Slashdot Mirror
iPod Shuffle Lookalike Hits CeBIT
An anonymous reader writes "It shouldn't be long before Apple's legal team goes after this one. LuxPro out of Taiwan introduced the Super Shuffle at CeBit, a look-a-like portable that is identical to the iPod Shuffle right down to the sihouette ads, but with the addition of an FM tuner and voice recording."
If we discuss Luxpro's trade secrets, will they sue us just like Apple does?
liqbase
I don't think there are any trademarks that have been hit and other than that they just kind of look the same and have similar functionality.
As far as I can see this really isn't all that different from walking into the grocery store and finding the generic products that do about the same thing next to the name brand ones.
Why I can already hear Jobs smashing extra Newtons already,..
their's isn't super! :(
Unpretentious Sydney reviews by unqualified Sydney reviewers
I saw this a week or so ago, and the first thing what wandered through my mind was not 'They are going to get sued' but 'So this is the OEM version of the Shuffle eh?'.
There has been a lot of speculation that Apple never designed the Shuffle but bought it in from outside, guess we will find out if and when Apple sue over it.
Are businesses REALLY interested in innovation or just being copycats? I foresee a lawsuit coming out of this blatant duplication of the shuffle.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
"Let's create a better product at a lower price, but without hordes of millions of fanboys blindly buying it at once..." comes to my mind immediately. ;)
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
Only good products get copied over and over.
where's all that Karma?
look like? it is a 99.9% clone. it would be like Chevy cloning a Ford Mustang but using a different layout on the dashboard.
Apple always has legal protection on the physical design of their products as well as the rest of it. they went after those people that came close to ripping off the old CRT iMac look and stopped them. this is a blatant rip-off of Apple's design. even if you hate Apple, you have to see that.
[i]2) the FM radio is a good idea[/i]
I'd prefer it to be DAB digital radio... I'd be a bit more excited if it were.
"So there he is, risen from the dead. Like that fella, E. T." - Father Ted Crilly
IANAL but I don't think there is much apple can do. Unless they stole some patented technology, they should be fine with that desing. You cannot copyright style or asthetics. If there were a trademarked shape (apple, nike swoosh) also copied then there would be a problem.
You cannot protect a scent, that's why fragrances can be duplicated, generic drugs and grocery store products are another example.
This lawsuit-bait would almost be worth considering if it had an AM radio. I wonder why these things include FM radio only. Perhaps the AM radio hardware is much more expensive. Regardless, it is much less useful without it. An FM radio is sort of redundant. I use FM radio for music, and there are already music files on the player. I use AM radio for news, and there aren't news MP3's.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
This is going to be very interesting to see played out. They're going after the iPod Shuffle market, with nary a thought to even partially concealing their inspiration.
However, there's absolutely nothing wrong with copying a good idea. Apple has no patent for the concept of an mp3 player, and I don't know if they can claim that a white tongue depressor is a "copyrighted piece of art". Otherwise the whole USB key market would be in a state of utter chaos, as my USB key looks pretty much like everyone elses.
The iPod Suffle is certainly a trademark, but the SuperShuffle isn't the same thing, and no one is going to be fooled. Apple doesn't make the "Shuffle"-- they make an iPod with "Shuffle" attached. I would argue that the SuperShuffle is as legal a name as the SuperPhoto or the SuperMini.
So, would Apple have a leg to stand on? Or is this a situation where the consumer (finally) is going to win on all sides?
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
I doubt it has tight integration with iTunes, which is a major selling point of the various iPods.
1. Make it black
2. Make the circular control area square.
3. Make it narrower (even if it means making it longer to cram the electronics in). This is one area where it would actually improve on the real Shuffle, which is just too wide, especially where it plugs in, requiring a USB extension cable or unplugging the other plugs that are crammed in near the USB plug.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
The only justification for lack of LCD is that you use iTunes to operate your iPod Shuffle. If you don't use iTunes smart playlists and iTunes autofill option, iPod Shuffle is actually quite worthless. It has no LCD because some elements of its UI are incorporated into iTunes. "Fake Shuffle" has no LCD either, but you have no software to make it out for you.
So how much are they? can they undercut apple but a significant amount?
even if they're a blatant ripoff, I'd buy one if they were cheap.
Did you even read the article? This is not just an MP3 player: it looks and has controls just like the iPod. Outrage over any non-Apple MP3 player is one thing. Outrage over a non-Apple player that is a deceptive look-alike is another.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I figured Apple would have a design patent in for the Shuffle, but it seems there's nothing there yet. There's design patents for the regular 1/2/3G iPod, but not the 4G or the Shuffle yet, and I can't locate any in the published applications either. Is there other protection afforded to designs for products other than design patents in the USA?
Looks like LuxPro is about to discover the iSue.
Free, legal music for iTunes users.
It's been a while since the business with the original iMac ripoff, so my memory might be a bit fuzzy, but I think the shuffles might be even more identical than the teardrop computers.
Then again, maybe not.
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
I am here at CeBit and have been a bit amazed at a couple of look a like iPod mini's and iPod's as well. Apple will easily stop this in the US under "trade dress" litigation.
I also wondered, what are they (the manufacturers that knock off almost exact copies) thinking!?
Real men don't need signitures!!!
They are totally different.
Apple's is a Shuffle, or iShuffle, or iPodensmallened, or something.
Lux Pro's is Super. I mean by adding the word Super it is clear that they are disrespectful to dirt. Can you not see they are serious? Get out of their way, all of you! This is no place for loafers. Join them or die. Can you do any less? For lucky best mp3, use Super Shuffle.
This
Yes, it's a bit on the cheeky side, but get over it.
- Apple wasn't the first company to make an MP3 player
- Apple wasn't the first company to make an MP3 player that did suffle
- Apple wasn't the first company to make an MP3 player without a display
- Apple wasn't the first company to make an MP3 player that plugged into a USB port
- Apple wasn't the first company to make something shaped like a USB key/stick/dongle
Apple is primarily a marketing machine.
Zilch.
This thing most likely uses the same GUTS even as the iPod shuffle, the chip in the shuffle already supports FM radio, Apple (like any sensible company) didn't provide it out of clean UI design.
That was the emachines eone. Compared to the iMac, it contained standard ports alongside the parallel ports, and built-in floppy (all of which were missing in the iMac), it was a lot faster and had twice as much memory.....and it cost hundreds less. No wonder Apple had to sue it out of existence.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
IAAL and...
You can actually protect style and aesthetics to a certain extent. It depends on the jurisdiction, but in many countries there is intellectual properties in designs, as opposed to patented methods or copyrighted works. In Australia, for instance, the rip-off iPod would clearly breach rights in Apple's shuffle design, assuming they were validly registered etc., not because of the similar functionality but because of the identical aesthetics.
Furthermore, Apple may have an action for 'passing off' in that this company is clearly trying to ride on Apple's market reputation to sell their own product through the name, advertising and styling of the device. This is an illicit subversion of Apple's goodwill and they will be able to take action on this basis in most countries.
Finally, if the allegations about asian tech manufacturers and Apple's partners prove true, there will very likely be an action in contract or equity against any company that has participated in sharing the technology used in the Shuffle for this device.
That is the legal position. My OPINION, however, is that Apple deserve to get screwed over because this new device looks as good and has better functionality than the Shuffle. Plus it is refreshing to see that you don't have to have the Godly powers of Steve Jobs in your fingertips to produce the same hardware at the same (or lower, presumably) price.
Read Pynchon.
Is it any tastier than iPod Quiche? Will it collapse if you slam your Powerbook closed?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
You can't, like, trademark a product's look, feel, and functionality, man.
What? You can? Oh. Yeah, those guys are screwed.
in response to the grandparent that:
1. that you can protect a scent in some circumstances; and
2. that generic drugs are not automatically free from intellectual property constraints, and may infringe patents for the manufacture process or the specific action of the drug.
Read Pynchon.
Most cheap MP3 players are built using standard chips that come with FM tuning and voice recording as standard. All you need is the firmware to activate the functionality.
AM would mean extra hardware (antenna and the rest) so is out of the question.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
It doesnt matter to them. This is a typical "asian" hit & run operation: Design a knockoff of something wildly popular, make half the web advertize it for free, and sell some hundreds of thousands (or millions) during a couple of months. By the time Apple wakes up, you have already made millions in profits. Apple won't be able to get a penny from you, for obvious reasons: a) you're in Asia. and b) you have a big & loyal family.
My gallery: www.estiasis.com/modules.php?name=gallery2&g2_ite
4. Don't call it 'Shuffle'
5. Don't target your advertising at pretentious wannabes using silhouettes of idiots dancing to world music so that people who don't want to look like fashion victims will still consider using one
6. Don't package it with shitty proprietary software that automatically sends you to buy music from the same company that makes the hardware and installs multiple useless services that run all the time in Windows XP
I think we're starting to get to quite a decent little MP3/MP4 player between us...
Read Pynchon.
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
music lover since 1969
In northern Europe, they also sold the iVorkVorkVork.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Exactly. (Unfortunately this was posted in the "Apple" section for some reason, so you got modded down.)
But after adding an FM-tuner and recording capabilities, all that was missing to make the iPod Shuffle useful (and at least on par with any cheap no-name Korean player) was a display, and they forgot to add it! The fanboys won't buy this anyway, so LuxPro might as well have made a good product for people who want an MP3 player more than they want a a cute piece of plastic with a particular trademark.
What on earth were they thinking?
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
This addon is quite cool. It lets you copy files between two Super Shuffles. I've not seen this for iPod shuffle, has anyone else?
"A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
How about a new name for this, Lux? "EyePawed: Shah-phel"
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Worse, it looks like the silhouette in the knockoff photo is an asian chick who clearly can't dance!
[Not that there aren't plenty of asian chicks who can...but the ones who can are mostly in North America]
The iPod Shuffle uses a Sigmatel Stmp3550, which doesn't have a built in FM tuner. There's an external tuner chip which only supports FM.
Good job! I think it'd be great if all Slashdotters were as honest as you were when you chose a subject for your ad^H^H post. ;)
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
There are plenty of us who never use the radio. I appreciate not having an extra, unwanted feature on a simple player like this. Those of you who want a radio should buy something other than an iPod.
"Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
Tell me again why Apple doesn't put FM in the iPod?
From looking at the pictures, I'd say it's more like Chevy cloning a Ford Mustang, including the dashboard, but adding an AC...
Apple to stop CeBIT presentation of iPod shuffle clone
Good to see that there is at least *some* sense on slashdot.
Ever see any red and white cans of soda at the store that just say "cola"? Pretty obvious those are a knock off of cocacola, yet they are out there. Similar but not exact product, similar colored can, not the exact swirl but similar, similar size, shape, weight,etc. I wonder if this will come into "play"?
Does the US trademark laws even have any relevance in Taiwan? It may not matter that this is a knock-off ( with more features )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
They probably make them in the factory next door to the clone factory they make the iPod Shuffle in.
r -m p3-player.aspt g/detail/-/B000 08AJSO/002-0805304-2818432?v=glance
When Steve Jobs got on stage in 2004 and poo-poohed flash music players, concentrating on the high end, I was livid. He was talking about flash music players as if the big bulky high-end were the only possible competition. I immediately went to Apple's site and sent in a suggestion that if they thought flash music players were $200 behemoths they ought to have a look at the music player I'd bought for my daughter back in late 2002 or early 2003. It cost me $70 and it had the minimum features imaginable... no screen, no way to select specific songs, you just plugged it in like a flash drive and copied MP3 files over... and it played them in whatever random order they landed in memory.
I had even figured out the way to use iTunes with this player to get the equivalent of what they later called their "Autofill" function using their Party Shuffle. Sure, it only held a couple CDs worth of songs, but you could reload them when you recharged the battery overnight... so who cared?
Apart from the "reshuffle" ability, and the memory size (after all, this was 3 years ago), it was functionally identical to what Apple released a year later as the iPod Shuffle. It was a little bigger than the shuffle, but not much, and even hung from a lanyard like the Shuffle does. Oh, Apple's definitely done their usual wonderful job of [re]design... but all in all the Shuffle is just a few tweaks applied to the Magic Star "Gray Whale" MP3 player:
http://pc-memory-upgrade.co.uk/memory/magic-sta
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/
The killer feature of the Shuffle, for me, is that the 512M Shuffle is cheaper than the 512M "Gray Whale"! This may be the first time in memory that an Apple product was less expensive than the third-party equivalent... but it's got a lot less of Apple in it than most people seem to think.
FM, on the other hand, length of the antenna determines the reception quality - the headphone wire is a perfect place for that, i think.
I really think that you should say that the other way around: the iPod shuffle uses the same GUTS as all the cheap and not so cheap no-name MP3 players out there. It's just another Sigmatel Stmp3500 based MP3 player without a display, but with the reality distortion field applied. It probably even has all the same filesystem, frequency response and USB bugs as all the others. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the only part Apple played in making the Shuffle was the ID. I also wouldn't be surprised, as some have pointed out, if the company in the article are the people they outsourced it to.
The Stmp3500 does NOT have a built in tuner and I have no idea where everyone is getting that idea from. Apple probably didn't add an FM tuner because: a) it would be more expensive (most likely reason), b) it would be unusable without a display. I imagine they'd just have "random station selection" and think up a funky marketing slogan to hide the stupidity.
And when Apple's iLawyers are done with LuxPro in iCourt, LuxPro will have to find to find an i-noffensive pursuit instead... such as running a Mac rumour blog.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
-- Apple Lawyer
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Here is a view of Mr Sparkle: click here.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
This player doesn't, it uses an internal li-ion battery like the shuffle does. If it's the same dimensions as the shuffle, there's no room for an AAA battery in the player.
From the LuxPro page:
Power Supply: Li-Ion rechargeable built-in battery (Charging via USB port from computer or power adapter)
Heise News article (in German) and the Google-Translation (replace "conditions" with "booth", and it makes more sense). LuxPro had removed the notPod from their booth on Friday, but put it up again on Saturday.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
This kind of ripoff is actually quite common. I see Rbok and Nke shoes all of the time and they are cheaply made direct copies of the originals. In fact, many Chinese factories that make the original will also do the ripoffs using the same equipment, just different grades of electronics, plastices and other items. It even goes as far as cars. I read a article in Time where knock offs cost not just the computer industry, but almost every industry on the planet. Callaway golf clubs, Yamaha Motorcycles, Nikon cameras, etc etc....
I bet this Super Shuffle does not even work with Apple's DRM'd files.
Gorkman
Why stop there? Why not a Beowulf cluster of these super suffles?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Administrative Contact:
hotels.com.tw
tom lin (host@hotels.com.tw)
7F.-2, No.10, Shaosing N. St., Jhongjheng District, Taipei City -
Taipei, tw, tw
P: +886.223912558 F: +886.223912650
Technical Contact:
hotels.com.tw
tom lin (host@hotels.com.tw)
7F.-2, No.10, Shaosing N. St., Jhongjheng District, Taipei City -
Taipei, tw, tw
P: +886.223912558 F: +886.223912650
Billing Contact:
hotels.com.tw
tom lin (host@hotels.com.tw)
7F.-2, No.10, Shaosing N. St., Jhongjheng District, Taipei City -
Taipei, tw, tw
P: +886.223912558 F: +886.223912650
Is the Shuffle made in Taiwan as well?
Gorkman
The 'Cola' and 'Grocery Store' comparisons I've heard are a little off. In those examples, you're comparing two products that have a similar purpose. That'd be like comparing the iShuffle to all other MP3 players, or comparing a Rolex to other watches.
The debate here would be analagous to someone making imitation Rolexes that are exact, blatant aesthetic ripoffs. What's wrong with that, you say? The only reason anyone wants a fake Rolex is because it looks like a Rolex, but is much cheaper. Here, people might want to buy the Super Shuffle because they think it's just a cheaper (not sure), better (could be soundwise) iShuffle with more features.
Also: Someone posted a remark saying it couldn't use iTunes. Are you sure? I'm sure that could be easily cracked if the hardware inside is similar at all. What software do they plan on providing the users with otherwise?
Copying wholesale and just sell a copy is one thing. But I have to respect even those people that copy and IMPROVE upon an existing invention and sell it.
If you improved upon it, I believe it should be fair game as it benefits everyone in the long run and leads to competitive innovation. A lot of times, innovation comes in steps, this is a patent violation I am willing to turn a blind eye towards.
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2005/03/super _shuffle_f.html
....
The Shuffle wasn't the only thing they copied
Originally I was going to claim that this is a perfect example of design patent infringement, but I've just done a quick search of the USPTO web page and I can't find any design patents relating to the iPod Shuffle, just the normal iPods.
Unless I've missed it somehow, this means that they can at least get away with copying Apple's design for the time being, since the patent's most likely pending.
"Max, come over here. French-Canadian bean soup. I want to pay. Let them leave me alone." - Dutch Schultz
Apperently, if anyone was wondering what the Apple lawyers were gonna do, it's here
No, this product certainly isn't intended to cause any!
About 5 years ago, right after Apple came out with the first iMac, eMachines came out with a blatant knockoff and Apple successfully sued http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/08/20/ 1345216&tid=3. This website http://ordinateurs.free.fr/APPLE/copies_pc_iMac.ht m is in French but has pictures.
By producing a nearly identical product to Apple's and giving it a nearly identical name, Luxpro is clearly trying to make consumers believe they are buying an Apple product. I mean, it's so blatant they're even ripping off the advertising.
Apple can, and will, go after them for trademark issues because of the product's name, and trade dress issues because of the appearance of the device.
If you're not familiar with it, trade dress is when two products "kind of look the same" enough (in the eyes of a court of law) that consumers could be fooled into thinking cheap knockoff B is actually name-brand product A. Trade dress infringement claims are how Apple killed off those cheesy all-in-one PCs with a blue and white/translucent color scheme that quickly appeared after the original iMac was released.
~Philly
Could it be that the reason the supply of shuffles is so inelastic to demand is that Apple and its OEM are having a cat-fight, and this is a power play by Lux?
Have not seen this dicsussed yet but I ordered a shuffle 7 days after it's debut from mac mall and have yet to recieve it. I checked around and all re-sellers are out or have cryptic notices like we dont gaurentee in stock at time of order. Mac mall says they have 4000 orders they cant fill.
On the other hand if you go to apple's store they are delivering with 1-3 day ship delays. Obiously they in a position where demand outstrips supply and as a result are taking the sales premium for themselves (that is they pocket the profit thed lose at the MSRP by letting someone else sell it.).
So my guess is that Lux is the OEM for these and is squeezing apple by only producing the contracted number. THey have excess capacity or are holding back expanding in return for some concession form apple like letting them re-sel their own version. Apple cant bit the hand till the find another maker.
Or so I wildly speculate.
So do you have an ipod on order from other than apple. Where sis you order it from and how long did you wait. I perhaps foolishly in hindsight, ordered from mac mall because the ipod shuffle came with a load of freebies ( senhieser headphones, a second set of ear buds, and some base station speakers from logictech.) A good deal if I could just get it delivered before ski season ends....
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The name Shuffle is clearly protected under Trademark law, since Apple has it trademarked.
LuxPro is screwed.
Boom Shanka
Right after Apple released the iMac back in 1998, everyone started jumping on the "all-in-one" PC thing again. A new company at the time, eMachines, tried to market a near copy of it called the eOne PC. They were slapped with injunctions in the US and Tokyo shortly after that and later forced to stop production.
The review for the eOne is still up on epinions, along with a stock photo: eOne Photo
Daewoo tried something similar. They both got the smack down. See here.
Do you remember when Cobalt Networks was about to sue Apple over the Cube? Because of Cobalt's Qube design? Only to find out a few months later Apple owned NeXT at that point, which created the original Cube. At that point Cobalt changed their tune and decided suing might not be so smart. Some Cobalt info.
The reason for suing is brand dilution. When you make a look-a-like, you're copying a design that's identified with the product. It's the same reason stores brand soda tries to have similar color schemes to Coke, or Pepsi. You identify the product by the colors, shapes and patterns of the packaging or product itself.
I get what the Taiwanese company is doing. They would have been better off sticking to knock off Nintendo games though. I'd guarantee Apple already knows about the knock off at this point, and we'll probably be seeing lawsuits within a week or two.
The name Shuffle is clearly protected under Trademark law, since Apple has it trademarked.
Links from tess2.uspto.gov expire after a few minutes. Here's a fixed link (the Check Status button).
Anyway, how valid is Apple's trademark on SHUFFLE given that "shuffle" is a descriptive name for the random sequence playback feature in several MP3 players? It's not nearly as strong as IPOD, an arbitrary/fanciful name.
It's one thing to repackage your old mp3 players into new shells, it's another to pay good coders to code a good product.
And it's yet another to find a good Free Software product, use that, and make a token donation to the project.
I dunno where you live, but every Target I've been in has em.
just ask for it at the electronics counter. I picked up a 1GB there about two weeks ago. I asked why they weren't on display, and the reason was related to shrinkage. So, maybe you might wanna saunter/mosey/drive there...
Blacker than my baby girl's stare. Black like the veil that the muslimina wear. Black like the planet that they fear...
Does the US trademark laws even have any relevance in Taiwan?
If the trademark laws don't, then the other weapons do. Look how the bought Congress of the United States forced the DMCA and the Bono Act on Australia, by threatening a trade war if Australia didn't "harmonize" its copyright laws with the bought laws of the United States.
Except it has more features, doesn't require a proprietary program to use it, and costs less.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
There is nothing wrong with intellectual property laws to the extent that they allow innovators a period of exclusivity to reap the rewards of their innovation
Wrong. There is everything wrong with such laws, but the wrongs are sometimes balanced with rights. It is bad that companies can't copy others' inventions, but there is a potential benefit of increased R&D spendings.
You seem to have the belief that laws are fundamentally good, no matter what they say. There are many good ways to solve the problem of "innovation coming to a screeching halt", while also opening the world of ideas to human creativity. For example, compulsory licensing of patents and designs would allow that company to make their Super Shuffle as long as they pay Apple, say 10$ per item. We would still get our FM-enabled shuffle and Apple would still be stimulated to develop great designs in the future.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
"Let's copy a famous product that is expensively marketed worldwide and make some easy money from chumps"
That was classic intercourse!
> IANAL but I don't think there is much apple can do. Unless
> they stole some patented technology, they should be fine with
> that desing. You cannot copyright style or asthetics.
I don't that's true. Patents aren't the only thing protected. Designs, trademarks, logos, and appearances are protected, too.
You can't market a product that can be mistakened for the product of another. The reason is that psychologically, people associated items that look similar as having the same quality as the original product, and consumers will assume that the two companies have something in common. In other words, the rip-off product is trying to bank on the consumer perception of the original product.
In my Consumer Behavior class we studied the case of a regional soft drink called "Corr's Natural Soda". The can looked vaguely like "Coors", but the script was different (to someone paying attention) and the former can had a big cross-section of a lemon on it.
Coor's Brewing Company sued the regional soda manufacturer claiming that "Corr's" was trying to facilitate their market position and gain benefits through the name and the look of the can. The latter defended by saying that it was named after the owner "Robert Corr".
The courts sided with Coor's Brewing Company. They told the regional soda company to change the product to make it less similar to Coors. They were told to not put the name in script and if they wanted to name their soda after the person, they had to use the guy's full name and not just the last name with an apostrophe s so as to not deceive. The soda was changed to "Robert Corr Natural Soda," the name was put in a regular (albeit ugly) Serif font, and the can looked different enough from Coors that no one would expect there to be a connection.
The Coors versus Corr's case gives some insight, so I think Apple has a case. Many people will look at this "Super Shuffle" and think either Apple made it (since it looks almost exactly like the iPod shuffle), or that this company builds it for Apple (and thus the customer is getting the same product for less money because they don't pay Apple's markup). Then they'll go home and find out it doesn't support purchases from the iTunes Music Store, and you'll have some unhappy customers.
Clearly this ripoff product is gaining value by banking on Apple's look and feel. The fact that they put "Shuffle" in the name (a non-obvious name that only has value now that Apple has an iPod shuffle) and their ad rips Apple's ads off makes it worse.
I'm sure Apple Legal will have a response Monday morning. Like with the case of Future Power who ripped off the iMacs years ago, Apple needs to quelch the iPod ripoffs early and often. If someone wants to make a competing product, great, but market the product on its own merits, not trying to deceive customers.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Ever hear of the Apple Airport aka the Lucent RG1000?
It's been a couple of years now since Apple used that card's guts as the basis of their AirPort card.
Also last time I checked Apple wasn't the manufacturer of any of their display products.
Apple doesn't make the LCDs themselves. They do manufacture the displays themselves.
So yes their are OEM versions of Apples products that wind up in the open market.
You have that completely backwards. Apple has, in the past, bought OEM versions of other products and used them as the basis for their products. But Apple does not offer OEM versions of its own products.
Tell me again why Apple doesn't put FM in the iPod?
Because the quality of received FM varies, and Apple is all about trying to give you a consistent experience. It doesn't matter if it's not the Shuffles fault if you go under a bridge and loose signal, most people are still going to get mad at the device. Apple wants to make sure that when you are listening to music the quality is not going to degrade in any way they can help.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
the next one will be "hyper" and the one after "ultra", or is it the other way around, they always are ... don't know what comes after those companies that use those names always implode before they go any further
People have missed the point. This company is going to sell an iPod Shuffle knock-off in China. There's no way that it will be sold (for long) in Europe or North America -- just like knock-off Rolex watches. Apple will have an extremely difficult time pursuing the manufacturer through the Chinese legal system. If they do manage to exert suitable pressure to get the company shut down, it may well be a year from now -- after all the money's been made. Clever strategy in the Chinese "Wild West."
To ensure they maintain the high standards of English-language manuals produced by Asian manufacturing companies, they should translate Apple's manual into Chinese and then translate it back into English.
As you can see, it works really well:
[Reading from his book, "Jimmy James: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler," translated to Japanese and back again]
Mr. James: I had a small house of brokerage on Wall Street. Many days no business comes to my hut. Jimmy has fear? A thousand times no! I never doubted myself for a minute, for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo...
[pauses while turning page]
Mr. James: dung.
(Courtesy: IMDB)
~Philly
When you don't listen to your customers, they'll find someone who will. Serves them right.
There has been a lot of speculation that Apple never designed the Shuffle but bought it in from outside, guess we will find out if and when Apple sue over it.
Unless Apple was brain dead, whether it was manufactured or even designed by Apple is irrelevant. Apple should have at minimum taken out design patents which cover the look of the device. We're more familiar with utility patents which are what most of us think of when we think of patents. But for something that is purely ornamental one can take out a design patent which protects the visual design. Doesn't provide the protection of a utility patent but still effective in a case like this. Plus it's entirely possible they have one or more utility patents and there probably are some copyright issues involved as well. Virtually all consumer electronics are manufactured outside the US but this has no bearing on whether a company can build a visually identical knockoff.
Ob Disclaimer IANAL. Source: Legal Aspects of Engineering Law by Richard C. Vaughn.
Apple does not offer OEM versions of its own products.
:)
Bell and Howell "Black Apple II"?
HP iPod?
Apple's a big company. They do lots of stuff. They even do stuff they said they'd never do, like release a headless consumer Mac. Or a flash-based MP3 player.
One of the best bits is that in some stores they are using ipod shuffle wall ad posters and just sticking the logo of the Luxpro over the top.
if you want one, grab one while this company is still in business, which it won't be for much longer
Business Voyeur
I've just been looking through articles about the SuperShuffle and I don't see any mention of price. Where do you get that it's the same price as the IPod Shuffle?
This isn't 'IP' like software patents, or DMCA copyright schemes, it's 'IP' as in 'identity'.
No one would cry 'foul' at this product, if it were functionally exactly like it is now, but didn't look just like an iPod shuffle, and wasn't packaged with Apple type adverts (dancing black silhouettes with white 'pods over a green background).
I agree that fighting competition with 'IP" instead of innovation is evil, but this thing isn't 'competition', it's impersonation.
It really is a striking look-alike, but the original is just a rectangular thumb drive in the first place. Since there is no Apple logo on it I wonder how far they will get with trademark issues.
To me it seems ethically iffy but possibly letter-of-the-law ok (if they have good, expensive, lawyers).
If I or you were to create something cool and someone created a knockoff, don't you think we deserve protection via 'trade dress' protections?
GPL Deconstructed
Did you look at the thing??? "Kind of the same" is a Dell DJ compared to an iPod. This is as blatant a rip off of an Apple product that I have ever seen, they even copied the advertising, and I would not be surprised if the packaging also looked the same. Generic store brands don't copy the entire thing like this, and actually are often made by the same company that made the original product, they are different enough to the point where a consumer can not accidently mistake which one is the real thing. Can you say the same about this Super Shuffle? I don't know what the hell they were thinking, especially by trying to pitch it in a trade show outside of Taiwan, maybe they hope to be able to sell enough of them to turn a profit before they have to stop.
It might be pointed out that one of the chief negatives against the entire iPod line is that it possess lower audio quality than competing manufacturers.
This is the first time reading someone being concerned over the iPods' audio quality. I've read reports on the contrary, where audiophiles could not find problems with it. I wonder what the Consumer Reports report had to say, which the web page author refers to.
WTF are you talking about? Competitors DO have the right to make better products with more and better features. They don't however, have the right to shamelessly rip off the design and marketing of a product.
There is nothing stopping anyone from making a cheaper, smaller, and more featureful mp3 player than the iPod shuffle.
Quit your bitching.
"The iPod ear-bud headphones are among the best we've tested."
Probably something like "How long will it take Apple to sue us?"
There's only three things that come out of Apple; Ipods, Macs and Lawsuits. For any company to blatently rip off one of Apple's designs takes a lot of guts, especially since Apple's got some of the scariest lawyers in the industry.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Umm, built in FM radio says better function. The Shuffle has no real functions to improve upon, just generic mp3 decoding chips and a simple shuffle function.
Bell and Howell "Black Apple II"?
Are you fucking kidding me? You want to reach back nearly 30 years? I suspect that you might be a dipshit.
HP iPod?
Good point, but technically that's not an OEM arrangement. Apple sells the iPods to HP at wholesale prices and HP retails them. It's the same arrangement that Apple has with other retailers, like Target and Best Buy.
Interesting.
Trying to understand your perspective in today's global environment becomes something like writing science fiction; not that what you say won't ever come true. I don't fully agree with you as I haven't reflected on the ramifications, but I'd like to understand your position. Do you recommend any reading material for this?
>You seem to have the belief that laws are fundamentally good, no matter what they say.
No, there isn't enough information to extrapolate that from the parent's comment.
-j.
I doubt it. The legal and financial implications for Luxpro of doing a clone rip off a client that they have a contract with would be even larger than they are already facing, and far easier for Apple to win. China and Taiwan as just really quick at cloning stuff, they don't have to be an OEM of the shuffle to be able to copy it's physical appearance.
...or WMA, or FLAC, or any of the dozen other things people gripe about.
Because most of the potential buyers don't mind not having it. The potentialb buyers who do are not a large enough market to justify changing things.
You want to reach back nearly 30 years? I suspect that you might be a dipshit.
No, just an old fogey who really enjoyed programming on a Bell and Howell Black Apple back in the day.
What are you upset about? Is there something evil and rude about OEMing stuff? I think it's a smart move, myself, and I wish Apple did it more. I'd really like a Power-PC equipped Thinkpad running OS X, for example... I hate the OS on my Thinkpad, but I can't stand the PowerBook and iBook hardware.
"Asian" in this usage was referring to the type of consumer electronics, not the owners of the store.
Settle down, and take it easy. Nobody's "slurring" anybody here.
Is there something evil and rude about OEMing stuff?
There's something evil and rude about being a troll.
There's something evil and rude about being a troll.
What exactly is it that's pissing you off, man? I report what really happens, and you accuse me of lying, call me names, and generally make a big stink about the idea that tight iTunes integration might not be a killer feature... that someone might actually prefer an MP3 player that operates at "arms length" from iTunes.
Thanks for the reply and for the compliment. While I don't know about books/articles about this particular topic that describe my point of view, I'd recommend you read something on dialectics, preferably something by Hegel and Marx themselves (not to confuse with dianetics, which is an evil cult).
IMHO dialectics is the best approach to deal with contradictions. In this case there are two conflicting views 1) copyrights are property and artists have the right to profit from their work (thesis) and 2) ideas belong to everyone, limiting creativity is evil (antithesis). To achieve synthesis you need dialectics.
The best part about dialectics is that it works just fine in any area, not just in regards to patents.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
I may be wrong, but I suspect that most people buying Shuffle buy an "Apple iPod", not a "Shuffle".
Furthermore, while the ads may be intentionally exploiting Apple's ad campaigns, I am not sure it should be considered illegal or even unethical. After all,
1) Apple ads were manipulative in the first place, trying trick the customer into buying their product (as any ad that appeals to style does).
2) If a company is providing a similar product, why shouldn't it use similar marketing? The trademark laws are intended to protect the customer, not corporate profits.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Urgh... Parent presents valid points against something related to Apple in a polite manner and it gets modded down as troll!!
...is this an *exact* copy down to everything, or is it similar looking and functioning? Where exactly is the dividing line with the laws? I was throwing out the cola example because it's analogous and most everyone has seen it. Does Mac have a trademark with the word shuffle? Does mac have an exclusive patent on having a music player using a flash drive in a small portable form factor? I honestly don't know exactly where they draw the line, like so far and no further before it becomes a "legal" counterfeit item. I mean, it's a real Sorny! A Panaphonik!
/shrugs. I've grown very cynical of manufactured items and labelling and who owns what with "IP", I just don't care much anymore. I used to but it's been beat out of me with the reality stick and watching this government and our "business" leaders actions for a long long time. They aren't even close to loyal to us rank and file US workers, haven't been for an entire generation now(I'm a blue collar guy and personally felt the effects of both outsourced jobs (mine, twice) and insourced cheap illegal competition labor WAY before any of the white collar IT world had it on their radar screen),so, I feel zero loyalty to them. I'll take whatever I can get that's the cheapest and gets the job done, I can't keep up with who is stealing what "IP" from whom, not in this age of software patents and business process patents and being able to trademark common words like "windows" and whatnot. US big business asked for this situation, now they got it, sort of silly for them to cry foul over it. That's my opinion anyway. They "cloned" my labor over to asia for a nickel on the dollar, so I don't care if they get "cloned" themselves. I've bought quite a few Apple products in the past, still own most of them, but until they drop their prices down even more, I mean radically drop prices, I won't even consider buying any of their stuff, it's no longer worth it to me to pay a huge premium for about the same asian manufactured items. Ya, I'd like to have a decent new PPC based system, but I'm not going to pay their prices for it either, I'll "struggle by" with cheap commodity stuff, either computers or music players.
I don't know any of those things, but I really don't care either, not that much anyway in this exact situation here, because it's a minuscule example of a much larger problem.. I fully expect that we will continue to see clones from asia, everything from small electronic gadgets all the way to cars and planes and ships and you name it, That's one of their prime businesses is just making knock offs, and because they have been doing it for decades, and the US hasn't banned imports from there yet, or banned outsourcing, or done much of anything with IP laws other than to harass little guys in the US*,and to make quad trillions for 1% of the population while dragging the nation into a debt that just cannot be paid off and trashing the dollar, well, the obvious conclusion is that they are ignoring it on purpose more or less, and I expect it to continue.
*Yes I know there have been some token busts of clone copycatters once in awhile, I read the news too, and it also hasn't slowed them down one bit, close one clone factory, ten more go up in their place, and the tariffs and taxes keep being skewed in favor of cloned crap in, hard to export out. And shoot, where is the "real" iPod made anyway? I wouldn't even consider it a US product if you got down to it. They happen to have corporate HQ in California,
Yes, and "Windows" is a generic term for a framed area in a GUI for viewing filesystems.
In the United States and possibly in other English-speaking countries. However, outside the anglophone world, "Windows" is possibly a fanciful foreign word.
<sarcasm> So, obviously, anyone can use "Windows" to describe their GUI-based personal computing operating system. </sarcasm>
Lindows won in the United States but lost in Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg, all jurisdictions outside the anglophone world.
Are you saying that this might not be a slam dunk? Or are you saying that Apple has absolutely no grounds to make a claim of trademark infringement?
The former. If it goes to court, the judge will probably find trade dress infringement and order a few cosmetic changes to the product, but the name "Super Shuffle" and (more importantly) the existence of the product will likely not be affected.
Wouldn't the logical thing to say be "Those of you who do not want a radio should buy something other than an iPod"?
"Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
Um... There's "functionality" and there's "functioning." On the surface it has more going for it (excepting that you won't have a seamless tie-in with iTunes, which is much of the appeal of Apple products), but will the extra features actually be WORTH it?
Not to mention that there's one other trait we don't know yet that one always needs to take into account... will the LuxPro device actually be the same PRICE? If it's more expensive, then the features are moot--you're paying more for them--and the device comparisons back to where they always are: measuring price, performance, functionality, etc. and determining what's best for you.
Heck, if they wanted they could even change the GUI back to NeXTStep style to differentiate the products further. I wouldn't mind!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Oh, now that would be interesting. Custom OSX themes for OEMs. Something shiny and "bling bling" for Sony, OS/2-style corporate for IBM, Platinum for Toshiba, Luna theme for Dell...
No, maybe that's going too far,
How do they integrate the extra features without extra buttons?
Also, has anyone ever bought ANY product made by Luxpro? Their website only has digital mockups of their stuff.
Yeah, that would be going too far -- I was thinking of stopping at "white/Aqua" for Apple consumer stuff, and "brushed metal/NeXT" for IBM corporate stuff. IBM would be making "SuperPower[Book|Mac]" kind of devices.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Same here, but you'd never be able to fit the components into a package that small. The smallest portable DAB radio I've seen is about the size of a normal iPod, not to mention it'd probably double the cost of the thing.
"Decoding Format: MP3 (8~320Kbps), MP3-VBR, WMA, WMA-DRM (5~192Kbps), WAV (ADPCM)"
They support WMA, but no mention of AAC and fairplay. This could be good for Napster, etc.
Vote for Pedro
Fair enough if they made it so it looked a bit different. A different colour even?
Fair enough if they made it a different size, or shape, or changed the position of the buttons, or something
Apple do not have a monopoly on flash-based MP3 players, they don't have a patent on the idea. What Apple do have, however, is ownership of the design of the iPod Shuffle.
What Apple are (rightfully) pissed off at is the blatant rip-off of their intellectual property - the look and feel.
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
Could it be that the reason the supply of shuffles is so inelastic to demand is that Apple and its OEM are having a cat-fight, and this is a power play by Lux?
Certain Apple stores seemed to get a lot more Shuffles than others. I remember in Chicago they all disappeared off the shelves within hours of being released, and it took weeks for a new supply to come in. At the same time, the Apple store in Tokyo had crates and crates and crates of them. And for good reason. One random weeknight I waited in line with 200 other people to buy one for my wife. Most people bought two or three at a time, plus a full suite of accessories. And this wasn't even immediately after the release -- this was a month later. From what I've seen there's a huge pent-up demand for Apple products in Japan. Yodobashi Camera (think eight floors of Best Buy on crack) is still sold out of 1G models. And I've seen people at the Ginza Apple store buy Mac Minis by the armload. Considering the fact that Apple products cost US$10 to US$30 more in Japan, I can understand why they'd get more product than U.S. stores.
World's tallest building rises in the desert
Don't forget, now it's Lenovo who owns the Thinkpad factories.
Lenovo Thinkbook? lBook?
I've been working with these exact chips for years and I would be very surprised if we've been spending extra dollars per unit on a needless external tuner chip :)
On my XP machine iPodService.exe and iPodHelper.exe each use about 1.8MB of memory.
That said, I wouldn't call it bloatware.
Try new Anonymous Coward Lite! Opinionated, and low in facts!
Apple has actually spanked MS a number of times in the last ten years, lawsuit-wise. The problem is that as soon as it begins to look like Apple is winning, MS immediately settles. One of the settlement conditions is always that neither of the principals will discuss the settlement, so it takes a little digging to get the information, but there are always some leaks.
For example, there was the company that MS paid a rather surprising amount of money to get a copy of Apple's QuickTime source code from. At the time, MS's video player was less than half the speed of Apple's, on Windows. So they just appropriated huge chunks of code wholesale from Apple's software. And, when Apple took them to court, they settled out of court. According to the best scuttlebutt available, the large MS investment in Apple in the late 90s, and the agreement to continue developing MS Office for the Mac, were part of the settlement.
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
And second, you need a little bit of education on the difference between morals and ethics. I won't even undertake to do that here, but here's a pretty decent web site: http://www.scribblers-ink.com/professional_ethics
Apple does unethical things upon occasion, as does any other large corporation you can name. Do they do it more often? Are they a thousand times more heavily scrutinized than most other companies their size, and therefore their 'little lapses' are more often found? Is more expected of them, because of their early rhetoric, and therefore are all lapses greatly magnified, sometimes out of proportion?
I'd have to answer those three questions: 'who knows?', 'yes', and 'ohhh yes.'
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
That said, this is a total bust. Apple rocks. Cheap knockoffs suck.
Yes. You need something that can write the index files, but there are Perl modules for that. Plenty of people use iPods with Linux. It's just a hard drive. MP3s go in a bunch of folders, with an index file.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
- get up
- lift the needle from the turntable
- lift the record
- put it in the inner sleeve
- put the inner sleeve in the outer sleeve
- put the album back in the collection
- choose another album (fuck! You don't even have to choose nowadays, it just shuffles for you, good thing because if you're that stoned everything is good),
- pull it out of the collection,
- take out the inner sleeve,
- take out the record,
- place it on the turntable,
- start the turntable,
- put the needle on it (motor control!)...
- ...and finally get back to the...shit...they've already finished the spliff you just rolled.
The iPod is the second greatest thing for potheads across the universe and yet you're still complaining about it! (The greatest thing was of course the Lego Mindstroms controlled rolling machine.)Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
the FM radio is a good idea
I like to use my music player on airplanes.
Airlines don't allow devices with radio tuners on airplanes.
There, a real reason to leave out the bloody radio. Besides, I haven't heard anything good on the radio in years (exaggeration - but not by much).
Maybe he was thinking of "Crazy Reo"?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Wow! You're really an iconoclast! I bet you have some really great, unconventional ideas.
I've got a really great, yet unconventional, idea. Hows about you give me all your money? What do you think? Is that a great (yet unconventional) idea, or what?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
You fool, you've let your tinfoil hat slip off! Now, they know that you know!
Run, hide, go before the black Apple's iHelicopters drop iJackbooted iThugs down on your mom's roof! Your imminent incarceration is only minutes away! Write your manifesto on the wall? No ink? Improvise!
Or, maybe we could come back to reality for a moment. Take your meds and calm down for a second.
Lots of tools let you sync with the iPod. Apple is not going to make an mp3 player that filters content. If they were, they'd be doing it allready. But they aren't, because the concept itself is absurd.
And even if they could do it without an absurd about of development, it would ruin the iPod. The iPod wins by being a sexy, easy-to-use, high quality player. If Apple nerfs it, then it stops being what people want at all the work that Apple's done to control the online music market will vanish in a puff of smoke.
We aren't using iTunes because it's an Apple product. We're using it because it's one of the best music players/managers out there.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Did you think I'd forget what you said in this post?
You obviously didn't know this before hand, when you wrote that post. It's good that you're doing some basic googling now. It's bad that you're trying to pretend like you never messed up in the first place. No one here is going to fall for it.
What, did you think I'd forget the post that I responded to? I think maybe you need more coffee. Or less. I'm not sure which.
Move along.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
I've had an iPod shuffle (512 MB) on order from MacMall since January 12. I finally got a shipping notification yesterday (March 13). Maybe yours is not too far behind.
if "asia" was a reason, we would have had a wide selection of ipod clones in the web for the past 3 years. if there would have been this selection of those, a shuffle clone would not have hit the /. headlines now.
never underestimate apple's lawyers. the chances that you would not lose are existant, only if you 1) have more money to burn to prove it, and 2) did not copy the product. the "family" is not going to protect anyone against apple.
When you find out the truth about the iPod shuttle
Apple's a bit late for the X Prize, no?
-mkb
That is a safe guess, regardless, considering the Mac's tiny share of the market!
In any case, you still might want to pick up an Apple USB Keyboard "
There is no such problem on my desktop, but the ports are really crammed in there on my PC notebook. Looking at some pics (I don't know anyone with a Powerbook to check for real), it appears that Mac notebooks might have the problem too: Look at this powerbook pic. They look rather crammed on this one as well.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Actually I don't have an Ipod I don't want an Ipod and an IpodService.exe is no use to me on a laptop with a 400mhz processor and a maximum of 192 meg of ram giving away nearly 2 meg of it to a service I will never use is a waste of limited resources.
Portable media serial number (retreives the serial number of any portable music player connected to my system) also started and unneeded.
remote registry editor whats that doing enabled.
Thanks Grandparent and parent for alerting me to the option of turning off a lot of useless services.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Linux