Cult behaviour at Apple
Summary: The appearance of Steve Jobs is ‘property’ of Apple based on the company’s very ludicrous actions
AS we pointed out some days ago, Apple sought to block reproduction of its dear leader’s appearance, which would make a dangerous precedence (a form of censorship).
According to reports such as this, Apple got its way. But more importantly, Apple, a patents and trademarks aggressor, also did this when he was alive, so those who use mortality as a factor miss the point. As one blog put it:
The 12-inch doll made a stir when news of its development emerged earlier this month. Commenters noted its uncanny resemblance to Jobs, who died Oct. 5.
Legal action was all but certain given an incident last year in which Apple successfully blocked the Chinese company MiC Gadget from producing a doll with Jobs’ likeness.
Here is more information on this subject:
In Icons drew a lot of attention when it announced it would be selling a Steve Jobs doll (“12in collectible figure” may be more accurate, but it’s also on the verbose side).
Compared with many representations of well-known figures, the prototype was a remarkable likeness to the extent that some people thought it fell into the ‘uncanny valley’ where the resemblance is so close it doesn’t really look like a model but the slight lack of realism makes it seem somehow creepy.
It does not look creepy, but Apple shut it down anyway. The creepy thing is the real character of Steve Jobs, who was not a nice person. In other news from China, Apple gets the egg treatment:
Apple halted sales of its iPhone 4S in Beijing and Shanghai on Friday after scuffles broke out over a delayed launch of the device, sending a shopper hurling eggs at one of its stores in the capital.
The Inquirer has more:
According to a report at Reuters, as soon as word spread that handsets were unavailable people began getting agitated, and as well as throwing around perfectly good eggs engaged in shoving matches with the police.
Apple deserves this for its aggression with patents. In fact, Apple deserves a lot worse and Cringely thinks that Apple might get sued for patent violations in Siri, which many people tactlessly claim to be an Apple “innovation” (there is prior art). To quote:
I was watching this Bloomberg video the other day featuring Shawn Carolan, the venture capitalist who backed the Siri electronic personal assistant startup then sold it to Apple. His was the closest I’d heard to a technical explanation of how Siri works and it surprised me because it sounded a lot like technology I remembered from years ago at Excite, the long-defunct search engine. Please look at the video and then meet me in the next paragraph. The part that excited me (no pun intended) is about four minutes in.
We are still urging for an Apple boycott. The company’s behaviour is appalling and it does a lot of damage to science and technology. Equally manacling are the company’s followers, who act on faith rather than facts. █