The general public aren't computer experts. A lot of people just google what they are looking for. Someone could be taken to Amazon's app store instead in that case. It was just one example.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Amazon Ordered to Enter Settlement Talks Over 'App Store' Trademark Issue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The general public aren't computer experts. A lot of people just google what they are looking for. Someone could be taken to Amazon's app store instead in that case. It was just one example.
Correct. You'll probably find that when they loose the case it'll become a reserved term to prevent anyone doing it again.
This is what happens when the trademark office doesn't research correctly. Trademarks are all well and good but I bet a fair few of them should never have been issued.
Normally, I'm not a fan of trademarking everything under the sun, but looking at this objectively, Apple singlehandedly made "app" into a household word. "App Store" is synonymous with Apple, and has been for the beginning. I don't see Amazon's case here. It would be like Kinkos advertising their own "Xerox" service, or Yahoo saying that they are the best search engine at "Googling". A trademark is not invalidated just because it becomes common lexicon.
I don't understand why the judge is ordering both parties to settle. They were unable to settle, which is why they are in court. Is the judge skittish about making a decision here?
Ok. So they go to Amazon's store and can't find it/can't install it. You assume they give up and don't TRY the Apple store? Ok.
No it is not irrelevant - people are idiots. I wasn't making a point about app stores or hardware, just consumers.
Well by that logic then yes, Apple was damaged. They went to purchase an iPhone but didn't know enough to realize they got something different - and now can't use the Apple app store either.
Now that I think about it I should ask him if he has used iTunes yet.
Off the top of my head :
- Palm, as seen on a screenshot posted twice in this very thread and tons in other threads.
- SAGE Networks, who held the trademark earlier this decade, albeit for a software licensing program rather than an actual Store that sells Applications.
Sure "app store" is common today - but who made that common? When the trademark application was submitted, nobody else had an app store, Apple was the only one calling it that. It's a false argument to say that it's commonly used - it was not at the time the trademark was filed. What is common today was made common by Apple. Just because everyone uses the term TODAY does not invalidate the trademark that was granted before this term was ubiquitous in any way, shape or form.
People have short attention spans. If they can't get it now, they often forget about it.
Who told you the prerequisites for a trademark and what makes/keeps them valid?
I have a picture of the Palm App Store on the Treo on page 3, and Samcraig replied to your initial post with that exact same picture.
Are you just ignoring us so you can say "no one else had an app store" over and over again?
The problem is that it's becoming genericized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks
Those same customers who buy a Galaxy Tab thinking it is an iPad? Or the ones buying a Galxy S2 thinking it is an iPhone?
Do you not read any answers at all before answering? The term "App" has been around for decades, and is common. Adding store makes it a descriptive term, that can't be trademarked. For example Palm has used the term App Store 10+ years ago.
You're seriously going to keep going with this scenario?
Ok. Sure. If I wanted and app that I saw on TV or someone told me about - I would just give up if I accidentally googled the wrong web page. I know whenever I am looking for information and I click on a link that doesn't give me the information I need - I immediately give up because if it's not there in that first link - who cares.
On second thought - your scenario explains the reason why people on this forum ask the same questions over and over or spread the same FUD that has been debunked over and over. Often in the very thread (and PAGE!) that they are posting on.
No, that's the complete opposite of the problem and issue being discussed. "App Store" is not a made up word that people are not using as a descriptive term, like Kleenex to actually mean tissue or Hoover to mean vaccum cleaner.
It's that App Store is a descriptive term that Apple is trying to tie to their own store that sells apps.
I agree. It's utterly ridiculous the lengths Apple will go to in order to try and get some marketing advantage and yet they'll kick themselves in the foot left and right when it comes to doing things like ignoring USB 3.0 for so long or replacing better quality GPU in the Mac Mini with Intel Integrated (step backwards in that department).
OTOH, you have to look at Lucasfilm and their "Droid" trademark. I'd argue that "Droid" is just shortening the word Android like Christian to Chris, but that didn't stop Verizon and Motorola from paying Lucasfilm to use "Droid" in their phones.
Go ahead. You realize there's a difference between what you want to do and what is being discussed here? Or do you not?
You can't do it. There's already a river called Amazon in, like...I dunno...Mexico or somewhere.
It'll just confuse all those people with boats.