News
Forbes: ‘Apple bites the fans that feed it’
Forbes senior editor Lisa DiCarlo and Boston attorney Bruce Sunstein have spoken out on Apple’s recent lawsuit against Mac rumor site Think Secret, which has recently posted reports on upcoming Apple products such as a low-cost iMac, a productivity suite, and a flash-based iPod. “It is widely acknowledged that Apple enjoys the kind of slavish devotion among its customers—and fawning adoration from the press—of which other companies don’t even dare to dream,” writes DiCarlo. “That is, it’s acknowledged by everyone but Apple. How else to explain Apple’s latest attempt to clamp down on, rather than embrace, its fanatical fans?” Sunstein, who specializes in intellectual property law, said the case will only result in damage to Apple’s reputation. “A fair amount of buzz doesn’t hurt Apple’s business,” he said. “And, to the extent that Apple sues its customer base; it has to think twice about biting the hand that feeds it.”
Share This Article & Win an iTunes Gift Card. Next: Exclusive: Griffin to unveil AirClick wireless gear, SmartDeck adapter
Previous: New Podcast online: U2 iPod, Top Accessory Picks, PSP vs. iPod
Comments
If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.
Recent News
- AdMob: iPhone accounts for 50% of smartphone ad requests
- Apple targets Verizon with new iPhone 3GS ads
- Apple announces Black Friday 2009 shopping event
- Swimman waterproofs Earphones with Remote and Mic
- KT to launch iPhone in South Korea on Nov. 28
- New iPhone jailbreak worm seeks banking info
- Apple exec Schiller discusses App Store
- Enter the CES Exhibits Plus Pass Giveaway today
- Wider distribution boosting iPhone sales in France
- Chinon rolls out AVi portable iPod speaker
Recent Reviews
- Electronic Arts Command & Conquer Red Alert
- Bowers & Wilkins Zeppelin Mini
- iHome iHM79 Rechargeable Mini Speakers
- Elexa Consumer Products iBlink
- Bose SoundDock 10
- Shure SE115m+ Sound Isolating Headset
- Apple Remote (2009)
- Kensington Travel Battery Pack and Charger for iPhone
- Tapulous Metallica Revenge
- Electronic Arts NBA Live by EA Sports
Recent Articles
- The Beginner’s Guide to iTunes
- Ask iLounge 11-20-09
- The Complete Guide to Using the iTunes Store
- iPhone Gems: Brain Challenge 2, Impossible Quiz, Jeopardy, Trivia Wars + Wheel of Fortune
- The Complete Guide to Album Tagging, Art and Playlists in iTunes
- Ask iLounge 11-13-09
- The Complete Guide to iTunes Audiobooks, Podcasts + iTunes U
- Ask iLounge 11-6-09
- iPhone Gems: Asphalt 5 and Doom Classic
- Ask iLounge 10-30-09
1
Not true. If Apple didn’t do this many possible customers might over anticipate and pass up a product for not including all that was claimed, or they might not pay a more expensive price.
Posted by andres in Miami on January 7, 2005 at 1:57 PM (PDT)
2
Apple has been spending too much time hanging out with a bad crowd, and now they’ve started picking up some rather nasty habits from their new buddies… RIAA and MPAA!!! <grin>
Posted by IDSmoker on January 7, 2005 at 1:58 PM (PDT)
3
Those that don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. It is often surprising to newbies how effective Apple legal has been. Apple’s willingness, over time, to protect their turf has been a major factor in the current viability and integrity of the various Apple marks. In the 80s, Apple legal once wrote something along the lines of, “Some think that it is fair to use bananas, oranges or other fruit in lieu of an apple in their marketing materials. This is not true,” and then went on to defend their point. Their willingness to draw the line is exactly why the Apple brand translated so well to the iPod.
Posted by B Hayashi in Denver, CO on January 7, 2005 at 3:15 PM (PDT)
4
Apple’s willingness, over time, to protect their turf has been a major factor in the current viability and integrity of the various Apple marks.
How about Tangerine computers, or Apricot computers? Someone should make a list of all the “fruity” computer companies.
Apple Corp’s willingness to draw a line is why Apple Computer has been repeatedly sued by the Beatles, and lost consistently, over the past thirty years. The Beatles are harsh when it comes to settlements. If Mr Jobs had known in 1976 how badly the use of the Apple logo would turn out, I rather think he might have chosen a different fruit! It’s notable that “Macintosh” also infringed on the trademark of a music equipment maker. Once is a coincidence but twice just seems careless.
Posted by Demosthenes on January 7, 2005 at 5:00 PM (PDT)
5
The suit against TS isn’t just about clamping down expectations and fight a theoretical war against property rights infringement. Leaks of innovations has very real affects on business. When a company innovates a product, it enjoys a small window of advantage over its competitors. Apple doesn’t want to announce what they have until they’re ready. Leaks of new products give their competitors time to react and to come up with competing products, even before Apple is able to put the product into the market. This seriously shortens the already small window of opportunity that Apple has to take advantage of their innovations.
Posted by Nipith in Los Angeles, CA on January 7, 2005 at 5:29 PM (PDT)
6
Leaks? Industrial espionage? Apple’s got to protect itself, after all, it’s not some sort of welfare organisation which exists to provide entertainment for all.
Apple’s competitors, especially those red in tooth and claw, are, I imagine, always probing. If they could steal a march on Apple they would, without hesitation.
Posted by Rod Fryer on January 8, 2005 at 12:42 AM (PDT)
7
Look what happened to the iPod mini! If Apple could just keep the rumour sites tight lipped about price (even on nonexistant product rumours) then I don’t think anyone could have a reason to be disappointed.
Posted by minty on January 8, 2005 at 8:57 AM (PDT)
8
“and lost consistently”
They didn’t lose. They settled. Big difference!
Posted by Quoth_the_Raven in Herndon, VA on January 10, 2005 at 10:08 AM (PDT)