AppleInc
Latest
Apple fined $2.29 million over '4G iPad' claims in Australia
Australia's federal court has fined Apple for "deliberately" misleading customers on local 4G capabilities of its latest iPad. The Cupertino-based company recently agreed to the terms, which included AU$2.29 million fine and a cool AU$300,000 in costs. Despite its 4G claims, Apple's new iPad can't connect with existing Antipodean next-generation phone networks, although it can hook up to US-based networks. Apple offered refunds for any customers that felt deceived and even adjusted its advertising to reflect its cellular capabilities, but the judge still deemed that the company had contravened Australia's consumer law in the ensuing confusion. Fortunately, Apple still has plenty left in the bank.
Apple closes in on $2.25 million settlement in Australia for disputed 4G iPad claim
The legal drama surrounding Apple's 4G labeling of some iPad models in Australia might be coming to an end. The Australian reports that Apple has agreed to pay $2.25 million to settle claims that the company's use of the term "Wi-Fi + 4G" was misleading because the tablet doesn't work with the country's 4G networks. Apple already offered to provide refunds to consumers who felt deceived by the labeling. The company also renamed the aforementioned model to "iPad WiFi + Cellular" in several territories. Apple hasn't quite made it across the finish line, however -- the settlement still requires court approval before it can be finalized and the Judge has adjourned the case until Wednesday to gather more information. [Thanks, Matt, Clayton]
Apple's iPad WiFi + 4G renamed 'iPad WiFi + Cellular' across many of its stores
Remember Apple's new iPad WiFi + 4G? Well, forget that moniker, as this variant of the company's latest slate has been quietly re-dubbed as the iPad WiFi + Cellular. As noticed by 9to5Mac, the change occurred within the last "24-48 hours" across many of Apple's region-specific webstores (update: and retail locations), including (but not limited to) those for the US, UK, Australia, Canada and various countries in Asia. If you'll recall, in many regions the best you'll get out of the slate is HSPA-connectivity, even though it's also equipped for LTE -- something that Apple itself had considered good enough to market it as 4G despite offering refunds to customers in Australia who (like many others) couldn't officially partake in its LTE. Interestingly, 9to5Mac also notes that a similar change hasn't made its way over to the iPad 2, which still has its cellular-equipped variant named, iPad 2 WiFi + 3G. We've reached out to Apple for comment, but the meantime, feel free to hit up the source links below for more insight.
Apple working on 21,468 square-foot cafeteria in Cupertino, wants employees' chatter to be safe
How do you keep your employees chit chat from spilling the beans on your next one more thing? You force the beans to be served in an employee-only 21,468 square-foot cafeteria -- that's how. According to Mercury News, Apple just got the go-ahead from the Cupertino Planning Commission on its scheme to build a colossal two-story bistro exclusively for staff members. While the facility will be mainly used for eating purposes during lunch hours (11:30AM to 2PM, to be exact), it'll also accommodate meeting rooms and lounge areas. Apple's Director of Real Estate Facilities, Dan Whisenhunt, says the company needs to provide its people with a sense of security "without fear of competition sort of overhearing their conversations." Now, we can't help but wonder if it's going to look anything like that spaceship...
Confirmation of Apple rejecting an app for accessing UDID
Paul Haddad of Tapbots confirmed that Apple is rejecting apps which send out UDIDs. The developer posted a rejection notice for version 2.2 of its popular twitter client Tweetbot. The notice says that Tweetbot was rejected because the "app does not obtain user consent before collecting their personal data" and points to the UDID as the culprit. Tapbots says it was using the UDID for its push notification service and has disabled the code in the most recent version of Tweetbot that it submitted to the iOS App Store. Haddad advised other developers who rely on the UDID, "If you are an app developer and depend on UDID for any functionality it's time to migrate away from it, sooner or later Apple will catch you."
Apple files for old Apple Corps trademark
Apple Inc. (formerly known as Apple Computer) must be feeling pretty sure of itself after finally hammering out the Beatles deal for iTunes with Apple Corps. and its associated partners. The company that makes iPhones is now trying to re-secure the Apple logo trademark that Apple Corps. used for so long. The logo was originally lost to Apple Inc. in 2007 after a settlement gave much of Apple Corps.' trademarks to the computer company, but now Apple Inc. is actually filing for the legendary trademark, per Patently Apple, in order to nail down ownership once and for all. As I read it, Apple is simply trying to ensure that the Granny Smith logo stays where it legally belongs now: in Cupertino. Apple already had a hold on the trademarks, thanks to that 2007 settlement (which itself paved the way for the Beatles' iTunes release), but this filing was most likely pushed by the legal team and seeks to hammer out a total and complete hold on everything Apple Inc. can use Apple Corps.' trademarks for in the future. [via CrunchGear]
Apple on iPad competition: Windows is 'big and heavy,' next-gen Android tablets are still vapor
Apple's COO (and current Steve Jobs stand-in) Tim Cook thinks "there's not much" competition to the company's iPad tablet. When queried about Apple's view on what the rest of the market offers, Cook was brutally candid in describing Windows-driven machines as generally being big, heavy and expensive, while current generations of Android-based slates are in his opinion merely "scaled-up smartphones." While we agree that Windows 7 isn't a terribly touch-friendly affair, we don't know that Cook's comments on Android are quite so pertinent now that Google's tablet-savvy Honeycomb iteration has been unveiled. Then again, he has something to say about the next generation of Android tablets as well, noting that the ones announced at CES lack pricing and release schedules, leading him to conclude that "today they're vapor." Ouch. As a parting shot, Tim took a moment to reaffirm Apple's belief that its integrated approach will always trump the fragmented nature of Android and its plurality of app stores. Hear his comments in full after the break.
Phil Schiller's Twitter account gets verified
Apple's Phil Schiller has joined Scott Forstall (though not Steve Jobs) over on Twitter -- he now has a verified account to tweet from, and is following a few celebrity and official company accounts so far. The account's actually been around for a while (Schiller tweeted from France while there and mentioned 500 million app downloads when it was announced last January), but only recently got verified, which means there's one more official Apple voice on the networking service. It's strange that Apple still doesn't have a real official presence on Twitter -- Schiller follows an account called @AppleIncNews, but it appears to be a simple RSS feed of Apple website news, and it's not verified by Twitter as official at all. There are certainly plenty of fake Steve Jobs accounts, but none of those have been verified either. Especially since Steve seems so easygoing with his Stevemails, you think Twitter would be a perfect place for him to interface directly with the Apple community. But so far, all we've got is Forstall and Schiller, and neither of them seem very forthcoming about interacting with the community of Apple fans online. [via 9to5Mac]
The Beatles finally coming to iTunes, according to Yoko Ono (update: EMI says not tomorrow)
Even more than in past years, the build-up to Apple's iPod event this Wednesday has been nothing if not a bevy of The Beatles / iTunes rumors -- the company even broke with its traditional Tuesday event date to have it instead on "09-09-09," the same day The Beatles Rock Band and a new box set are due to hit store shelves. Now it looks like we've heard it from none other than Yoko Ono herself, who in a now-pulled Sky News article confirmed that the Fab Four's headed for digital distribution. All that's left of the piece is a Google cache of the first sentence, so for the full skinny, it looks like we'll have to wait until tomorrow. Update: EMI is telling Financial Times that, while conversations are still going on, no announcements will be made tomorrow. Read - Yoko Ono reveals Beatles on iTunes Read - Google cache
Apple most assuredly NOT slapping family with "gagging order" over iPod fire
Across the pond in the UK, in what may be a bit of a legal "lost in translation," an 11-year-old girl was using her iPod when, according to her, there was a hissing noise and an ominous pop. It rapidly heated, and then allegedly jumped 10 feet into the air. She was left with a melted mass of unplayable music. Needless to say, not usual iPod behavior. (To be fair, you might not be surprised at spontaneous suicidal combustion after asking it to play anything by, say, Paris Hilton, though there's no evidence the girl committed that particular crime against nature.) She and her father contacted Apple, seeking a refund for the presumably out-of-warranty iPod. Apple apparently agreed to return the purchase price of the iPod, and sent a letter to the family offering the refund, denying overall liability with regard to the incident, and included a standard confidentiality clause in it. This is where things went a bit off the rails. The little girl's father went ballistic, refused to sign, and soon enough, there was press coverage. The Times UK covered the incident, complete with photograph of the girl holding her toasted iPod, accusing Apple of slapping the girl with a "gagging order" and attempting to "silence" them, mafia-style. Whoa, there, Times. 1) This is no gagging order. As nice and evil and meaty as such an accusation sounds, a gagging order comes from a court and no court is involved here. It implies that Apple has gone after this family legally, and that there's been a hearing and a decision and a court order. Quite the opposite. This is just a regular, ho-hum contract between two parties, describing the things they want out of each other. While the family may be shocked they got a letter, from a legal perspective they should be shocked if they didn't get one. Apple doesn't feel like they've done anything wrong and isn't going to start admitting its products are combustion risks by returning money out of warranty, which is exactly what it would do it if gave money to these people without some sort of settlement agreement. 2) A confidentiality agreement is standard operating procedure. Sure, a letter filled with legalese is a little heavy-handed, but hey, the iPod was out of warranty and when a company agrees to give you money it doesn't feel it owes you, especially in a situation such as this one, it can very well request confidentiality you keep your trap shut about it going forward. It's standard practice even when the company thinks it probably does owe you money. No courts are involved, and litigation is spared where the parties would fight over whether or not the money is owed. And when a confidentiality agreement is sought, it's also pretty standard to remind the parties the possible consequences of breaching the agreement. Remember: no court is involved here and Apple and this family can reach whatever agreement they want. If the family wants an admission of liability from Apple, they remain absolutely free to pursue a lawsuit in which it will be determined whether or not Apple is at fault. And now, of course, having disclosed all the contents of the letter, Apple I'm sure has rescinded whatever refund it offered. The UK Times has vastly overstated the standard form letter that Apple sent to them when they sought an out-of-warranty refund. I suspect, however, that Apple could have averted this public relations issue had it said, "look, we're happy to give you your money back. We have no idea why that iPod went kablooey. It could be any number of reasons, including many that don't involve us at all. So if you want us to give your money back, we will, but you have to agree not to discuss it. Why? Because that way people won't think we make defective and dangerous products when it's not at all clear that we do, and giving you your money back is good business, not an admission of liability." And then, when a legal-sounding letter shows up in the mail, nobody is shocked.
Connect360 having hiccups with latest update
It would appear that not everything about the latest spring update is all wine and roses. Application developer Nullriver is currently having to deal with the Spring Update with Connect360, the Mac solution to as according to tipster Rob Avery, checking your video shows your music, and there is an apparent 2000 viewing list limit. Either way, Nullriver is working on the problem and will have addressed the different nuances as soon as possible. Once everything is in place things should definitely look up for Mac users, as the addition of H.264 support is music to our ears. Apple based X3Fanboys, do you utilize Connect360?
Beatles and Apple Inc finally settle up
We were getting wind of Apple and Apple finally settling their differences similarities and possibly even making some snazzy sort of iTunes deal to show off their new found love for each other. No word yet on iTunes, but it does look like the pair have finally reached a naming agreement that has both sides pleased, ending years of legal sparring. "We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks," said Steve Jobs. "It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future." And just how was this resolved? Both companies are going to be paying their own legal costs, and Apple Inc is walking home with the entire brand, with an apparent agreement to license certain trademarks back to Apple Corps. No wonder Steve was pleased. We'll keep our fingers crossed for some sort of iTunes deal, but obviously that oft-rumored Super Bowl ad spot opportunity has come and gone. Luckily, the word from Apple Corps' Neil Aspinall hints at good things to come: "It is great to put this dispute behind us and move on. The years ahead are going to be very exciting times for us. We wish Apple Inc. every success and look forward to many years of peaceful co-operation with them."[Thanks, Raghu]
Apple Inc. and Apple Corps Ltd. finally settle trademark dispute, still no major iTunes release from Beatles
Apple Inc. and the Beatles' record label Apple Corps Ltd. have finally buried the hatchet and settled their very, very on-going dispute over 'Apple' related trademarks. After more than a decade of fighting over Apple's use of the name in selling music-related products, as well as music itself with the iTunes Store, the two companies are calling it a day. From the press release: "Under this new agreement, Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to "Apple" and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use." In other words: it seems as though Apple Inc. has won the trademarks, but we don't really know how or why. In fact, both parties are eating their own legal fees. A quote from Steve Jobs doesn't help much either: "We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks. It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future." Unfortunately, this hasn't heralded the much rumored debut of the Beatles' catalog in the iTunes Store, despite Mr. Jobs' open invitation - yet.
An Apple by any other name
I am just a simple blogger. I don't have a PhD in anything (other than Awesomeness, but I got that online for 5 bucks) nor do I spend my days locked in an Ivory Tower pondering the socioeconomic implications of the Ruble. This is why when you went to get a broader prospective on what Apple's recent name change (from Apple Computer Inc. to Apple Inc.) means you turn to trained professionals. That's just what Knowledge@Wharton did for their piece examining what Apple's name change means for consumers, and to Apple as a company. Some think that it is a tacit declaration of surrender in the PC market ('We lost the PC war, so we might as well get rid of the computer from our name') while others think that the change was made to more accurately reflect Apple's diversifying interests. If you ask me, which you didn't, Apple is clearly devoted to computers in whatever form they may take. When you get right down to it the iPhone and the Apple TV are both just highly specialized Macs running variants of OS X. Are they computers? Are they consumer electronics? They're both, and that convergence is the market that Apple is trying to corner.
