May 19, 2008
Apple takes a very big legal gamble? This could be a landmark case.
Analysis of:
Apple files suit over unauthorized iPod accessories | www.ipodnn.com
This analysis is solely the work of the author. It has not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Implications: What if Apple losses? What will happen to one of its core revenue makers? What if Apple wins? Who else wins and loses?
Analysis: A few of us who follow Apple used to joke about a law suit a day filed against Apple, well this is a turn of events. Apple has filed suit to protect its right to control the accessory market for its products, namely the iPod and I am sure looking forward the iPhone.
Currently if you make a product that supports the iPod Apple wants and gets a royalty fee. However, Atico is not paying that fee. I am certain numerous communication took place prior to the suit to no avail.
Here's the gamble, Apple generates income from all these royalties and more to come in the future on the iPhone add-ons. We can already see their approach with the Apple SDK where to sell a software product for the iPhone Apple collects 30% of the price. I was suprised when I did a search for "Made for iPhone" in the trademark system, none exists nor has been applied for.
What happens if Apple losses this case. Watch for mass deflections of others paying for the "Made for iPod" royalty. If Apple wins, watch them expand the "Made for" to other product areas.
This could be viewed as a landmark case, will other companies start to demand royalties for secondary market items, Car manufacturers for all those 3rd party add-ons comes to mind.
Analysis: A few of us who follow Apple used to joke about a law suit a day filed against Apple, well this is a turn of events. Apple has filed suit to protect its right to control the accessory market for its products, namely the iPod and I am sure looking forward the iPhone.
Currently if you make a product that supports the iPod Apple wants and gets a royalty fee. However, Atico is not paying that fee. I am certain numerous communication took place prior to the suit to no avail.
Here's the gamble, Apple generates income from all these royalties and more to come in the future on the iPhone add-ons. We can already see their approach with the Apple SDK where to sell a software product for the iPhone Apple collects 30% of the price. I was suprised when I did a search for "Made for iPhone" in the trademark system, none exists nor has been applied for.
What happens if Apple losses this case. Watch for mass deflections of others paying for the "Made for iPod" royalty. If Apple wins, watch them expand the "Made for" to other product areas.
This could be viewed as a landmark case, will other companies start to demand royalties for secondary market items, Car manufacturers for all those 3rd party add-ons comes to mind.
Report a Concern
More GLG News in
Technology, Media & Telecom
Most Popular:
Source Article | Expert Analyses
U.S wind power strangled by antiquated power grid
www.iht.com
Western Digital working on 20,000 RPM Raptor
www.bit-tech.net
Bandwidth crisis is Tellabs' chance
www.suntimes.com
Symphony deploys Ekinops 360 in Bangkok optical network
lw.pennnet.com
RICOH to Acquire IKON Office Solutions, Inc. | www.marketwatch.com
investors.ikon.com
How much of a Threat To Ciena is “Next-Generation” Optical Firmware?
September 4, 2008
Not So Fast - SSD's Are On The Way, But Rotational Drives Are Not Spinning Down Yet
September 2, 2008
iPhone reception problem resloved, but....
August 29, 2008
Would Tellabs Consider Merging With Ciena Again?
August 28, 2008
An Industry Giant Gains Momentum - And A Serious Blow to Canon
August 28, 2008

