7 days, 7 incredible accessory prizes, and a bonus chance to win it all! Can you find, follow, and retweet all the Twitter Treasures?

The Jawbone JAMBOX Stereo Bluetooth speaker system is simply one of the best ways to enjoy everything from body-rocking music to crystal clear conference calling with your iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, or any smartphone, tablet, or computer for that matter. And the iMore Accessory Store has one ready and waiting to give to you for FREE -- if you can win our Twitter Treasure Hunt!

Here's how to enter:

1. Follow @imore, @reneritchie, @GeorgiaTiPb, @llofte, @iMuggle, @chrisoldroyd, @bla1ze, @simonsage on Twitter.
2. Watch our Twitter feeds.
3. At some point today, 1 (one) of us will tweet the Treasure Hunt accessory of the day (that's the Jawbone JAMBOX today). When that happens, retweet it!
4. Successfully retweet each and every treasure hunt accessory, and you're entered to win.

And if you want to enter our grand-prize and win all 7 (seven) Treasure Hunt accessories, simply retweet this and you're entered:

• $500+ in prizes! RT+follow to enter! @imore @reneritchie @GeorgiaTiPb @llofte @imuggle @chrisoldroyd @bla1ze @simonsage http://t.co/HIPuGEOT

Are you ready? Are you set? The iMore twitter treasure hunt is ON!

Following up on Samsung's claim that Apple had been sending out letters to retailers demanding those retailers stop selling Galaxy Nexus handsets in light of a recent court injunction, iMore was sent a copy of the 2-page letter received by one such retailer. The retailers claims this is just one of several such letters they've received recently, but electronically and physically. It reads:

Re: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. C-11-01846 (LHK)

[Name redacted]

We represent Apple Inc. in the above-referenced action.

We enclose a copy of the June 26 preliminary injunction ordered entered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in this case together with a copy of Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604 (the '604 patent'). With the posting of the requisite bond, the order is now in effect.

The order provides as follows:

For the foregoing reasons, Apple's motion for a perliminary injuction is GRANTED. Accordingly, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC; its officers, partners, agents, servants, emplotyees, attornyes, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them, are enjoined for making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the Unite States, or importing into the United States, Samsung's Glaxy Nexus and any product that is no more than colorably different from the specified product that infringes on U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604.

(emphasis added).

As the italicized language provides, the order applies not only to the named Samsung entities, but also to anyone "acting in concert" with them. Apple thus believes that the order extends to you because you may be selling, offering to sell, or importing Samsung's Galaxy Nexus.

Please comply with the order by ceasing immediately to engage in any of the specified acts (e.g., importing, offering to sell, or selling within the United States) in connection with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and any product that is no more than colorably different from it and embodies the '604 patent's design. At a minimum, Apple believes compliance with the Court's order requires immediately removing for sale the Galaxy Nexus from all physical and online venues under your direction or control.

Please contact the undersigned if you have questions.

The letter was accompanied by almost 100 pages containing the Unites States District Court ruling referenced in the letter.

Clearly, Apple believes that when and if they're granted injunctions with this specific language, they can and will go after retailers selling the enjoined product(s). Given the long, multinational history of skirmishes between Apple and Samsung, it's also clearly far from over.

It's our understanding large retailers Like Best Buy and Walmart had been in the process of complying with the order, Apple letter notwithstanding. Others may not have been so inclined.

For more, see my take on the initial story and Alex Dobie's take on our Mobile Nations sibling site, Android Central.

iTunes has a Wish List. If you use the desktop version of iTunes, you may know this already. If you mostly use the iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad App Store, however, you'll be forgiven if you have no idea it exists at all. Because "add to Wish List", one of the features that makes the most sense on mobile, doesn't exist in the on-device App Store at all. And it really should.

Case in point, last weekend I received a text message from a friend who told me in no uncertain terms that Apple needed to add a "Wish List" feature to the App Store. She was out and about and came across something she didn't want to buy immediately, but really wanted to remember to buy -- or be gifted! -- at some later point. And not only couldn't she add it to her Wish List on the iPhone, the lack of functionality made her think iTunes lacked the feature entirely.

That's the perplexing thing about the Wish List, if you visit the App Store (or any other iTunes Store) on the desktop version of iTunes, you can click the little arrow next to the price of the app and click "Add to Wish List". If you visit the App Store on the iPhone or iPad, you're simply out of luck. The iOS version has no such counterpart.

Clearly, Apple has recognized a need for a Wish List, otherwise they wouldn't have included it in their desktop app, but for some reason they've decided not to include it in any of the iOS Stores. Your Wish List cannot be accessed from the App Store, iTunes Store, or iBooks Store on the iPhone or iPad.

Apple doesn't release metrics on where or how people buy apps, but I can't help but assume most people actually shop for iOS apps on iOS devices, and for them the current Wish List implementation is practically useless. We need the Wish List on the the devices we're shopping with -- our iPhones and iPads.

I use My Wish List all the time for Movies on the Apple TV. There are many movies I want to own, but don't have the money needed to purchase them all at once. Instead, I occasionally browse through movies in the iTunes Movies Store and add several movies to my Wish List at a time. Then once a month, I visit My Wish List and purchase one or two movies from the list.

I'm sure there are many people who would love to do the same with apps. Most people live their lives on a budget and don't have the means to buy every app they want whenever they want it. Teenagers who get an iTunes allowance or buy gift cards to add money to their account would also greatly benefit from a Wish List.

So let this be another plea to sit beside my request for a Kids category in the App Store -- please, Apple, give us Wish Lists in the App Store on our iPhones and iPads.

On the surface Kickstarter seems unbelievable -- a way for anyone with a dream and a game plan to get the funding they need to make that dream reality. In some cases, from LunaTik to Olloclip, that's exactly what it's turned out to be. For others, many others, it's ended in failure to launch and loss of money for the backers involved. Sascha Segan of PCMag

A success rate of 33 percent is good for a venture capitalist, because actual investors expect to hit it big often enough to offset other losses. But when you give money to Kickstarter for a tech product, you're not a real investor. Investors have equity. You're just a buyer who isn't getting your gadget for who-knows-how-long. The longer you don't have the product, the less value your money had - and if you never get that product, well, remember, they don't have to refund your money.

That last bit is the nut. Once a project achieves "funded" status, Kickstarter is paid, the project is paid, and your money is gone. If everything goes perfectly, you get the pledge reward you were promised. If everything goes poorly, you get nothing. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

It's basically gambling, but where the best outcome is simply getting your money's worth, and the worst is losing it all. Of course, "it all" is often only tens or hundreds of dollars for most backers, but it all adds up.

I've gotten a few of the products I've backed on Kickstarter, including the aforementioned TikTok and Olloclip, and they're legitimately awesome. Other products have been delayed or "failed" and I'll likely never see that money again. That's made me more cautious about what I back, but I think that's a good thing. A fool and his money, as they say, are soon parted and we should all be a little more careful about how and when we foolishly part with our money.

And that's the bottom line -- Kickstarter is more entertainment than commerce for users. It's betting on dreams and concept videos, and only has exactly that much promise.

Check out Sascha's article, below, and whether you back Kickstarter projects or not, at least you'll be doing it with your eyes as open as your wallet.

Source: PCMag

Gameloft has announced that it will be releasing its highly anticipated game, The Dark Knight Rises on July 20th. The game is based on the upcoming Batman film with the same name and will be the only official game based on this movie; the information comes from Pocket Gamer.

Featuring dozens of missions and random events like jail breaks, car chases, and hostage situations, The Dark Knight Rises aims to completely immerse its players in Gotham City.

As players navigate Batman through the levels of the game, they will need to master a complex and cinematic combat system in addition to the Dark Knight's customary gadget goody bag.

When the time for punches and Batarang tossing has passed, players will also have the chance to drive the Batpod across the streets of Gotham or take to its skies in The Bat.

There are now two trailers showing how the game looks and they're both worth watching; we have embedded them below. If you're a Batman fan, you are going to love playing this game. There is no information on pricing but we would assume that it will be similarly priced to Gameloft's last movie-based game, The Amazing Spiderman. That hit the App Store last month for $6.99 and was a universal app for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch.

Sometimes games based on movie franchises don't live up to expectations as they use the name to disguise poor gameplay. Gameloft appears to have addressed this complaint as its last game has an average rating of over four and a half stars from nearly three thousand reviews; hopefully The Dark Knight Rises will be just as good.

Source: Pocket Gamer

For many people, Twitter has come to replace RSS as the go-to way to get the latest news, reviews, and how-tos, and many of you have told us that's how you keep up with iMore these days -- or @iMore more precisely. We love that, and we figured we could have a little #FollowFriday fun to help us reach even more fantastic readers on Twitter, and give something back to everyone who considers us worthy of a follow.

So we're going to have a little treasure hunt!

Starting tomorrow, Saturday July 14, once a day for the next week (7 days), each iMore editor will take a turn tweeting out a link to the treasure hunt accessory of the day (and they'll be good ones -- all thanks to the iMore Accessory Store!). Follow our Twitter streams and re-tweet the treasure hunt accessory tweet each day. Successfully find and retweet all 7 of them, and you're automagically entered to win. There'll be 7 winners, one for each accessory.

And If that's not enough, give us a #FollowFriday and you'll also be entered to the win the grand prize -- all 7 of them!

So here's what you have to do:

1. Follow @imore, @reneritchie, @GeorgiaTiPb, @llofte, @iMuggle, @chrisoldroyd, @bla1ze, @simonsage
2. Watch our Twitter feeds.
3. Each day, 1 (one) editor will post the treasure hunt accessory of the day. When they do, retweet it!
4. Successfully retweet each and every treasure hunt accessory, and you're entered to win.

And don't forget, Send out a #FF:

• $500+ in prizes! RT+follow to enter! @imore @reneritchie @GeorgiaTiPb @llofte @imuggle @chrisoldroyd @bla1ze @simonsage http://t.co/HIPuGEOT

So you're entered to win all 7 (seven) treasure hunt accessories -- the grand prize!

Are you ready? Are you set? The iMore twitter treasure hunt starts... NOW!

Found an interesting article you want to share with iMore? Have a burning question about that feature you just can't figure out? There is ALWAYS more happening just a click away in the forums. You can always head over and join in the conversation, search for answers, or lend your expertise to other members of our community. You check out some of the threads below:

- Post pictures taken with your iPhone 4S here
- iMessage a video to another iPhone
- Reminders App Monday - Friday
- Saving attachments in Sparrow?
- Phone Stolen - any way to get pictures?
- Amazing Spider-Man Retina wallpapers

If you're not already a member of the iMore Forums, register now!

Following the injunction Apple won against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Galaxy Nexus, Samsung claims Apple sent letters to carriers and retailers demanding they stop selling the enjoined products. According to FOSS Patents, the letters went out on June 28 and July 7 respectively.

Samsung claims that "Apple's menacing letters greatly overreach, incorrectly claiming that third-party retailers are subject to the prohibitions of the preliminary injunction, which they clearly are not". In Samsung's opinion, "they are permitted to sell their existing inventory, even without a stay". However, both preliminary injunctions clearly relate not only to Samsung's employees, agents etc. (including its subsidiaries and "partners") but also to "those acting in concert with any of them".

Alex Dobie from our Mobile Nations sibling site, Android Central, added:

People close to the matter at Best Buy and Wal-Mart tell us that they've been complying with the order regardless of Apple's aggression. One such source told us, "We had planned to remove the Galaxy Tab 10.1 from the shelves the evening the news [of the injunction] broke, and we received word from our district manager to go forward with the plan immediately."

Apple and Samsung have been engaged in a global patent war that would be almost comedic if it weren't so tragic. Ultimately, courts will either invalidate the patents, deny damages, throw cases out, or order one rich company to pay another rich company, but in the meantime fear, uncertainty, and doubt will plague consumers.

As long as the patent office spits out silly patents, and courts provide injunctive relief, and corporations have a duty to shareholders to compete in the market, situations like this will keep occurring, lawyers will keep getting faster cars, and consumers will keep getting caught in the middle.

I've already expressed the opinion that Google, as platform owner, should have done more to prevent and protect Android manufacturers and partners from litigation, and Android Central has provided a ton of sane, balanced coverage as well. There's one point that came up on last week's Android Central podcast, however, that I think deserves some more attention:

That Apple is litigating out of fear of competition.

Apple is most certainly competitive, and litigation and innovation are both competitive tools, but Apple makes such a disproportionate amount of profits in the smartphone space that, despite Android and Samsung's market share, Apple still has limited financial competition in the industry. In tablets, especially when the global market is considered, Apple still has no competition. While that could change, and market share momentum can lead to profit share increases, it would be a mistake to assume Apple's patent and trade-dress claims are merely out of fear for Android's future success.

Rightly or wrongly -- and intelligent adults can engage in civilized discourse over the merits of both arguments -- Apple felt betrayed by Microsoft, a former partner who they see as having ripped them off and denied them their due in the PC era. It's hard not to imagine that hasn't fueled their "thermonuclear" reaction to history repeating itself with Google in mobile.

Because as much as public companies are driven by shareholder value, they're run by people.

Source: FOSS Patents, Android Central

The analogy came upon me while recording the iMore show this week -- Twitter's recent, ambiguous, ominous proclamations to developers feel to me like the tired old cliché of someone who works their ass off so their significant other can get through college and make something of themselves, only for that significant other to graduate and dump them for a hotter, richer, more glamorous life.

That's completely unfair, of course. Twitter has absolutely worked hard as well, listening to users, learning from Twitter apps, and fighting their way into mainstream success. But to think they did it alone is just as unfair. For almost every feature Twitter added, there's a user trend or developer innovation that helped it get there. For every celebrity who added to Twitter's public profile, there's a "via [third party Twitter app]" that helped that profile get made more public.

The Iconfactory's Twitterrific was one of the first jailbreak apps even before the app store, was one of the first iPhone apps when the App Store launched, and was one of the first iPad apps when the iPad launched. They came up with the term "tweet" for tweet's-sake, among many other things. Loren Brichter's Tweetie introduced pull-to-refresh (coming ubiquitously in iOS 6 and was so successful that Twitter bought it and made it the official Twitter for iOS and OS X client. Tapbots' Tweetbot pushed the state-of-the-art of Twitter apps through notifications, mute filters, and more.

And a generation of fervent users were brought along, and brought them along in return.

Twitter. Geeks. Developers. It took the virtuous harmony of all three to get Twitter to where it is today. Like a newly graduated significant other, or a successful music group, it took magic to make the moment. That's why it feels fundamentally unfair that when the most powerful member of a partnership or group, on achieving success, starts hinting that they'd rather be a solo act, or that they'd rather hang around in different circles. That they need space. That they need a break. It feels fundamentally unfair because everyone worked together based on the implicit promise of a better life, and yet when it looks like that better life is finally about to happen, it also looks like some of those who worked for it will get left behind.

Just as geeks are no longer the user base Twitter wants to attract, client developers are no longer the kind of developers Twitter wants to cultivate.

Whether it's better to have loved a platform -- like Twitter -- and lost, or never to have been able to love it at all -- like Facebook -- is debatable. In the moment, the loss of the service or apps that made for the experience you loved is too fresh and painful for it to matter.

Right now, Twitter feels like it wants to break up with Twitter apps and jettison that part of its past to faster embrace a more prosperous, more glamorous future. But the lack of clarity also makes it feel awkward, like any human coming out of a long term relationship -- conflicted and maybe even a little guilty.

Ideally Twitter would figure out a way to balance the good of their original user base and third party developers with their obligation to monetize their future.

There have been numerous suggestions in the past for everything from paid pro accounts for users, to in-timeline advertising. Rather than dicking around with trends and other, off-putting options, having Twitter own ads and letting developers charge for paid, alternative apps (that include those timeline ads).

Everyone gets the officially Twitter app for free, and those who want alternatives, be it in interface or feature set, can pay for those alternatives.

And because the interface is the app for users, if an alternative to Twitter's back end ever manifests -- as I mentioned in a previous column, social apps have been far more cyclical, historically, than operating systems -- those apps would be free to embrace alternative APIs.

Twitter has to grow and they have to make a business, but the past doesn't always have to be dumped for the future. Sometimes the past can be built on and made into a better, stronger future for everyone.