Apple taking IOPS to court over knockoff iPod minis

We were all kind of wondering how long it was gonna take Apple to make the first legal move against all those crazy Asian iPod knockers off, but it looks like the card most consistently at the top of that deck — Luxpro — dodged the bullet on the first real lawsuit, and a little less expected firm, IOPS, is the one getting hauled to court. Apparently Apple's bringing them in over the Jock (right) and Z3 models, which, granted bear some resemblance to the iPod mini but if you ask us it seems a bit pious for Apple not only to demand IOPS stop selling the two players, but get comped for lost sales, and for IOPS to take out an official apology in three (or more) South Korean newspapers. Especially since, you know, Apple hasn't sold the mini for month. Give 'em hell, IOPS.

[Thanks, Shin-Young Kang]

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Ummm...that doesn't even look like any version of any ipod. Nice job crapple.

[Roopesh Sheth @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I hope Creative takes this as their invitation to enforce their navigation patent. Maybe even force crapple to bankruptcy, a la NTP vs. RIM.

[ebp2k2 @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I dont see any resemblence.. except white earbuds...

I can't wait til Creative sues Apple.. and demand cut for every ipod nano ever sold!

:P

[Matt @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

no matter how much of an apple fan I am, I hope this story is a typo or rumor. neither of those players look like any ipod. if apple were taking them to court over anything, I would think it would be the iops name more than anything else.

[o0adam0o @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Man those apple lawyers at it again! That thing looks nothing like anything apple makes.....oh wait, omg! its rectangular and has a circular control...and white headphones! Sue apple sue!

[mike @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I don't know what kind of idiot would think that getting sued by creative would cripple apple, it could make the sales higher by making more people know about the nano's..
And Ha-ha "crapple" I bet it took you half a second to come up with a lame remark like that..

[Roopesh Sheth @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I knew it was only a matter of time till the fanboys starting posting their defense of apple comments in here.

[Darien @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Apple fanboys defense powers activate!

[David T @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

#6: erm, a lawsuit would make more people know about the nano? sorry, that's very, very, very debateable (sorry if spelling is wrong).

yeah, wait til Creative sues Apple - but i guess Creative knows it might hurt its image more than the amount of compensation they'd get.

but seriously, this IOPS thing doesn't look the slightest bit like the iPod at all. the round looking controller has completely different functionality from iPods - the centre part is actually a joystick. and it plays video while being the size of a Nano (ok, so resolution is crap but it's video)! heck, it isn't even white - or black, for that matter lol. Apple must be really desperate if they're going after people like these...

[Derek @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

It'd hard to see the South Koreans as sympathetic to Apple's plight... given the whole Samsung flash media debacle...

[Black Guy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

If if Creative sues, Apple could appeal to the patent office in attempt to nullify the patent and they would have a good chance of winning. Really, there are many software programs and hardware devices that use a hierarchal navigation menu. Many of which were released well before Creative even thought of an MP3 player. If Creative really had such a solid patent, they would be suing everybody and their grandmothers right now; especially Apple. There must exist substantial difference between the two menus that Creative would have a strong case if it brought one.

If if they did sue Apple & won and Apple had to withdraw the iPod from markets, Apple wouldn't fall. The Mac hardware, services, & other software still comprise the majority of Apple's income; about 73%. The iPod percentage is hardware AND accessories. (I'm knowing this stuff cuz I'm a stock holder & I receive quarterly reports.)

Lastly, I agree... That thing hardly resembles the Mini. I've seen more blatant knockoffs like those from Luxpro. Apple showed handle those guys instead.

[dim5 @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Now hold on. The white earbuds and clickwheel are the only thing that's consistent across the iPod product line. To say this doesn't look like an iPod is to not understand what defines the iPod image.

[Pal @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Apple deliberately waited. As the article stated, why not prohibit the sales? No. Apple wanted IOPS to sell a few units and THEN sue to get the cut of the profits.

This is similar to Immersion vs. Sony case. After selling millions of units, Immersion comes out of their hole and demands a cut of the share for every system with the Dual Shock controller sold. Sure, it was wrong of Sony - but why not sooner? They could have sued when the PlayStation 1 was out, but they waited till PlayStation 2 was at it's prime.

Money is what every company wants and some will use dirty methods to get it. Shame on you, Apple.

Hopefully IOPS will get the same lawyers that Luxpro did. :)

[TZK @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

How exactly do you comp someone for sales lost when you cant even determine what the loss is? Do you interview people who bought the IOPS and ask them to truthfully answer:

WOuld you have bought an iPod had this IOPS didnt exsist?

YEAH!

Sideboob! :)

[mb @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

In other news, Apple applies for a patent for square objects with circles in them -- next up: Apple sues thermostat manufacturers.

[zip22 @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

pal, waiting till you can see that the competition IS actually competing makes perfect sense. why waste the money on a lawsuit that will get you nothing at all (sue before the product gets big). its reasonable that you would wait till you saw that this other company was actually making a good profit off of something similar to your product before you think about spending the money to take them to court.
do i think this looks like an ipod? not really.
do i think apple is wrong for suing? no, if they think they can make more money be getting rid of iops, its their problem. its clear than in south korea, the ipod isn't as popular and this product is right behind it. suing them could really hurt ipos, and give apple a bit of a boost.

[Liam McNulty @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

No matter how many times I read the article, I can't help but think the only reason Apple is doing this is because the company is Korean, rather than Chinese.

The last time I checked, Apple's market share was far less than iRiver's share in South Korea. Apology in two newspapers? Is that sort of thing common over there? I don't believe it is; this is probably Apple's attempt at making headway in Korea. Someone over at Apple needs to sit down and think about how this is making their company appear to the Korean public. Especially if all of the articles about the case in Korean media are written like the one by The Korea Times.

And as everyone else said, the damn thing doesn't even look like a mini. I'm interested to see how this turns out.

[Dub @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

_______________________________________
In other news, Apple applies for a patent for square objects with circles in them -- next up: Apple sues thermostat manufacturers.
_______________________________________

not to mention VW, the Jetta was rather square and had a steering wheel! Gettem Apple!

[Alex K. @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

APPLE HAS A PATENT ON THE SCROLL WHEEL

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO LOOK THE SAME TO FUNCTION THE SAME FOR IT TO BE A PATENT INFRINGEMENT.

[simon @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

ha ha, i think that OEM model is licensed by a company in Hong Kong called Speed, they make total kwap

[jblock @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

The only reason apple sued iOPS is because iOPS products are damn good. My gut tells me this isn't just about copyright. Apple is scared of iOPS in the asian and european markets, plain and simple. Just check out the F5, their "nano-killer". If it had any publicity (or distribution) in the US, the nano (2gb) would be history.

[XenoCorpse @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

1. "IOPS" is suspiciously close to "iPod"

2. Clickwheel almost identical

3. White earbuds are known Apple icon

4. Size and shape nearly identical

5. Advertising quite similar

It's enough to run on. If someone made a cola with a red & white swirl on it, in a particular-shaped molded plastic bottle, and called it CCOAS-COLA, then the Coke company would have enough to go with. It's about the company deliberately relying on Apply marketing staples to sell their product.

[Justin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

xenocorpse

I may be beating a dead horse but I couldn't disagree more with you right now

1. "IOPS" is suspiciously close to "iPod"
-It is isnt even similiar, unless you count having 3 of the same letters in their name (which aren't even in the same order). Ccoas-Cola is a little bit closer to Coca-Cola than IOPS is to iPod.
2. Clickwheel almost identical
-First, the IOPs isn't even a clickwheel so the term "clickwheel" can't be used here. Secondly, there are a ton of mp3 players with the same circular design on their players, iriver for one has had past mp3 players with a circular navigation shape.
3. White earbuds are known Apple icon
So why isn't apple suing sony for the white earbuds they include in the PSP? Oh right, because apple doesnt own the color white
4. Size and shape nearly identical
All mp3 players are nearly the same size and shape as each other. What hard drive based mp3 player isn't in the shape of a rectangle and the size of an index card?
5. Advertising quite similar
I have never seen a commercial for an IOPs player before so you could be right here. Yet if you just compare Apple's website to IOPs they are nothing alike.

[Justin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

xenocorpse

I may be beating a dead horse but I couldn't disagree more with you right now

1. "IOPS" is suspiciously close to "iPod"
-It is isnt even similiar, unless you count having 3 of the same letters in their name (which aren't even in the same order). Ccoas-Cola is a little bit closer to Coca-Cola than IOPS is to iPod.
2. Clickwheel almost identical
-First, the IOPs isn't even a clickwheel so the term "clickwheel" can't be used here. Secondly, there are a ton of mp3 players with the same circular design on their players, iriver for one has had past mp3 players with a circular navigation shape.
3. White earbuds are known Apple icon
So why isn't apple suing sony for the white earbuds they include in the PSP? Oh right, because apple doesnt own the color white
4. Size and shape nearly identical
All mp3 players are nearly the same size and shape as each other. What hard drive based mp3 player isn't in the shape of a rectangle and the size of an index card?
5. Advertising quite similar
I have never seen a commercial for an IOPs player before so you could be right here. Yet if you just compare Apple's website to IOPs they are nothing alike.

[Martin @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Apple is nothing but a bunch of fuckin' hypocrites. End of story.

[Chris @ Jan 5th 2006 6:49PM]

I also think that this lawsuit is rediculous. First of all this thing isn't close to resemble the mini. Have you seen the actual size of it? It's basically 2 mobiblu cubes stacked together and a tad bit slimmer. Apple has no reason to sue IOPS and I hope that they lose the lawsuit.