<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open Tech&#8217;s Chances vs. Apple?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/</link>
	<description>Macs. Lawyers. Simple.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:05:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 06:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esquiremac.com/?p=68#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Instead of suing, Apple should just put out a cheap desktop and be done with it. That would essentially eliminate the market for such a product. With that said, I also think that no matter the merits of Apple&#039;s claim, small shops like these folks, cannot afford to defend themselves against someone like Apple. I do believe Apple has a claim against the original firm bundling the Apple software, but I think as you pointed out, any claims by Apple against the second company is pretty thin. Of course, this would not stop apple from their kitchen sink legal strategy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Instead of suing, Apple should just put out a cheap desktop and be done with it. That would essentially eliminate the market for such a product. With that said, I also think that no matter the merits of Apple&#8217;s claim, small shops like these folks, cannot afford to defend themselves against someone like Apple. I do believe Apple has a claim against the original firm bundling the Apple software, but I think as you pointed out, any claims by Apple against the second company is pretty thin. Of course, this would not stop apple from their kitchen sink legal strategy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EsquireMac</title>
		<link>http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>EsquireMac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:55:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esquiremac.com/?p=68#comment-29</guid>
		<description>Narcogen: Thanks for the comment, and that&#039;s a good observation, but Apple defined what it meant by &quot;Trade Dress&quot; in the Complaint to mean the basic look and feel of OS X:

&lt;blockquote&gt; The Mac OS X user interface combines the use of color, transparency and animation together with the overall arrangement and set up of various icons in a unique and creative manner. In addition, the Finder toolbar containing the famous Apple Mark is combined with a distinctive three-dimensional applications bar (or &quot;dock&quot;) on which various icons reside. The distinctive nonfunctional combination of elements that makes up the Mac OS X user interface is well known to consumers and has become associated with Apple and Mac OS X Leopard. This combination of elements shall be referred to hereafter as &quot;Apple&#039;s Trade Dress.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Apple&#039;s Seventh Claim for Relief in the Psystar complaint is clearly addressing the fact that Psystar has installed OS X on the Open Computer and &quot;Defendant&#039;s unauthorized use, sale and distribution of goods displaying Apple&#039;s Trade Dress is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the source of the goods and services provided by Defendant, or as to affiliation, connection, association, sponsorship, or approval of such goods and services.&quot;

The Complaint can be accessed here: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/apple.pdf

I don&#039;t think the fact that the hard drive looks like a Mac Mini is material. Those kinds of drives have been around for about 3 years with no fuss from Apple. See: http://www.gadgetreview.com/2005/12/mac-mini-external-hard-drive-look-like.html, http://reviews.cnet.com/hard-drives/lacie-mini-firewire-hard/1995-3186_7-31467030.html, and http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/external-storage-a-mac-design,1153.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Narcogen: Thanks for the comment, and that&#8217;s a good observation, but Apple defined what it meant by &#8220;Trade Dress&#8221; in the Complaint to mean the basic look and feel of OS X:</p>
<blockquote><p> The Mac OS X user interface combines the use of color, transparency and animation together with the overall arrangement and set up of various icons in a unique and creative manner. In addition, the Finder toolbar containing the famous Apple Mark is combined with a distinctive three-dimensional applications bar (or &#8220;dock&#8221;) on which various icons reside. The distinctive nonfunctional combination of elements that makes up the Mac OS X user interface is well known to consumers and has become associated with Apple and Mac OS X Leopard. This combination of elements shall be referred to hereafter as &#8220;Apple&#8217;s Trade Dress.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Apple&#8217;s Seventh Claim for Relief in the Psystar complaint is clearly addressing the fact that Psystar has installed OS X on the Open Computer and &#8220;Defendant&#8217;s unauthorized use, sale and distribution of goods displaying Apple&#8217;s Trade Dress is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the source of the goods and services provided by Defendant, or as to affiliation, connection, association, sponsorship, or approval of such goods and services.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Complaint can be accessed here: <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/apple.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/apple.pdf</a></p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think the fact that the hard drive looks like a Mac Mini is material. Those kinds of drives have been around for about 3 years with no fuss from Apple. See: <a href="http://www.gadgetreview.com/2005/12/mac-mini-external-hard-drive-look-like.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.gadgetreview.com/2005/12/mac-mini-external-hard-drive-look-like.html</a>, <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/hard-drives/lacie-mini-firewire-hard/1995-3186_7-31467030.html" rel="nofollow">http://reviews.cnet.com/hard-drives/lacie-mini-firewire-hard/1995-3186_7-31467030.html</a>, and <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/external-storage-a-mac-design,1153.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/external-storage-a-mac-design,1153.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Narcogen</title>
		<link>http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>Narcogen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esquiremac.com/?p=68#comment-28</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Count VII: Trade Dress Infringement - Open Tech doesn’t sell any computers with OS X installed, so no problem there.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I think you may have misunderstood the definition of trade dress. Whether OT has computers that have OS X on them is immaterial if it is deemed that the appearance of the product itself is intended or likely to cause confusion in the market. Look at OT&#039;s (freewebs) website. Front and center is an image that looks for all the world like a black Mac Mini. Except it&#039;s just a hard drive. One can argue that that image and that product are designed to create in the mind of the consumer a connection with Apple that doesn&#039;t exist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Count VII: Trade Dress Infringement &#8211; Open Tech doesn’t sell any computers with OS X installed, so no problem there.</p></blockquote>
<p>I think you may have misunderstood the definition of trade dress. Whether OT has computers that have OS X on them is immaterial if it is deemed that the appearance of the product itself is intended or likely to cause confusion in the market. Look at OT&#8217;s (freewebs) website. Front and center is an image that looks for all the world like a black Mac Mini. Except it&#8217;s just a hard drive. One can argue that that image and that product are designed to create in the mind of the consumer a connection with Apple that doesn&#8217;t exist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Wife</title>
		<link>http://www.esquiremac.com/2008/07/open-techs-chances-vs-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>The Wife</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esquiremac.com/?p=68#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Just like a cow&#039;s opinion... it&#039;s moo.  Classic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just like a cow&#8217;s opinion&#8230; it&#8217;s moo.  Classic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
