The announcement from Palm this week that the forthcoming Pre device will sync directly with iTunes - the first phone not called an iPhone to do so - has sparked discussion about how Apple will react. While it is not yet clear exactly how this will work, the apparent ability to use the Pre device as a personal music player could be seen as a threat to Apple's dominance in the combination phone/music player market.
It's not surprising that Palm would want the new device to feature this iPod-esque functionality, especially considering the fact that Palm's president Jon Rubinstein is credited with developing the iPod during his tenure at Apple. The question is what can and should Apple do about this? Is the cease and desist letter (or, more likely the complaint) already drafted, as some have suggested? After all, the pre-release hype period has already featured legal posturing by both parties regarding whether the Pre would infringe any of Apple's intellectual property embodied in the iPhone interface.
Setting aside the disputes about the touch-screen and other basics of the iPhone user interface that seem to be incorporated by the Pre, what would be the basis of Apple's claims regarding the iTunes sync feature? That, of course, depends how Palm is accomplishing this functionality. According to Jon Lech Johansen, Palm is likely doing this by having the Pre emulate the specific codes Apple assigns its devices to identify themselves to iTunes. (The Johansen article and the comments that follow are well worth the link.) If Johansen is right, can Apple make out a case that these codes are, in DMCA terms, part of the anti-circumvention package protecting iPods and iTunes? If so, this would seem to provide Apple with a legal basis to attempt to block the Pre's iPod-like sync feature.
Perhaps the more interesting question is the business one - should Apple be upset that the maker of a new device touts the ability to sync media from iTunes as one of its main selling points? Or should it just be flattered that the competition has so clearly acknowledged its dominant position?
