Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

inputmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 309 posts

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#291

Post by Teckla »

tomtimtall wrote: post #73
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the author stand a chance against the army of ivy league lawyers of a trillion dollar megacorp? I guess it would help if he's also American (don't know where he's from) so he could fight Apple on home turf and use the jury system on his side like "Evil megacorp steals from the little guy" (does it even work like this in the US or did I watch too many movies?), but I'm more curious how a lawsuit would go if he'd…

I think no, but that army matches on quite a large load of cash, so they’ll likely offer him a settlement agreement which means he “losses” but gets paid. Not fair by any account, but I think that’s what is likely to happen.

If Apple settles, wouldn't that incentivize other developers to sue Apple for the same and similar reasons?

I'd think Apple would want to win the case to discourage other developers from doing the same thing.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#292

Post by kazinator »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #286
kazinator wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no law against executing someone else’s idea Are you sure about that? Obviously, you mean outside of the patent framework and the concept of infringement, so never mind that. There is law against executing someone else's idea which is public, and over which they have no patent. What if the idea isn't public? Not that it applies in this case, but I think there is such a thing as breaking into an organizatio…

>There is law against executing someone else's idea which is public, and over which they have no patent. What is this law? I am pretty sure flying cars, underwater cities, space travel, etc are ideas that someone else has had, but no US court is going to stop you from executing an idea just because someone else fantasized about it. >What if the idea isn't public? Not that it applies in this case, but I think there is…

I'm sorry to have wasted your time, that is a typo; somehow I lost the "no" in "no law".

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#293

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

mdoms wrote: post #290
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In sum, given the totality of the record, and its underdeveloped state, while the Court can conclude that Apple exercises market power in the mobile gaming market, the Court cannot conclude that Apple’s market power reaches the status of monopoly power in the mobile gaming market. That said, the evidence does suggest that Apple is near the precipice of substantial market power, or monopoly power, with its considera…

I didn't say anything about "monopoly". One of the most common fallacies when discussing this topic is that anti trust only applies to monopolies. This is dead wrong.

What? I didn't say anti trust only applies to monopolies. According to the judge Apple is violating anti trust and walking right up to the line of being a monopoly. It's interesting. My quote is taken straight from the ~180 page ruling.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#294

Post by qweqwweqwe-90i »

alisonkisk wrote: post #124
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he proves in the courts that they do, yes. Just because someone else has built another keyboard for the watch does not mean that any IP was infringed on.

OK then why was FlickType banned without a court order?

Because Apple doesn't allow keyboard apps on their devices.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#296

Post by spiderice »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #115
jdavis703 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally I’m not sure the small developer has a chance. Not because the courts are unjust, it’s just hard to say whether Apple broke any laws here. It’s not to say they didn’t, it just doesn’t seem like there’s any slam dunk legal argument about wrongdoing (despite who this might feel morally).

>it’s just hard to say whether Apple broke any laws here Doesn't stealing someone's idea for an app/innovation and respinning it into your own implementation count as IP theft? IIRC the Winklevoss twins got paid handsomely as a settlement for Zuckerberg stealing their idea for Facebook. Granted, they were very rich and well connected so that helped.

> Doesn't stealing someone's idea for an app

"Stealing" someone's idea to make a keyboard.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#297

Post by rasz »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #175
Razengan wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why has there never been a horde of torches and pitchforks outside Castle Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo yet? And don’t squeeze out that “cOnSoLeS aReNt cOmPuTeRs” bullshit. They’re closer to computers than a goddamn wristwatch.

I'd wager a lot of it has to do with history. Gaming consoles were always proprietary hardware that could only do things approved by the manufacturer, and were purchased with that understanding, unless you did some hacking. Computers were always open platforms that you purchased and then could do what you wanted with, no hacking required. iOS was the first major market computing platform that broke this general under…

Consoles were pretty open at the beginning. 2600 had plenty of third party games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision#Early_years_(1980%E... and even crazy futuristic peripherals like modem (online game renting service) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameLine. Same for Genesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade. Atari f** up on NES by committing blatant copyright infringement and scamming Patent Office https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games_Corp._v._Nintendo_...> if not for the method they used it would of been fine too.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#298

Post by skygazer »

skygazer wrote: post #254

I paid for and use FlickType on the watch. It’s clever, but it always sucked it was a stand-alone app. It was a very limited and cumbersome workaround for an obviously missing OS feature. Copy and paste isn’t even a thing on the watch, so text was mostly trapped in the app. Everyone that used the app knew it would vastly better if a keyboard were supported natively by Apple across the whole OS. It was mostly a tantal…

It seems the letter from Apple that the dev posted on Twitter (which was cropped, excluding the date) was actually from 2019 and not sent recently -- it was his initial rejection before the app was finally approved. A bit misleading, whether intentional or not -- if it was intentional, it cleverly fanned the flames. Props to the dev for gorilla marketing skill.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/15/apple-refutes-fli...

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#299

Post by kurikuri »

Terretta wrote: post #157
windexh8er wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I fully support Eleftheriou on this just for the principle, but if I were in his place I would have agreed at a very large sum from Apple (even lower from what I had in mind) just so that we could all be happy right now ;-) Seems like Apple has a very anti-competitive position, no? To me this goes all the way back to the walled garden argument. Apple sat on, what some may consider, a straw man arguing that they cou…

> walled garden argument A watch is now a walled garden? Does Casio have to open its OS? Either these are not general computing devices or there's no line, a fridge or microwave or a console are general computing as well -- and device makers have no rights to make a product from digital parts as well as mechanical parts without having to make it open to digital fiddling, and secure it dragging in that new threat mode…

The line might be able to be drawn between devices which have support, or intend to have support and will accept applications/plans, for 3rd party software and those who don’t. By accepting third party software, the third party now becomes dependent upon (and in this case: a customer to) Apple. In these situations, the device producer has knowledge about and leverage over on-device application competitors which other third parties would not.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#300

Post by wayneftw »

amiantos wrote: post #255
criley2 wrote: post #163

There is no way to have a fair App Store where the organization approving your app is the same organization creating apps to compete with you. This is a fundamental, existential problem with the App Store model. You can't compete with Apple; they simply will not let you.

So... what are you saying? Apple shouldn't be allowed to improve the software for their own products? There should be a law that prevents Apple from building a keyboard for Apple Watch and consumers have to buy a third party keyboard made by a guy who still won't explain why the keyboard needed "network access OR VoiceOver to be turned on"? Seems fishy to me. I think I'd prefer the keyboard Apple makes.

Apple shouldn’t be allowed to lock out alternative app stores.
Post reply on HN