsoft agreed to the $150M worth of non-voting stock investment/public vote of confidence, and five years of continued development of Office on the Mac.

      ~Philly

  7. Err, no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tweaking Apple back? Err, they stole Apple Computer's shot at Apple Records, and dropped the "so".

    Get on a Mac. Look for the sound file "Sosumi".

    Sumi is just ripping off Apple again. They can't even come up with their own witty name!

    1. Re:Err, no. by babbage · · Score: 2

      IMO that doesn't stop it from being funny... :-)

    2. Re:Err, no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and speaking of which I came up with this original joke:

      all your base are belong to me!

      ROFLMAO!!!! Witty huh?

      What do you mean that joke is old? This is different!

    3. Re:Err, no. by Lars+T. · · Score: 2
      Ahh. Funny like:

      1) Call your product Sumi
      2) ...
      3) Profit!

      Or more like: Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Sumis!

      Or like: All your Sumi are belong to us.

      Or: WhazzzSumi!

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  8. Yes, that must be it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I big OSDN consparay to make you look at banners ads.

    I mean, banner ads make so much money nowdays! And none of OSDN's primary customers would ever use software to block ads!

    To be blunt, I've never seen the ads you speak of. If you see ads, you haven't set up your browser properly.

  9. The real issue here? by psicE · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    Watson should immediately sue Apple, for "look-and-feel" violations regarding the new Sherlock.

    The outrage here is not that Apple did this in the first place. That's to be expected; Apple makes its fortunes with look-and-feel, and of course it will sue anyone who tries to take that away. But when Apple does the opposite... why does no one call them on it?

    1. Re:The real issue here? by Dokushoka · · Score: 1

      Actually, Watson was a rip off of Sherlock. Sherlock came first. That is why the watson people can't really complain. Apple kind of just took it back. And xTunes was utter shit anyways. Dreadful at best. Who cares.

    2. Re:The real issue here? by GutBomb · · Score: 2

      apple should have originally sued watson for taking the look & feel of sherlock

    3. Re:The real issue here? by hype7 · · Score: 1
      Watson should immediately sue Apple, for "look-and-feel" violations regarding the new Sherlock.

      The outrage here is not that Apple did this in the first place. That's to be expected; Apple makes its fortunes with look-and-feel, and of course it will sue anyone who tries to take that away. But when Apple does the opposite... why does no one call them on it?


      Because they're Apple.

      You want to take on a Co as big as they are?

      Also, Apple offered the Watson developer a job. They were aware that the two were converging. They are not entirely heartless.

      As Phil Schiller said though, Watson originally was bourne out of Sherlock - searching through the web (Sherlock plugins) for items of interest. Watson "stole" from Apple first, if you want to take that line.

      -- james
    4. Re:The real issue here? by danielpavel · · Score: 1

      why does no one call them on it?


      This is why (quoting from TEX9's page):


      We showed the letter to several lawyers and concluded that our desire to keep the name xtunes and its current interface is much less than the time and money it would cost to try to do it.


      Boy, does this suck.

      I agree the "xtunes" name is an "iTunes" rippof, but giving up on it just because you don't have the money is sad.

      -silent
  10. Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Anyway, I thought there may have been a Windows version of SoundJam, but at the moment I'm not turning anything up, Mac or otherwise...."

    There was no Windows port. SoundJam is easy enough to find for 'legacy' Mac OS.

    OS X is another matter. There was a time-limited Mac OS X beta released, however it's time limit expired a year ago, is relatively difficult to find, and there has been no hack to disable the timelimit (besides rolling the system date back before launching the app...).

    To be honest however, SoundJam was pretty poor. Ugly, non-Mac like interface, and hideous performance on the app's interface (being it's own proprietary window format to be skinable).

    Yes, iTunes is a rebuilt SoundJam, but iTunes is also a much improved SoundJam. The loss of theming was worth the better application.

  11. Hrm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Apple coming up with "Sosumi" was funny.

    2) Apple coming up with "BHA" was funny.

    3) "Sumi" isn't funny, because it's already been done. Please refer to point 1.

    1. Re:Hrm. by babbage · · Score: 2
      But that's just it. Point one is not the same as point three, because "sumi" is not a literal match for "sosumi". An obvious echo of it? Yes, sure, ok, but it has been changed a bit.

      I guess the funny bit for me is all contextual, which the "that's not funny" crowd are also seeing but from a different angle. I think it's funny that Apple, no stranger to these legal intimidation [and defense] tactics, is now having "their" phrase turned against them.

      To put it in cinematic terms, it reminds me of something like the good guy / action hero turning the bad guy's catchphrase against him as he begins to fight back...

      Mindless repitition of an overworn joke is, we all agree, not funny at all. Clever recasting of such jokes can be though.

      Why did the chicken cross the road?
      Fish. </surrealism>
      Ok maybe not a good example but you get the idea :-)
  12. Re:Sumi? = Sue Me. by catwh0re · · Score: 1

    closer observation reveals sumi sounds alot like "sue me", I think all their wit is perfectly intact.

  13. WATSON SHOULD SUE MAC COZ THEY RIPPED EM OFF!!!!1 by Xenex · · Score: 2

    WATSON SHOULD SUE MAC COZ THEY RIPPED EM OFF!!!!1

    Look, the company is called Karelia, not 'Watson'.

    Yes, Apple almost certanly took a whole lot of ideas for Sherlock 3 from Watson, however Watson also was inspired by Sherlock 2.

    Besides, Karelia may get their own back: they are pondering a Windows port.

  14. Re:Sumi? = Sue Me. by catwh0re · · Score: 1

    it's come to my attention that they may have not realised the whole sosumi/beatles issue, so their wit is lacking.. hehe it's still good. At least they didn't call it BHA.

  15. Not really. by Xenex · · Score: 2

    I think all their wit is perfectly intact.

    My point is that the app-formerly-known-as-xtunes people couldn't even think up a good name themselves, and instead stole a decade-old jab at Apple Records.

    It's not even their wit! They stole it from the company they're trying to use it against!

  16. Maybe the X Consortium should sue Apple by JimR · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can cope with Apple being a bit miffed about someone cloning their interface, but complaining about the name "xtunes" seems a bit rich coming from the company that called used exactly the same symbol (although not name) for their operating system as a popular and well established window system - X.

    They also seem to be in a habit of calling their products after popular Unix programs that have been around for years - consider "Xserve" only only one letter short of "Xserver", and "eMac" is only one letter short of "emacs". Maybe their next product will be called "gre", "Linu" or "Mozill".

    From someone who remembers when ical was a Tk/Tcl application.

    --
    #exclude <ms/windows.h>
    1. Re:Maybe the X Consortium should sue Apple by Dokushoka · · Score: 1

      There is no way in hell you can argue that xTunes isn't a (pathetic) attempt at an iTunes rip off. Thats what the issue is about here, so don't try and pretend like the xTunes guys aren't trying to bite off apple here.

  17. Hrrm... by Xenex · · Score: 1

    I think I wrote this just as you were posting that...

    Sosumi was cool the first time. It's not cool anymore; it's been done.

  18. Microsoft settled out-of-court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was an undisclosed sum, paid at the same time that Microsoft bought $120 million in non-voting Apple stock (which they have since sold at a large profit), and pledged Office be ported to the Mac and that IE would be the Mac OS's default browser.

  19. Answers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    'X' is 10. I don't think it's called the Ten Window System. Ten11 is a silly name too.

    'eMac' is 'education Mac'. Besides, 'eMac' is different then 'emacs'. Everyone knows that any decent UNIX is case sensitive (I run OS X on UFS).

    'Xserve' is obviously short for 'Mac OS X Server'. Don't expect me to explain why it's not pronounced "TenServe" though.

    As for iCal, Apple created the i[insert name here] format of naming. They have a supreme right over it.

    Any more questions? :P

    1. Re:Answers. by jasenko · · Score: 1

      As for iCal, Apple created the i[insert name here] format of naming. They have a supreme right over it.

      How stupid was that, ical existed long before any of the Apple iApps. If they have a supreme right over naming, they should send their lawyers to at least 100 current mac developers for breach of naming rights (check VT for more info).

      I was disgusted to see how they use their corporate power against open source developer that actually makes crappy software that nobody is using, but anyway, shame on you Apple

  20. Re:Sumi? = Sue Me. by overunderunderdone · · Score: 3, Informative

    closer observation reveals sumi sounds alot like "sue me", I think all their wit is perfectly intact.

    The poster realizes that. That's why he noted their name was "witty".

    He was pointing out that name and the "wit" that inspired it was an imitation of Apples system sound sosumi (So sue me) that was Apples jab at Apple Records which sued them over the name "apple" but their suit failed because at the time Apple computers couldn't (or couldn't very well) record music. When Apple added that ability they also added the "so sue me" sound.

  21. Wrong by overunderunderdone · · Score: 2

    Sorry, wrong lawsuit. You are thinking of the patent infringement lawsuit over windows 95 (and quicktime code? I forget and can't be bothered - google for it yourself if you are interested). The "look and feel" lawsuit was in the 80's and was over windows 3.1 stealing the Mac "look and feel" (a lot vaguer than the later patent infringement suit you are thinking of) and it DID go to court and Apple lost.

  22. Sagan by overunderunderdone · · Score: 4, Informative

    After they got sued for using the name

    It was more than just using his name without permission. All the code names for that generation of computers were named for scientific hoaxes: Cold Fusion, Piltdown Man, and Sagan. Something of a slight of Sagan's work ;)

    As you mentioned when Sagan sued they changed the name to BHA (Butt Head Astronomer) and when he sued yet again the changed the name to LAW (Lawyers Are Wimps)

    Unfortunately xTunes/sumi is not all that witty because it is just as unoriginal as Apple is claiming their product is. Apple has a system sound named Sosumi (So sue me) to tweak Apple Records of Beatles fame which had sued them over the name "Apple". Apple won the suit because at the time you couldn't do sound recording on an Apple computer. When Apple included that ability they included the sound Sosumi. It seems to me a decent part of wit is originality. The xTunes folks are coming across as the bore at a party which finds the same old joke hilarious every time he repeats it.

    1. Re:Sagan by jbolden · · Score: 3, Funny

      They should have held their guns on BHA. In court Carl Sagan would have had to prove by preponderance of the evidence that:

      1) He not a butt head
      2) That fact was known by Apple at the time

      Apple could have had quite a laugh as Sagan tried to establish legal criteria for being a butt head and showing that he did not meet them.

  23. Another good name by PD · · Score: 1

    Why not change the name of their software to "Apple Computer Corporation". Really give them something to whine about.

  24. Re: Apples and oranges... by Schart · · Score: 1

    (Forgive the bad pun.) First of all, I don't claim that this is A Good Thing, but I don't claim it isn't. That said, your examples (Xserver, emacs...) are without merit. Let me explain.

    iTunes - Music playing, sorting, ripping application with exceptional searching and playlist functionality etc...

    xtunes - Music playing, sorting, ripping application with searching and playlist functionality.

    Similar name AND similar functionality(?) of product.

    Xserve - A rack-mountable G4 with the intended use of being a server.

    Xserver - An open-source window server for *nix(es).

    eMac - An iMac-ish computer originally aimed at Educational institutions - hence the 'e' - I think you can figure out where the 'Mac' comes from.

    emacs - A text editing program.

    See the difference? Similar names, completely different product functionality.

  25. Apple is evil, again. by Call+it+a+n1ght · · Score: 0, Troll

    Film at 11. They're just like Microsoft, only not as good at it. The sooner the Mac f@nb0yz get that through their thick skulls, the better off they'll be. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying unencumbered hardware that runs free software and is manufactured by companies that don't sue every time their overpriced hardware revenue model is threatened.

    1. Re:Apple is evil, again. by Daleks · · Score: 0

      If Apple were as horrible as Microsoft, then they would have tried to shut the project down. Better yet, they might have tried to force the license agreement to give Microsoft rights to delete anything on your computer. Sound familiar?

    2. Re:Apple is evil, again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Apple wouldn't have gotten away with the former: the PR would have been ugly. And the latter would cause them to lose customers from their already miniscule market share.

      ~~~

  26. Where's the "forced" part? by droleary · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It sounds like they got a simple cease-and-desist saying "It seem like a lot of what you have is derived from our product and we'd like you to make changes." They agreed and made changes. It's not like they defended the thing in court and lost. Apple may have been the bully, but these guys are the ones who just gave them their lunch money instead of making them fight for it.

    1. Re:Where's the "forced" part? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As we all know, open source authors make billions of dollars a year and can obviously afford a protracted legal battle with other multibillion dollar entities.

    2. Re:Where's the "forced" part? by droleary · · Score: 2

      As we all know, open source authors make billions of dollars a year and can obviously afford a protracted legal battle with other multibillion dollar entities.

      Gee, something to think about then before you go off and make a derivative work. Really, why is Apple defending their IP wrong but open source advocates don't have a problem doing the same thing when defending GPL'd code? A little consistency here would be nice.

      And as far as legal costs, the EFF has in the past provided representation to worthy causes. I don't know if this would qualify, but I don't think the EFF was even consulted as a resource. I've given them my donation so that they can potentially help the little guy defend against companies overstepping their bounds. Where's your support, AC?

    3. Re:Where's the "forced" part? by dd301 · · Score: 1

      Gee, something to think about then before you go off and make a derivative work.

      Apple being the king of Look and Feel lawsuits would sue everyone if they had the chance. And what it the derivative work you speak. And you thought software patents were bad.

  27. Just a coincidence, kids by rjung2k · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to Think Secret, Apple's head of MacOS X software development admitted that they were already in the midst of developing Sherlock 3 when Watson was first released. Given that Apple didn't want to throw away the money they had already invested in Sherlock 3, and didn't want to spend more money licensing Watson, they didn't have much choice other than to continue working on S3 and ignoring Watson.

    Despite what Karelia would like to believe, Apple didn't "rip them off"; Watson just happened to be following a path Apple was already taking. And considering that Apple was spending a lot of time playing up Watson (to the point of offering the programmer a job working for them), I think they behaved as well as could be expected.

    1. Re:Just a coincidence, kids by dd301 · · Score: 1

      And considering that Apple was spending a lot of time playing up Watson (to the point of offering the programmer a job working for them), I think they behaved as well as could be expected.

      You should check out what Arstechnica has to say about this. And the reason the Watson programmer didn't take up the offer. They sure feel that they were ripped off.

  28. Rhythmbox by Tralfamadorian · · Score: 1

    Rhythmbox is coming along quite nicely, and the authors were wise in not using a name that could potentially cause problems (especially after the killustrator incident).

    It's not ready for prime-time, but I hear it might be included in GNOME 2.2. So developers, if you like itunes-style playlist management, and like GNOME, try hacking on rhythmbox!

  29. Re: Apples and oranges... by Dokushoka · · Score: 1

    BAH! Rather then try and make something original, the xTunes project just copied pre-existing software. This is the problem with thing like KDE, the GIMP, etc. They're just bad imitations of good software. The open source community has an opportunity to make innovative software, instead they seem hell bent of making clones of windows software and poor copies of mac stuff.

  30. Re:Sumi? = Sue Me. by mbbac · · Score: 1

    You missed that Sosumi is also the only Apple system sound that is a sample of a musical instrument.

    --

    mbbac

  31. In other Apple news by inkswamp · · Score: 2
    Apple announced that it is continuing its development of Sherlock 3 which is not at all similar in any way to any other program out there and steals no ideas or interface from anyone.

    Apple also unveiled a new campaign with its catchy new slogan: "Do unto others..."

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
    1. Re:In other Apple news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My jaw hit the floor when my friend showed me Sherlock vs Watson.

  32. I don't see why so many people... by jellisky · · Score: 2

    ... think that this was so wrong of Apple. Looking at the screen shot of xtunes on their own webpage, the similarities are very striking, including the top bar (which copies nearly identically the top bar of iTunes... compare xtunes screenshot to iTunes screenshot).

    Apple did a nice thing by warning them first, instead of just taking out a full subpeona and outright attacking them. Maybe they could have done the really nice thing and not have lawyers do the contacting... but with lawyers, it's hard to ignore them and you know that they're most probably really from Apple, not some weirdo trying to scare you. That said, the similarities between the two are very striking, almost an pure copy outside some icon changes.

    Hopefully the sumi people can just let this pass and make some good changes to their interface. I must say, as an iTunes user, that there are bits of the interface which I wouldn't mind to see improved, including adding some additional buttons which I used quite frequently on my old MP3 player, Macast.

    -Jellisky

    1. Re:I don't see why so many people... by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

      The question is, are UI designs protected in the first place? I would say no.

    2. Re:I don't see why so many people... by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually you are wrong.

      Apple is actually right in the cases where they are trying to defend their intelectual property, even though you - or the copycats - might think otherwise. Poor clones hurt Apple's image much like cheap bootlegs or fake clothes hurt the original brands.

      --
      "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
    3. Re:I don't see why so many people... by dd301 · · Score: 1

      Apple is actually right in the cases where they are trying to defend their intelectual property, even though you - or the copycats - might think otherwise. Poor clones hurt Apple's image much like cheap bootlegs or fake clothes hurt the original brands.

      How does this hurt Apple? Is there anyone out there who thinks that this product is from Apple?

  33. Notes and Rhythms by toddhisattva · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I have never understood how Apple's Look-and-Feel lawsuits are substantially different from, for instance, a musician suing over Notes-and-Rhythms. The look and feel of software can take more work than the code and data (especially with GUIs), and are just as much parts of the product.

    Indeed, the objections to L&F suits stem from a Command Line Mentality, from a world without look and feel. Of course the critics think UI is trivial because they've never thought about it. stdin, stdout, stderr are all anyone really needs, right?

    It was the late 80s, and CLI was still the mainstay. It's obvious that the evil judge Vaughan Walker was stuck in the CLI mentality. Truly an exemplar of the saying, "what do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 80? 'Your Honor.'"

  34. Once again... by rjung2k · · Score: 2, Informative

    From an earlier SD post...

    According to Think Secret, Apple's head of MacOS X software development admitted that they were already in the midst of developing Sherlock 3 when Watson was first released. Given that Apple didn't want to throw away the money they had already invested in Sherlock 3, and didn't want to spend more money licensing Watson, they didn't have much choice other than to continue working on S3 and ignoring Watson.

    Despite what Karelia would like to believe, Apple didn't "rip them off"; Watson just happened to be following a path Apple was already taking. And considering that Apple was spending a lot of time playing up Watson (to the point of offering the programmer a job working for them), I think they behaved as well as could be expected.

  35. Re:Sumi? = Sue Me. by catwh0re · · Score: 1
    hmm i'm not sure who is modding everyone up, but they need to realise that the last few people have said almost exactly the same thing.

    Their wit that I am trying to express, is to rip off one apple trademark with another, not just any apple idea, but the one that stood for a smart-alec response to a settled lawsuit. It's apple with a taste of their own old-stagnated medicine.

  36. Nothing done before is worth reimplementing! by Glytch · · Score: 2

    Absolutely! We need revolutionary new kinds of software! We don't need word processors or graphics editors or music players, dammit, we need something fresh and amazing!

  37. I was joking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I wrote that, I was joking!

    I expected funny moderations, not insightful ones!

  38. Another possibility... by speechpoet · · Score: 1

    ..."ex-tunes."

  39. Yes, I understand it was their point... by Xenex · · Score: 1

    ...however it still shows their total lack of originality. It's just another thing to note on the list of stuff they've ripped from Apple.