Apple Officially Loses 'iPhone' Trademark Dispute in Brazil, Appeals and Lawsuits Coming

[spyguy10709]

Originally Posted by shortcrust

Smart?! Do you really think it would be 'smart' of a Brazilian court to base a decision on the need to keep Apple happy rather that the need to uphold the laws of their country? I think it would be shameful, and I'm pretty sure Brazil isn't that desperate.

Some people on here have a really screwed up world view.

I actually don't. Brazil just pissed off Apple. I think it would, actually, because Brazil could have just risked 1000s of good jobs for their people, instead of a bogus trademark on an irrelevant, bankrupt, company.

[shortcrust]

Originally Posted by spyguy10709

I actually don't. Brazil just pissed off Apple. I think it would, actually, because Brazil could have just risked 1000s of good jobs for their people, instead of a bogus trademark on an irrelevant, bankrupt, company.

Wow. And you don't think that's a screwed up world view?! Words can't adequately express my contempt.

[spyguy10709]

Originally Posted by shortcrust

Wow. And you don't think that's a screwed up world view?! Words can't adequately express my contempt.

Nope. It's screwed up but that's the way it is buddy.

Sometimes you have to make the choice between "right" and what's good for people.

[RedCroissant]

Originally Posted by spyguy10709

Nope. It's screwed up but that's the way it is buddy.

Sometimes you have to make the choice between "right" and what's good for people.

Ok. That's crazy talk. What's good for people is the recognition that an action is in fact right. A right action can make a greater impact than an improper action performed simply under the presumption that is in the best interest of the people. In this case, what is right and what is good for the people is that the Brazilian government is upholding the law that their citizens rely on.

Which "people" were you referring to?

Undermining their own laws would also challenge their own authority and could also result in questions of national identity and security.

If Apple wants the trademark that badly(even though this company is definitely taking advantage of the popularity of the iDevice line) then they will end up paying for it. If not, there are other ways to get their products into Brazilian hands(just include one with every purchase of an Apple iFootball(soccer ball for Americans). :-)

[Sue De Nimes]

Originally Posted by turtlez

was Apple the one to set the trend for small letter capital letter? eg. eMac iMac. I remember playing online games and everyone was always iSomething. even the movie I, Robot kind of seems like it got the idea from there. Whoever set this trend should have right to use the term since it reflects upon themselves/company

LOL - I, Robot is based on the book I, Robot that was published in 1950

[turtlez]

Originally Posted by Sue De Nimes

LOL - I, Robot is based on the book I, Robot that was published in 1950

k well I don't know this. If I asked you what 1+1 was when you were first born and you did a poop instead i wouldn't say LOL. It's not like I am backing anyone here either. I am just saying whoever set the trend should have the right to use it whether it was Apple or someone else.

[Sue De Nimes]

Originally Posted by turtlez

k well I don't know this. If I asked you what 1+1 was when you were first born and you did a poop instead i wouldn't say LOL. It's not like I am backing anyone here either. I am just saying whoever set the trend should have the right to use it whether it was Apple or someone else.

A basic grasp of grammar would indicate that "I, Robot" means something very different to "iRobot"

[thekev]

Originally Posted by RedCroissant

If I were in charge of Apple, I would just simply not sell the phone in Brazil. Sure, make it available for sale online, but have the shipment of the phone come from some other country like: Colombia, Argentina..even Ecuador. Then that creates jobs in those other countries for shipment(not too many though) and then each government gets nice little tax incentives for the product all while Apple still makes money on the phone, keeps manufacturing facilities in Brazil, and doesn't infringe on the trademark. Done and done.

Spite would be a silly basis for business decisions.

Originally Posted by spyguy10709

I actually don't. Brazil just pissed off Apple. I think it would, actually, because Brazil could have just risked 1000s of good jobs for their people, instead of a bogus trademark on an irrelevant, bankrupt, company.

That's a bad policy. As for Apple you guys are are silly. There is no way to tell if this one factor makes business in Brazil less profitable to a point where they would alter manufacturing plans.

Originally Posted by Sue De Nimes

A basic grasp of grammar would indicate that "I, Robot" means something very different to "iRobot"

It's still important to consider that this looks different from a 2013 paradigm. Look at the size of Apple in 2000 when this trademark was filed compared to today. I'm not sure how many people would have believed that the lower case i would be carried on to so many products or that Apple would become this large. As far as trademarks are concerned, Apple had a short dispute with Cisco who also owned a trademark on "iphone" (and a working product) carried over from Linksys in however many countries.

[raybackjoe]

Taken aback which Apple didn't make an provide for title in 2006 or perhaps earlier.

[RedCroissant]

Originally Posted by thekev

Spite would be a silly basis for business decisions.

It's not spite. It's simply a business plan that actually doesn't drastically alter the present situation. It simply utilizes existing avenues for sale of the iPhone in a country where it is not officially available; like China.

It's also similar in the way that iPads "magically" found their way into the hands of Chinese buyers before Apple even purchased the trademark. Yes, purchasing the TM made it more profitable to manufacture and sell the devices in the same country, but the type of approach before the TM was owned by Apple does not make the policy or actually lack of policy a spiteful one.

[thekev]

Originally Posted by RedCroissant

It's not spite. It's simply a business plan that actually doesn't drastically alter the present situation. It simply utilizes existing avenues for sale of the iPhone in a country where it is not officially available; like China.

It's also similar in the way that iPads "magically" found their way into the hands of Chinese buyers before Apple even purchased the trademark. Yes, purchasing the TM made it more profitable to manufacture and sell the devices in the same country, but the type of approach before the TM was owned by Apple does not make the policy or actually lack of policy a spiteful one.

It may or may not change the fundamentals to a level where it makes sense to alter plans to sell the iphone directly in Brazil. It doesn't mean they won't still find a way to sell directly in Brazil.

[turtlez]

Originally Posted by Sue De Nimes

A basic grasp of grammar would indicate that "I, Robot" means something very different to "iRobot"

Thanks Sue. A basic grasp of logic would mean you didn't need to say that.

[Sue De Nimes]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Thanks Sue. A basic grasp of logic would mean you didn't need to say that.

Your understanding of logic seems to be as strong as your grammar.

[turtlez]

Originally Posted by Sue De Nimes

Your understanding of logic seems to be as strong as your grammar.

k time to stop now