Apple’s MagSafe Power Adapter adapter is really a wonderful invention which saves laptops and power cords by safely disconnecting them when one trips over or pulls the power cord. It’s therefore no surprise that the design of the power adapter is heavily patented and protected by Apple. Whatever you think about patents, it at least makes sense that Apple would want to prevent competitors from imitating their design.
What makes less sense is yesterday’s lawsuit against Sanho/HyperMac, which makes an external battery for Apple devices that plugs into the MagSafe adapter. First, Sanho provides a useful service to Apple customers, since current Apple laptops have non-removable batteries. If their customers want to take along an extra power source, Sanho’s HyperMac battery is the only simple way to do it. Second, Sanho does not actually copy Apple’s patented connector. Rather, they reuse Apple’s own connectors in their own products. According to the traditional first-sale/exhaustion doctrine, once you sell a product, you have no control over how it is used, regardless of what patents you hold on it. Unfortunately, some companies have recently used copyright law to circumvent this doctrine. If Sanho is indeed merely reusing original Apple parts, this case bears watching to see whether the first sale doctrine can still protect consumers and resellers. In either case, I fail to see what Apple has to gain from banning a product which is so useful to their customers.
{ 9 comments }
Apple is just angry that they didn’t think of it first.
They could drop the unibody concept and return to selling spare batteries for MacBooks like they did with earlier models. Probably the only reason the Hypermac battery even exists is that Apple decided that their customers didn’t need user replaceable batteries and enough of their customers disagreed to make it worth someone else offering a solution. Stiff, Apple.
(Typed on a Mac. I don’t have to like the company to like some of their products.)
Removable batteries create other issues. The strength of the unibody mac is like a monocoque frame. If you have holes in it, you have to reinforce them. Also, the case for the battery will also add weight.
That doesn’t excuse Apple’s self-destructive behavior, of course.
Hopefully, we’ll have practical methanol fuel cells soon so we can get off these batteries altogether.
Fair point, and granted I suppose we should expect it in something like a MacBook Air or an iPad. But something like a MacBook Pro… is it going to save that much weight, especially when they changed to a glass screen? And is the extra strength important when most people spending a couple of thousand dollars on a notebook are going to keep it in a half decent bag?
Still, by the by. As you say, the point is the way Apple are reacting to someone else offering not a competing product but a complimentary one. They’ve got form in getting all litigious about IP, e.g. this in the Sydney Morning Herald involving another complimentary product and this in The Age involving the logo of Woolworths supermarket (no relation to the US Woolworths). Ironic for a company that was sued by The Beatles for using the name Apple.
Unless Woolworths is in the market of selling the same thing as everyone else but in white and at twice the price, then I doubt anyone would get the two confused.
Hell, I’m glad I bought my car adapter already. I’m pretty sure it isn’t an Apple part.
Considering how badly Jobs has it in for Adobe, I’d say this lawsuit probably has a similar how-dare-you-defy-me origin.
Simple: Apple has a similar device in the works (probably conceived after the Sanho patent was registered and most likely inspired by it). Instead of simply buying Sanho or their patents alright they are going to squash it. Why? Because Apple has to live up to its innovative image and they most likely estimated that simply buying out Sanho shareholders would result in an “image damage” worth more than the lawsuit itself.
Big companies and corporations have a weird way of making business.
David, I can think of a few things Apple has to gain. First, the in terrorem effect of enforcing their patents. Second, laptop batteries last longer when bolstered by a HyperMac (I own one and love it), meaning that Apple has fewer batter or laptop replacements to sell if people use HyperMacs. Third, to improve their chance to extort patent licensing fees from Sanho.
Comments on this entry are closed.