Actually, they look way too similar, and if you had seen the in-booth displays of the advertising and PACKAGING (i.e. the boxes they come in) you would have seen that the whole Future Power thing is an attempt to sell the e-power box to folks looking for an iMac. It is one thing to be "inspired" - ahem - by the design elements of the iMac, it is yet another thing to shape your marketing and packaging to deliberately look like another product's marketing and packaging.
From looking at the photos and reading their own marketing info, it is blatantly apparent that they are counting on folks seeing one of their boxes and thinking they are getting "one of those easy to use Internet machines they saw on TV" or in the magazine ads.
Besides, unique industrial design that transcends design dictated by function, has already amassed some significant case law that says that in some cases, the look of a product is protectable intellectual property. Apple has a very strong case under trade dress to pursue this matter.
There is also the possiblity that the process Apple uses to get the transparent plastics (which they patented apparently) may have been infringed upon to make the FuturePower machine.
We'll see what the courts say, but I think Apple may have a lock on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, they look way too similar, and if you had seen the in-booth displays of the advertising and PACKAGING (i.e. the boxes they come in) you would have seen that the whole Future Power thing is an attempt to sell the e-power box to folks looking for an iMac. It is one thing to be "inspired" - ahem - by the design elements of the iMac, it is yet another thing to shape your marketing and packaging to deliberately look like another product's marketing and packaging.
From looking at the photos and reading their own marketing info, it is blatantly apparent that they are counting on folks seeing one of their boxes and thinking they are getting "one of those easy to use Internet machines they saw on TV" or in the magazine ads.
Besides, unique industrial design that transcends design dictated by function, has already amassed some significant case law that says that in some cases, the look of a product is protectable intellectual property. Apple has a very strong case under trade dress to pursue this matter.
There is also the possiblity that the process Apple uses to get the transparent plastics (which they patented apparently) may have been infringed upon to make the FuturePower machine.
We'll see what the courts say, but I think Apple may have a lock on this one.
-- Don