|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 03:11 PM EDT |
Apple is posing as the New Louis Vuitton.
Anything that looks like ... is counterfeit goods, if there
is any confusion remotely possible.
How we possibly could get that kind of viewpoint into this
case is above my ability to comprehend. It would be like
Chanel suing anybody selling any black garment.
However, I always thought that this "trade dress" is
actually central to Apple's following. They're a decent
product with a huge fashion appeal. Explain people buying a
Mac laptop and putting Windows on it.
Maybe someone with a better understanding of how the fashion
industry works could step in and explain this specific
question ?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 03:21 PM EDT |
It's a pity they haven't factored in goodwill with respect to the
not-already-in-the-apple-ecosystem.
The loss of goodwill by Sony in their court actions (and the stupidity of a
generic wired hands-free not working with their phone and NOT being able to get
a replacement wired hands-free for said phone [radio does not work without wired
hands free]) meant that when I had to replace my Xperia* I went with Samsung.
The school yard bickering by Apple (especially after reading Judge Birss's
judgement regarding potential copying of Apple's design) has lost them goodwill
in my eyes that will be impossible to rebuild and Apply has joined Sony on my
never buy [again] list. They, themselves, have lost a potential sale and entry
of me and my family into their eco-system.
There may also be some in the eco-system who may actually think for themselves
and realise that this is nothing less than protectionism and so leave the
eco-system, losing Apple
much greater sales as they will definitely negatively advertise Apple to their
friends and family.
*Sony may not be directly linked to Sony Ericsson, but the loss of goodwill by
Sony means I just boycott any device with "Sony" in the name of the
maker.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|