Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pocket PCs Masquerade as iPods

Posted by pudge on from the i-smell-a-lawsuit dept.

agwadude writes "Wired News has a story about a British software firm called StarBrite that is selling a virtual iPod that runs on Microsoft's PocketPC operating system. It mimics the iPod interface exactly, including the unique scroll wheel. It's a mere $20 but this seems right considering it's only software, and it only supports MP3. MacDailyNews has a shorter story."

7 of 334 comments (clear)

  1. Apple's legal team already knows ... by Greedo · · Score: 5, Informative

    MacCentral is reporting that "pBop's resemblance to the iPod was unmistakable, especially when the product first launched: It was originally called pPod, and featured an interface that was practically identical to third-generation iPods."

    it was so similar, in fact, that Apple asked them to make some changes, including the name.

    Starbrite has "cooperated fully to address Apple's concerns" but, if you ask me, it is still pretty much a rip off of the iPod interface (GUI and physical). Isn't this kind of thing legally protectable?

    --
    Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
  2. Old News by gh0ul · · Score: 5, Informative

    MacSlash had this item on March 01st. See it: here.

  3. Re:Missing something? by geoffspear · · Score: 5, Informative
    Besides which, it's not a copy of the iPod's software, it's a copy of the iPod's hardware interface in software. And apparently it's no longer an exact copy, according to comments on MacDailyNews (where it's also mentioned that the Serive Unavailable message was there yesterday, before the story hit slashdot). From the site updates that no one can see, it seems like they've talked to Apple and changed some things (like the name, from pPod to pBop.

    Anyway, I'm fairly certain Apple's relevant patents on the iPod are for the actual hardware design, and it'd be hard to sue for a software ripoff that doesn't even have all of the iPod's features (like non-MP3 sound file compatibility)

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  4. pictures by penultimatepost · · Score: 5, Informative

    pictures

  5. Re:Sign of things to come. by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've got it backward ^^

    They make money on the hardware, not the music. Therefore the harm.

    --

    GPL Deconstructed
  6. Well then it's an industrial design issue by blorg · · Score: 5, Informative
    it'd be hard to sue for a software ripoff that doesn't even have all of the iPod's features

    I'm pretty sure you can sue for infringement on any of the claims in a patent. That said, the only thing Apple obviously mention as being patent-pending (that I can see) is their Auto-Sync technology.

    In any case, the design would be covered by industrial design law - it was on this basis that Apple successfully sued Emachines over their iMac lookalike PCs.

  7. Re:Sign of things to come. by mrmoa · · Score: 5, Informative
    Besides, apple wants to make money on the music, not the hardware.
    Um, no. Jobs said they're breaking even on the music and are using it to sell iPods. On page 3 of this article Fred Anderson said last week:
    • "So our philosophy is that traffic to the music store will lead to iPod sales and iPod sales will lead to the sale of Macs."
    And the Seattle Times noted last October:
    • "Apple's goal with iTunes -- which has yet to make a profit despite sales of more than 15 million songs -- is not to sell music but to sell its music player, the iPod."