NEWS: Beats in a lawsuit with Yamaha - Page 19

Think you might find RIM developed and held the smartphone market long before Apple Me Too'd there way in. Whining about Samsung or anyone else horning in on their action really brings turnabout being fair play to mind. Apple of all organizations should be the last to throw stones. Then again were it not for the iPhone and that found money cash cow known as itunes, they'd still be scratching around for 8 per cent of the computer market. If you're lucky maybe they will re introduce the Newton for you.

 

You might want to a do little research on what "smartphones" looked like before the iPhone came along. BB users kept insisting that physical keyboards were indispensable, and Samsung phones were Razr lookalikes, until the iPhone took off. You seem to forget that Apple had already made enormous profits with the iPod and now with the iPad, so your claim that the company is a one product success story (a one trick pony) is wrong.

 

Some fanboys just can't over themselves and refuse to give credit even where it's clearly due. It's sort of a shame. I expect to read this sort of ignorance on YouTube, not here.

 

P.S. I own an Android and 2 Windows PCs, not a single Apple product these days, but this is getting way off topic.

I did not forget a thing. With out RIM developing the smartphone market you'd still be listening to mp3's on a gen 2 ipod. Once again, itunes is floating the business and without it there would be no Ipod with a phone built in, now would there. As for fanboism, mirror mirror, perhaps. Gross adulation of Jobs can easily be remedied in 15 minutes of conversation with anyone who ever worked for him. You seem to have not a single molecule of knowledge of Apple pre iEverything and yet you accuse me of ignorance. Shame on you.

From my perspective, Samsung® can keep its Chromebook®.  I'm currently starting the process of acquiring truckmountable computers, and the only manufacturer with qualifiable candidates, as of February 2013, is Matsushta-Kotobuki, the company behind the Panasonic® TOUGHBOOK® so loved in government-fleet circles; Apple® has yet to manufacture portable computers with serious hardpoints, so the Retina Display™ is out of the question.  Same for Asus®, which has fast enough hardware in the ROG® line (including some models with Creative® CA0116 DSP's) but, again, no hardpoints.

 

Panasonic®, Yamaha®, and TDK® have useful enough headsets for certain tasks that may require some sound isolation; others have already ruled out Dr. Dre beats®, as far as I am concerned, as they boost bass at the expense of midrange.

Funny, soon we will all have things that look the same (seems like government, socity, schools and now companies are trying to make everyone look, talk, and act the same way).

 

And people seem to like this.... Am i the only one here who really does not want to have any of those lookalike items?

I think largely what has happened with regard to design is a narrowing of options due to CAD CAM being used. Look at the automotive field right now and it is rife with lookalike products from the new Land Rover which looks like the Lexus which looks like the Nissan... to a Bentley, of all things, that looks like it came off a Chrysler production line from the 3rd quarter view.

 

 Once you put the constraints of method of manufacture into the mix there is a limited amount of design leeway a computer system allows. Personally I find the whole "optimized for manufacture" look to be disconcerting. Can hardly wait for someone to rediscover the drafting board and pencil:)

 

Perhaps the new patent infringement defense could be "Solidworks told us to do it"

 

Nice ;)

It's obvious who the fanboy here is. I don't own a single Apple product and haven't ever been a fan of the iPhone/iPod/ or iPad. I prefer Android and will not pay a premium for a Mac desktop either, but I'm objective and know basic facts. Whether or not Steve Jobs was a great human being isn't the issue. We're speaking about Apple products, so save your personal attacks about Jobs for another discussion. 

 

Funny how you credit RIM for revolutionizing the smartphone but fail to give Apple the same due tip of the hat. If not for the iPhone, your smartphone today would be a BB clone, probably wouldn't even have a touchscreen and would likely require a stylus if it did. If not for the iPhone, BB wouldn't have released what is essentially an iPhone of its own with the Z10 or whatever it's called. The same thing can be said about the tablet market. Prior to Apple's entrance, few made a tablet anything like the iPad, and now everyone has one with similar features. I don't care for the iPhone or the iPad, but I'm not blind to their influence on the market, just like I'm not blind to the musical influence of people like Hendrix despite not being a fan of his. 

 

I expect more informed discussion on here. I suppose iPaintCode started it with his pro Apple rant, but this doesn't give you the right to invent nonsense to satisfy your Apple hatred. Take it to YouTube or a PC forum for the thumbs up from other uninformed posters.

 

Your screen name suggests otherwise. As for nonsense you are shoveling buckets of drivel the like of which I have not seen in years. Apple did nothing but marry an mp3 player with a phone ,period. Their market share came from iTunes, period and that was marketing genius. You are driven no matter what you do to the iTunes store and that is as good a market capture as has ever been seen  As for a smart phone with touch screen, well Palm was there first now weren't they.  Yet you have the nerve to call me uninformed.

 

   You are the one who brought Jobs into this discussion, not me, but feel free to backpedal all you want.

 

Very easy for you to talk about hatred isn't it. You are being taken to task over your lack of knowledge and that's the best rebuttal you can come up with? Your complete inability to comprehend Apple's business model and the product line resulting from that is mind boggling.

 

Troll on somewhere else, I am done polluting this thread with responses to your lack of industry knowledge.

Im new here..

 

Beats Since 2008 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_by_Dr._Dre      Owner Monster Cable Lol it funny

 

 

Yamaha Since  1887 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_Corporation

 

 

And for apple fanboy

 

I can build an alienware that are know to be overprized! and they look 20x better and better build than apple laptop..

 

For 1800$ you are around 2300$ for the same spec in apple..

 

And Apple laptop are know to overheat with window installed on it.. Airflow.. is bad!!  Just google it..

 

 

 

 

Yamaha win my vote..

Edited by bonami2 - 2/28/13 at 3:43pm

Reason being windoze is a resource hog, most Unix OS's are more efficient OSX being no different. I bet running a stable other Unix or Linux on a Mac wouldn't be running hot, tho I've never had a overheat condition on a Mac, and I've been using them since 1997. Still have my first Mac, and use it for journaling, runs great, sans the battery. Hp, dells, asus, etc never seem to last past the warranty. The only windoze machine I've ever liked was a Panasonic tough book. That sucker was nice.

When did this thread degrade into a Windows vs Mac OS X flame war? Both have their merits.

 

Back to Yamaha vs Beats. Yes, Yamaha is stealing Beats' looks. Yes, Beats has legal standing to sue Yamaha and win.

 

But ONLY because of the broken patent system. IMO you shouldn't be able to patent a "look". I don't care if someone steals the "look" of a product, as long as they are providing choice. And please remember there are many types of choices: price, looks, quality, functionality.

Bonami, you can't base copyright lawsuits based on how old a company is. If Sennheiser were to make a direct copy of a Focal headphone, who do you think would win?? And I'm gonna nip this apple vs windows flame war right in the bud. Each computer fills a niche, and that's all that matters. Go be content with your computer.

 

I do not know if the patent system is broken or simply not up to dealing with things that did not exist when it was conceived. The look of a product can be of great importance (B&W nautilus for example) so that needs to be recognized. But when is a product different enough, supposedly when there is no prior art, but that relies on the patent system and its researchers itself and may not go into other intellectual property domains. In other words it is not thorough enough and relies on challenges and suit's to remedy any errors. Where it really breaks down is when design and technical details become involved (in short the system never took into account the accelerated rate of development brought on by the computer and internet ages). There just does not seem to be enough expertise in the Patent Office system(s) to make sound (no pun int) judgements on these type of issues.

 

So to sum up you have

A) insufficient information for the PO to draw on

B) insufficient expertise in the PO to make a reasonable decision

C) a system which relies on litigation to mediate its own errors.

D) resulting in a sound retirement fund gold mine for patent lawyers. Doubly so if in fact they have Technological expertise.

 

The only real way around this would be to use the type of system academia has used worldwide for years WRT new research papers. It has to pass through the peer review system to determine its individual merit and uniqueness.

 

Can you just imagine the look's on the faces at Sennheiser when the Beats patent came in for review:)

 

The US Patent Office began issuing design patents just 53 years after the ratification of the Constitution (James Madison, father of the Constitution, had been dead only 6 years). The first design patent was for a typeface in 1842. Perhaps the most iconic is the design patent issued to Coca Cola for the design of their bottle in 1915.

 

So there's absolutely nothing new or unusual about Beats obtaining a design patent for their headphones.

 

se