PDA

View Full Version : Apple may take Woolworths to court over similar logo


MacBytes
Oct 4, 2009, 08:52 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Apple may take Woolworths to court over similar logo (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20091004215254)
Description:: Apple is known for vigorously defending its intellectual property, and while some might claim that it often takes things too far, from Apple's perspective, it often doesn't have much of a choice.

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

dukebound85
Oct 4, 2009, 08:55 PM
are you kidding me

i hope apple loses

MadGoat
Oct 4, 2009, 08:57 PM
While I disagree that they look alike, apple still has to try and pursue it.

Chundles
Oct 4, 2009, 08:58 PM
They have no choice, they MUST defend their trademarks.

My Mum saw the similarity so there's definitely something there.

thegoldenmackid
Oct 4, 2009, 08:59 PM
And the lawyers are bored again.

.Andy
Oct 4, 2009, 09:00 PM
I read this in the paper and it's absolutely ridiculous. I can understand companies defending their corporate identity but it really goes too far sometimes. A few years back virgin was suing a band in australia for having virgin in their name.

Chundles
Oct 4, 2009, 09:01 PM
I read this in the paper and it's absolutely ridiculous. I can understand companies defending their corporate identity but it really goes too far sometimes. A few years back virgin was suing a band in australia for having virgin in their name.

They MUST defend their trademarks, it not something they just decide to do, if they don't do it they lose it.

.Andy
Oct 4, 2009, 09:05 PM
They MUST defend their trademarks, it not something they just decide to do, if they don't do it they lose it.
Bollocks they don't have to do anything. I've got no love for woolworths but I do hope apple gets some seriously bad PR in this case.

savoirfaire
Oct 4, 2009, 09:13 PM
Bollocks they don't have to do anything. I've got no love for woolworths but I do hope apple gets some seriously bad PR in this case.

Wasn't there a 1978 lawsuit that Apple Corps brought against Apple Computer for trademark infringement? Kettle, meet Pot.

Dafrety
Oct 4, 2009, 09:16 PM
They MUST defend their trademarks, it not something they just decide to do, if they don't do it they lose it.

So after this then I can totally expect Apple Inc. to sue Apple Corps next because they use an Apple as their logo right? Then after that Apple Inc. is going to get sued by McDonalds, because they copyrighted Big Mac and Apple calls their computers Macs. :rolleyes:

Ivan P
Oct 4, 2009, 09:23 PM
So after this then I can totally expect Apple Inc. to sue Apple Corps next because they use an Apple as their logo right? Then after that Apple Inc. is going to get sued by McDonalds, because they copyrighted Big Mac and Apple calls their computers Macs. :rolleyes:

1 - Apple Corps existed for an entire decade before Apple Inc, so for Apple Inc to sue them would be absurd.
2 - There's already been decades-long legal battles between Apple Corps and Apple Inc, reinvigorated after Apple Inc launched the iTunes Store as it was believed this was a huge violation of a previous settlement between the companies.
3 - The matter was finally settled only a couple years ago, with Apple Corps 'leasing' the term 'Apple' from Apple Inc. Quite absurd if you ask me considering, as I said above, Apple Corps existed long before Apple Inc.

Peace
Oct 4, 2009, 09:23 PM
So after this then I can totally expect Apple Inc. to sue Apple Corps next because they use an Apple as their logo right? Then after that Apple Inc. is going to get sued by McDonalds, because they copyrighted Big Mac and Apple calls their computers Macs. :rolleyes:

Apple,Inc. won the lawsuit with Apple Corp. and gave Apple Corp. the right to use the logo.

But I digress even though to me at least the Wollworths logo looks a lot like Apple's logo. Especially the part with the little stem on top.

Ivan P
Oct 4, 2009, 09:32 PM
Apple,Inc. won the lawsuit with Apple Corp. and gave Apple Corp. the right to use the logo.

They didn't really "win" - it was a settlement as opposed to a court's ruling.

Rivix
Oct 4, 2009, 09:45 PM
This kind of pisses me off as a graphic designer, even if its the layers who start this BS.

savoirfaire
Oct 4, 2009, 09:45 PM
They didn't really "win" - it was a settlement as opposed to a court's ruling.

There have been multiple lawsuits. I think Peace was referring to the 2006 lawsuit in the UK where the courts ruled in favor of Apple Computer's right to use the Apple name/logo in connection with the newly launched online music store. Previous lawsuits, however, had ended in settlements.

windywoo
Oct 4, 2009, 10:41 PM
This is ridiculous but not surprising. I hope the judge spits in the face of whichever legal genius though this up.

anjinha
Oct 4, 2009, 10:53 PM
are you kidding me

i hope apple loses

Do you ever use punctuation?

pdxflint
Oct 4, 2009, 10:55 PM
They could just take that stem-y looking thing off of it, and it would make more sense as a 'W' and not look like it's trying to subliminally suggest something else... like a fruit, maybe? With that stem-y looking thing, when one just glances at the shape, it's reminiscent of the apple logo until you look at it. That's too similar, if I were Apple, especially if they go into electronic products. Just get rid of the 'stem' and they should be fine, unless they take a chunk out of the right side of that 'W.'

kbrittle
Oct 4, 2009, 11:21 PM
must be nice to own the image of an apple, Apple.

EarthDawn
Oct 4, 2009, 11:32 PM
eh' .... I dont really see it ...

apple1984
Oct 5, 2009, 05:39 AM
As I understand it, one of the prerequisites for litigating a trademark is the substantial likelihood of consumers confusing the two brands. While I understand that Apple has to protect their trademarks, there's literally no chance of people mistaking Woolworth's clothes, accesories, and such for Apple-related electronics.

bigandy
Oct 5, 2009, 05:42 AM
I don't agree that it looks that similar, but I do agree a company should be seen to at least attempt to pursue every possible infringement of intellectual property.


Do you ever use punctuation?

:D

doubleohseven
Oct 5, 2009, 06:57 AM
I can see the resemblance of the two logos (little 'stalk' at the top of the Woolies logo), but that's really nothing to argue about in court IMO. I do my grocery shopping at Woolworths and I have never thought to compare the Apple logo with the Woolworths logo.

whooleytoo
Oct 5, 2009, 08:51 AM
They're nothing alike, other than they're both apples.

So no other company or entity can use an apple icon/motif?

I think I should register the attached as my company motif. Then perhaps I can prevent anyone using a person logo/motif in their advertising, thus confusing the consumer between our two companies... :rolleyes:

MasterDev
Oct 5, 2009, 08:55 AM
Quick, someone copyright orange!

Scarlet Fever
Oct 5, 2009, 09:11 AM
It seems the issue is that people confuse the logo for an apple. I have a solution.

Here's the current logo;
http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/woolworths_logo_detail.gif

Here's my proposed logo;

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9093/woolworthslogodetail.jpg

It's a peach! No more confusion, no one need be sued.

Anuba
Oct 5, 2009, 01:41 PM
While these things often seem overly silly (and I very rarely support the party with the ridiculous claim, and I'm especially reluctant to side with Apple), it's hard to imagine how the inspiration for the WW logo was anything other than an apple. It's, erm, an apple, and they just had to go and put the little leaf there and make it point to the right. Definitely falls in the 'asking for trouble' category.

Eraserhead
Oct 5, 2009, 03:13 PM
Agreed that Apple has to challenge this - that's how trademark law works, and is why Otis lost escalator as a trademark.

Quick, someone copyright orange!

They have (http://www.orange.co.uk/).

Rodimus Prime
Oct 5, 2009, 06:02 PM
Agreed that Apple has to challenge this - that's how trademark law works, and is why Otis lost escalator as a trademark.



They have (http://www.orange.co.uk/).

While apple has to changele this I really hope they do next to nothing to take it to court. It some of the trade marks I have seen company bankrupt the other side over something really REALLY stupid.
It should be very quick take it to a judge, the order state that it is in infringing and call it done. If apple appeals then apple has problems and I think then apple needs to start paying the others side legal fees when they loose.

Xapphire13
Oct 6, 2009, 09:14 AM
remindes me of when Cadburys copyrighted purple

Becordial
Oct 6, 2009, 09:20 AM
The obligation that exists in the US to defend your IP is not the same in Australia. In Australia you don't have to be seen to constantly and actively pursue to maintain your IP claims constantly to maintain your rights.

Given that Apple Inc is challenging Woolworths in Australia and relying upon their Australian registered Apple logo, under Australian rules, they're not obligated to pursue this in the same way as might be assumed elsewhere.

Still, it's a decision that no doubt is made in the US and guided by Cupertino and probably external lawyers that no doubt will always encourage this kind of activity.

Drpepper99uk
Oct 6, 2009, 09:29 AM
Apple suing Woolworths???

Ah...So that's what killed of Wollies here in the U.K and not the recession after all!!! :p

Xapphire13
Oct 6, 2009, 09:33 AM
Its not like a food supermarket is gonna start selling counterfeit macs or anything! Plus its JUST an apple... doesn't have the bite/notch taken out of the side or anything. Does this mean NOONE can use apples in their logo?

Bubba Satori
Oct 6, 2009, 11:09 AM
Lame.

BillyBobBongo
Oct 7, 2009, 04:24 PM
Apple suing Woolworths???

Ah...So that's what killed of Wollies here in the U.K and not the recession after all!!! :p


The two companies are not associated with each other. They just share(d) the same name.