AfterDawn: Tech news

Luxpro plans to sue Apple for lost revenue

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 05 Jan 2007 3:43 User comments (15)

Luxpro plans to sue Apple for lost revenue Luxpro, a Taiwanese electronics firm that was involved in a legal dispute with Apple over its digital music players, plans to sue Apple for lost revenues. Apple had accused Luxpro of copying its iPod Shuffle model and won an injunction against the company in Taiwan, forcing Luxpro to halt productions. However, after appealing to the Taiwanese High Court and Supreme Court, Luxpro had the ruling overturned.
The change led the way for Luxpro to sue Apple for lost revenue while there was an injunction active against the company. Luxpro marketed a similar sized player to the shuffle, also made of white plastic but the courts in Taiwan found that "the appearances of the two products are significantly dissimilar".

The company has resumed selling its Super Tangent digital players "in Latin America and eastern Europe". According to the Financial Times, chairman Wu Fu-chin revealed that the company plans to take steps to recoup the lost revenue. Apple's iPods are by far the dominating music player, acting as the main driver behind the company's success in recent years.

UPDATE: Luxpro chairman Fu-Ching Wu has revealed in a statement that the company has filed for $100m in damages from the "valuable market opportunities" lost during the injunction.

BBC News
Reg Hardware

Previous Next  

15 user comments

15.1.2007 11:09

RADICAL difference in appearance and function!

Here is a link with a close-up of the Super Tangent:,00.htm?

and here is a link for the Shuffle:

Not even CLOSE in appearance! The Shuffle is smaller and more square in its appearance, while the Super Tangent is longer and more rectangular.

In fact, here is a more complete list of Luxpro's MP3 offereings at this time:

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 06 Jan 2007 @ 1:41

25.1.2007 13:21

The two do look very similar. The Luxpro Super Tangent looks just like the first gen iPod Shuffle. Same button layout/design and same button markings. If I was Apple I would sue them too. Their trying to imitate Apple's product in hopes of snagging a bit of Apples sales.

35.1.2007 13:21

Forgot to post this but heres a picture of the white Luxpro Super Tangent (they also come in black and red),39050467,39094321p-2+,00.htm?

46.1.2007 4:51

bad move from Apple, the players are indeed "significantly dissimilar"... I hope Luxpro get those $100m because I am tired of seeing big corps trying to sue everybody just because they can afford it...

56.1.2007 6:47

I agree with you, tefarko, they look way different than the Apple iPods. I'm not sure what pictures PeaInAPod was looking at, but the shape, colors and even the main navigation buttons are different. Only the general shape of the nav buttons are simlar. Notice I said GENERAL shape, because they are both SOMEWHAT round, but upon cloer inspection, zooming in closer on each cpmany's offerings, you will notice they are signiciantly differnt. Once again, Apple is going to take it in the seat of their pants for illegal nonsense and "Big Brother" activities, something they accused Microsoft of doing many years ago. What comes around, goes around.

66.1.2007 13:30

Jeez, I though I made it clear enough. When I said that the two looked alike I meant the 1st gen shuffle and the Luxpro Super Tangent. To make things idiot proof, I have included pictures. The 1st generation iPod Shuffle AND the Luxpro Super Tangent" border=0> Now with those two pictures you can't honestly tell me the two don't look VERY similar. I don't believe in all of Apples legal actions in the past but if I was them I would be suing the Luxpro company too.

76.1.2007 13:34

The pic of the super tangent wasn't that great heres a better one for comparison purposes.

86.1.2007 16:50

well, define "similar"... all MP3 players have + and - for volume and << > [] >> for buttons... who did it first?... I guess it wasn´t Apple... and the court has the final word...

96.1.2007 20:48

I can't believe some of these responses. Either many people in this thread are blatantly anti-Apple or just flat-out blind. The two are obviously very alike. I'm not going to bicker about useless facts like the signs on the buttons. The fact is the too look very,very similar. From their size and button layout to the leds behind their plastic housings Luxpro knowingly manufactured a look-alike product in hopes to ride on Apples sales #'s. This is no different than a scam artist on a street corner trying to sell a Rolex knock-off. Yeah you can buy one and have a look-alike product. But Rolex is a corporation and their watch designs/logos/watches are theirs and theirs alone. No one else has the right to imitate their products and make a profit.

"Some people have no damn sense." - Nephilim, March 27 2007 @ 18:08

108.1.2007 3:13

It is exactly like the old Shuffle. But not so much like the new one. Butdoes it matter since the first gen shuffle isnt made anymore? How many shapes can you make a friggin mp3 player?

118.1.2007 3:31

It's all a moot point anyway, because the idiots at Apple were suing Luxpro based on Apple's CURRENT design, NOT the old one. Also, the place where the headphone jack is located is unique to each company's product (Lux is on top, Apple is not). Besides, there are still enough significant differences between the two models you linked to, and Apple is no longer making their "old" model anyway. If this were the only basis for lawsuits, auto manufacturers everywhere would be suing each other out of existance for creating "similar" looking models.

128.1.2007 5:18 many cars in the 90's "looked" like the ugly Taurus? With this kind of think GM should be able make up all those losses in litigation!

138.1.2007 12:34

This really ticks me off, people saying well they shouldn't sue because their already rich, the buttons are different, the sizes are different. So I struck those arguments down. Now for the new argument about how their so different. Look at this quote

Also, the place where the headphone jack is located is unique to each company's product (Lux is on top, Apple is not).
. Now look at this picture of the 1st Generation iPod Shuffle and the location of its headphone port Its located on the opposite end of the USB jack, directly above the button(s). Now compare that to the Luxpro . Huh thats funny its directly opposite the USB port and above the button(s) just like the iPod. Now I am not trying to say the placement of the headphone jack is grounds for a lawsuit but when taking into consideration all the similarities that Luxpro has in their model and its similarity to the 1st Gen. iPod shuffle its hard for me to understand why people say Apple is wrong in suing them. It doesn't matter if Luxpro's current model is based off of Apples old design scheme(s) that design is Apples.

148.1.2007 15:13

See what I mean? You have made my point for me. The headphone jack is BLACK on the Luxpro, and it is WHITE on the OLD iPOD! COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! And, as I recall, all iPod's utilize a USB CABLE, not a USB JACK, like the Luxpro. Also, on the front of the Luxpro unit, they have their own name emblazened on the face of the unit. Apple neglects to stencil ANYTHING AT ALL on the face of the iPod, let alone their name or the name of the unit. Last of all, the button is radically different, as pointed out before. The iPod has a huge center button, and the outer rim is circular and smooth all the way around. The Luxpro has edges and grooves on the outer edge, and has a much smaller center button. RADICALLY different! Not to mention that the earbuds are completely different, too. Don't even mention the missing lanyard, either, because the Luxpro doesn't seem to come with one, does it? I think Luxpro is not only going to continue in the lawsuit against Apple, but they are going to win, too. Apple is guilty of one thing here, which is a lesson to all: crying "foul" against "Big Brother", and then using unfair, illegal and immoral business practices to squash any possible competition, and in fact BECOMING "Big Brother" themselves. In the '80's, Apple STOLE (yes, STOLE!) the mouse, network card, GU interface for an OS, laser printing, and much more from Xerox's PARC (Palo Alto Research Center). At that point in time, they cried FOUL and BIG BROTHER very, very loudly against IBM. In fact, they even ran their infamous Superbowl commercial depicting a neo-1984 like environment, and an athletic woman running up to a big video screen, tossing a sledgehammer into the screen, smashing it to bits. In the late '80's, Apple cried BIG BROTHER again, this time against Microsoft, who stole the GUI from Apple. At that time, Apple was a huge, multi-national corporation, and Microsoft was a startup company struggling along with around 25 employees (including Gates himself), working out of a strip mall. 2 weeks ago, Apple cried BIG BROTHER again, this time when CEO and chief scumbag Steve Jobs was accused of securities fraud in the way he handled an illegal stock trade. Funny how tossing a ton of money and hiring a high-powered attorney can make problems just disappear, isn't it? And add to the mix several dozen other instances, like the Firewire debacle, this Luxpro nonsense, the whole "Superdrive" mess (hey, it's ONLY a damned DVD burner, ok? Ain't nothin' "Super" about it!), the programming source code lockout in the '80's, literally STEALING THE NAME APPLE from the Beatles, signing legal documents claiming that they will NEVER, EVER have ANYTHING to do with music on their Apple computers (a HUGE lie!) and what you come up with is a huge conglomeration of illegal, immoral and just plain WRONG crap out of a company that's supposed to be cooler, nicer, smoother, hipper and better, but really is not any different than any other company. Apple records is re-suing Apple Computer Corp AGAIN, this year because Apple C.C. broke their legally signed agreement. In fact, every single sale of iPods, iTunes, Garageband et al are legally entitled to APPLE RECORDS by the agreement that Apple Computer Corp. made with them years ago. So once again this is all a moot point. By the way, why in the hell would I or anyone else want to buy hardware that costs 2.5x - 4x as much as a much better PC that I can build myself with custom components, instead of having to settle for Apple's default crap? It makes no sense at all. Oh, and all the ranting and raving about how crappy Intel CPU's were? HA! Actual Steve Jobs quote from last year (2006): "It's simply AMAZING how much faster the Intel processors make our Powerbook laptops!" Well, DUH! Intel has the best, brightest and fastest CPU's on the market today! Try and do a Dual-core CPU, AMD? HA! You suck at it! Now try the new QUAD core! And I certainly don't see any Motorola contenders in that mix, either. Can't be done! And to top it all off, I recall quite clearly the original iPod being a complete POS (that's Piece Of Shit for those of you in Rio Linda!). The hard drive heated up, conked out and even caught fire in some cases. But did Apple honor the 1-year warranty? HELL NO they didn't! They told users that they were out of luck! That is, until enough of the dedicated, die-hard Apple fanatics joined together and caused enough media buzz that they literally FORCED Apple to give up its BIG BROTHER tactics that time. So, should I feel sorry for Apple? Should I side with them against every who brings a rightful claim against them for loss of revenue, when Apple has injunctions set against a company, just to drive their sales so low that they might go bankrupt after the several months without consumer sales, driving the company's profits into the crapper? HELL NO! I don't feel sorry for them ONE BIT, not one single iota. There is a famous saying that is very apropos here: "What comes around, goes around!" Eat it, Apple! Take a big bite and enjoy the WORM you created. /end rant.

158.1.2007 20:31


Every comment you have made has been completely asinine and a waste of page space. I am going to disprove/strike down everyone of your last comments. Each of your comments will get a number and their corresponding number will have a response. Got it? Good lets go.....

Your "questions"

1)[qoute]The headphone jack is BLACK on the Luxpro, and it is WHITE on the OLD iPOD![/quote]2)

all iPod's utilize a USB CABLE, not a USB JACK, like the Luxpro.
Also, on the front of the Luxpro unit, they have their own name emblazened on the face of the unit. Apple neglects to stencil ANYTHING AT ALL on the face of the iPod, let alone their name or the name of the unit.
he button is radically different
Not to mention that the earbuds are completely different, too.
Don't even mention the missing lanyard, either, because the Luxpro doesn't seem to come with one, does it?


1)About the black & white headphone ports, that is a very minor difference. And a very bad supporting point.
If you stole a car and painted it would it be your car? No, it would still be the persons you stole it from, all you did is change a minor exterior feature. Same basic philospohy applies to this topic.

2)Uhh, hello do you even know what a iPod Shuffle is?!?
First let me say, YOUR WRONG. Now to make it easy for you I included proof(something you have failed to do!), i mean pictures to support my argument...

Thats funny that looks like a USB connector to me ;)

3)Again your wrong. Do you even bother to do a little research on a topic? Or do you like making yourself look like an ass? Again more idiot-proof pictures. This time clearly displaying Apples logo and the word iPod.
"Apple neglects to stencil ANYTHING AT ALL", yeah right LMFAO

4) Your right out of everything on the Luxpro Super Tangent and the iPod Shuffle the only major (i use the term major very loosely) design difference is their buttons. First the similarities, placement, button markings, and overall size. Now for the differences, Apples "button" is completely round. And Luxpro' is round with notches cut out around the edges. And one other smaller thing. The "button(s)" on the Luxpro seem to be more pronounced than that of the iPod'.

5)First off different looking earbuds is a very weak supporting point. But yet again with the power of Google at my side I will prove you wrong with pictures. And before I go on, I know you have issues with black and white plastic so just for a minute imagine that the iPod's headphones are not white.
Heres the Luxpro headphones...

and here are Apples headphones

They seem very similar to me, how about you? Both have long straight sections capped off with a hemisphere on the top.(Luxpro has a hemisphere on both ends, minor difference). Those are the only difference between the two. One is silver, one is white. One has 1 end capped off, the other has both ends capped off.

6)Again, you post before you research. You say that "the Luxpro doesn't have a cap that has a lanyard on it, but Apples's shuffle does so they must be different". I would believe you but I stumbled upon a article - ( - while on google. And low and behold, what does the last sentence of paragraph four state?
The iPod shuffle comes with two caps, with and without straps.
Huh, so the iPod has both huh?! The fact that the Luxpro doesn't come with an Lanyard is a moot point since the 1st gen. Shuffle gives you the option to use either.

So thats it I just ripped apart your "opening statement" so to speak. And I am oh so eagerly awaiting your response. And guess what for more idiot-proof comparisons more pictures. This time of the Luxpro Super Tangent and the iPod Shuffle side by side!

And I cant help but believe you have a little resentment against the Apple corporation, theres no reason to be calling Steve Jobs a scumbag. Absolutely no reasoon for it. Apple may have a past but that doesn't restrict their legal rights and it certainly doesnt give any other corporation to leach off of Apples design(s)/product(s). No, and thats what this is about, one company stealing anothers design.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 08 Jan 2007 @ 20:35

Comments have been disabled for this article.

Latest user comments

News archive