Are Heavy-Handed Tactics the Way to Foster Brand Loyalty?
Posted on 14 January 2007, at 5:44 pm, by Christopher Spera
With the announcement of the Apple iPhone, a great deal of excitement has been generated. Is this a new paradigm? Will the rest of the world go this way? Will the iPhone be unique, or will it create a new paradigm that the rest of the world’s mobile device manufacturers will endevour to duplicate? Will consumers go for it? Will enterprises embrace it? Is it too expensive? The questions go on and on.
With all of the excitement, its not surprising that someone, or a group of someones, has tried to duplicate the look of the interface (duplicating the feel isn’t going to be possible, since dual-touch undoubtedly requires additional software and OS enhancements that just don’t exist anywhere else but in the mobile version of OSX). The look of the iPhone’s interface has taken the world by storm. The excitement is VERY contagious and infectious. I can’t help but admit that I’m caught up in it too. I really want to see the device and what it can do.
I noticed over at Paul O’Brien’s blog, that the day after he posted a link to a method at XDA Developers (the link on Paul’s site appears to have been removed…), he got an intersting note from O’Melveny & Myers LLP, demanding that he take the links and screen shot down.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Apple is entitled to their copyright and to the efforts required to enforce it. However, it really ticks me off. What in the world are big, BILLION dollar companies doing going after little guys like Paul O’Brien?? Paul didn’t create the method or the files necessary to duplicate the iPhone’s interface. However, as an MS MVP, he WAS generating excitement and interest in the device; which IS his role as a Mobile Devices Most Valuable Professional (or evangelist, if you will).
Now, Paul did the right thing, and removed all of the links, as was requested of him; but it really ticks me off. Creating excitement is the purpose of sites like MoDaCo, MYiPhone, SmartPhone Thoughts, pocketnow.com, and yes… GEAR DIARY. Its what we do; and one of the major reasons why we exist. Much of what we do is done on our own dimes, on our own time, and in our own minds. No one pays us to do this. In many cases (like mine, for instance); while I do some paid writing, most of what I do is done at a loss, or at HUGE personal expense (when compared to what I actually make from writing). We do what we do “for love of the game,” to help spread the excitement, and to share what we learn. Its a huge demotivator (and a little insulting) when a company like Apple turns its financial weight and resources towards the little guy and strong arms them out of, and away from, their mission.
I’d like everyone to do me a favor and weigh in here. Yes, Apple was entitled to do what they did by asking their lawyers to chase after Paul. They should protect their copyrights and intellectual property. No one, including myself, am suggesting that they shouldn’t persue that aggressively. However, don’t they benefit from the activities that Paul (in this case) do? Doesn’t it create and generate further interest? Doesn’t it increase the excitement? Doesn’t it generate additional business in the long run? If I have the iPhone theme on my PPC (I don’t by the way, and Apple is welcome to pay me a visit and look at my computers and my devices to see for themselves, if they would like); and I really like the concept, doesn’t it actually influence me to go after the actual device? Wouldn’t it encourage me to pursue the actual experience? I think it does. Shame on you Apple for beating down the little guy. I think its really beneath you and is a great deal of overkill. In the end, I think you’re just shooting yourself in the foot.
I’d appreciate hearing from everyone on this. Why don’t you leave your thoughts in the comments section of this post. If I’m off, I can be convinced to alter my opinion…
Related posts:
January 14th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
I agree, Apple doesn’t seem to understand that a lot of people are excited about their new product, and until they can get their hands on one, they want to emulate it as best they can. If anything this is free advertising for them.
January 14th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
I still don’t get all the excitement. This device is just not all that interesting. I think this will wear off like a bad hangover after a while, especially if they leave the price where it is.
January 14th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
I want to actually use an iPhone and then make my final judgement. But right now, 6 months is a long way away; a lot can happen and change, either with Apple or other OEMs.
I am intrigued by the iPhone, but I am not yet sold.
January 14th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Judie, it’s one thing to create excitement and interest in a product; its yet another to encourage the use of ‘illegally reproduced content’, for lack of a better phrase, and provide a roadmap directly to it. I’ve read the letters and the other info, and I’m afraid I would come out at the same place. I deal with a lot of contracts, and sometimes the line is very fine (and I am not an attorney, but a business type). I know Apple wanted the buzz early in the year, but I would have waited until the production model was closer to release. As you note, 6 months is a LONG time in the tech world.
However, I agree with Jerry. I think this product will be much better from a practical standpoint in generation 2 (and I love my three iPods).
Bill
January 14th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
What a surprise….. Lawyers! What is the difference between a picture on a web site hyping this thing and a picture on my pda today screen?
January 14th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
@drowe, I’m not certain. Perhaps its the source of the pictures… who knows. I’m not a lawyer; and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night either.
@runningman, I hear what you are saying, but with the actual release not for another 6 months, they really need to rethink this position. Its not like the PPC theme will take the place of an iPhone.
and I also agree that this will be better with the 2nd and 3rd generations.
January 14th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Didn’t I read somewhere a l-o-o-o-o-n-g time ago that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Maybe not anymore—maybe now-a-days it’s the sincerest way to get your butt kicked. I’m curious, does Microsoft go after everyone who has skinned their device to look like Vista? People, the ice caps are melting. Is copying an icon (and I mean that with small letters, Steve) our biggest concern these days. I think I also read somewhere (Wavy Gravy was it–can’t remember….) “When you lose your sense of humor, it’s just not funny anymore.”
January 14th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
That is a great quote!
January 14th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Hey Bill, I just wanted you to be clear that Chris wrote this piece not me. We are working on making the various posts’ authors more obvious.
January 15th, 2007 at 4:44 am
“Didn’t I read somewhere a l-o-o-o-o-n-g time ago that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”
I was going to say that, but these days imitation is the surest way to get sued unfortunately. I can understand their position that something they have taken a lot of time, effort and $$$s to create is being used by others without them receiving any profits, but they need to realize that this it is a form of flattery, and not an attempt to dig into their profits or rip off their product.
January 15th, 2007 at 5:20 am
Thanks Judie, sorry Chris. I obviously did not stay at the Holiday Inn Express either!
January 15th, 2007 at 6:33 am
runningman,
not a big deal. It happens…
January 15th, 2007 at 7:54 am
I don’t think it matters to Apple whether they care or not. What matters is that some day, when someone really DOES try to rip them off, that they can display that they’ve aggressively protected what is theirs. If they pursued money damages right off the bat or something similar I’d call that “heavy handed” but if they simply send the necessary threatening letter, I call that “protecting your IP in the eyes of the court.”
January 15th, 2007 at 11:36 am
Apple’s spokesman, Steve Dowling, was quoted as saying the Cisco lawsuit is “silly”
…if that’s silly, what does that make this ?
January 15th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
@endroren,
I can see that… and agree that protecting intellectual property is important. It is after all, THEIR copyright. but I think that can be done without the sledge hammer.
The people that are doing this aren’t trying to copy the iPhone. I’d argue that while the look is part of the copyright; the feel can’t be duplicated on the devices where the look can be. The iPhone won’t be released for another 6 months. After that…it may be “more appropriate” to pursue that kind of action; but now, when Apple is trying to generate excitement around the iPhone; don’t you think its a better road to allow the community to create the excitement than to stomp on it (which is effectively what was done…to someone who didn’t even create the files or method to duplicate the look).
Paul was fulfilling his role as a Mobile Devices Evangelist; and I support what he did: He tried to help create some excitement by REPORTING on a development. A cease and decist letter was a bit much. A friendly e-mail or even a phone call, say from Steve himself, could have accomplished the same thing, with a HECK of a lot more style, finesse and class.
I would have done the same thing that Paul did – I would have removed the links and screen shot; BUT had Steve called or e-mailed me himself, I would have felt a heck of a lot better about it; AND I wouldn’t have felt threatened by a huge corporate machine and their guard dogs.
With great power, comes great responsibility. (Sorry… on a Spidey 3 kick.) Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean that you should do it. I think this was handled poorly.
No money was made, had the potential to be made; and nothing of consequence (at least in my mind at this time) was profited by Paul. I just wish someone in Mr. Job’s office had realized this before the contacted the Legal Department and had them jot off that letter…