Judge in Brazilian 'iPhone' Trademark Lawsuit Rules in Apple's Favor

Really?

I wonder how much Apple paid... to the judge

Good. This was a money grab from the start. Not saying they don't have a case, I just think it's crazy to sit on something for 12 years until a product with your name comes out.

I'm sure those iPad factories Apple implemented in Brazil didn't hurt

A bit ironic considering when the "i" nomenclature was revealed by Apple, one of the things they said it stood for was "internet".

Good stuff. Couldn't be made up.



That said, even though they applied for the trademark in 2000, not using it until 2012 seems obviously stupid. Funny.

Toombs: I shoulda taken the money. LOL

Apple is the most valuable company in the world. You're really going to go up against its flagship trademark and expect to win? Oh yeah sorry Apple, just change the name of your phones for us in Brazil will you pls? Of course not, a ban was never going to happen. Those phones look like a pile of rubbish anyway, I bet they sold exactly 4.

Hmmmm.... would be hard for apple to agree to set up (or continue) production in a country that they can't sell their flagship device in (under its known name anyway)

Good...but

I mean its a silly lawsuit, of course Apple was going to win.

But what this ruling is saying is that trademarks do not matter if you don't have a product to apply it against, which I agree with.

Which means that some of the countless trademarks held by Apple and Google and Microsoft for potential future products should also be fair game to be taken by someone if there is no product to slap it against.

I don't like meaningless lawsuits, but I also don't like double standards. Apple better get an iWatch out there soon before some Brazilian company slaps iWatch on an actual product and has Apple eating crow.

TennisandMusic said:

A bit ironic considering when the "i" nomenclature was revealed by Apple, one of the things they said it stood for was "internet".

Good stuff. Couldn't be made up.

Image

Click to expand...

Back in 1998, that actually meant something. The character has since lost its meaning and now implies "Apple product." Think about it; the iPod didn't go online, iBooks are downloaded, iMovie is a desktop app, etc.

bryanescuela said:

I wonder how much Apple paid... to the judge

Click to expand...

Shipload!

*cue for sheepload comments*

/s know your are being sarcastic too

Good... Finally some reason in this case. I don't know what Brazilian law is like, but in the USA, if you fail to use and defend a trademark, you lose it.

JarScott said:

Apple is the most valuable company in the world. You're really going to go up against its flagship trademark and expect to win? Oh yeah sorry Apple, just change the name of your phones for us in Brazil will you pls? Of course not, a ban was never going to happen. Those phones look like a pile of rubbish anyway, I bet they sold exactly 4.

Click to expand...

The devices wouldn't have been banned (even if the judged ruled in favor of that); the decision would've been used to strong arm Apple into paying IGB to license the name.

ChrisCW11 said:

I mean its a silly lawsuit, of course Apple was going to win.

But what this ruling is saying is that trademarks do not matter if you don't have a product to apply it against, which I agree with.

Which means that some of the countless trademarks held by Apple and Google and Microsoft for potential future products should also be fair game to be taken by someone if there is no product to slap it against.

I don't like meaningless lawsuits, but I also don't like double standards. Apple better get an iWatch out there soon before some Brazilian company slaps iWatch on an actual product and has Apple eating crow.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Name squatting is what this amounted to.

But there are always double standards. Apple has major legal might and resources. However Apple is also almost certainly working on an iWatch and so it's not hypocritical for them to secure that name. Though I really hope it's not called "iWatch"

The judge also ruled in his decision that Gradiente's name was just the combination of "internet" and "phone", referring to a mobile phone with internet access, while Apple already had an extensive "i" product line, registered in several countries.

Click to expand...

good guy judge

Justice is served! This time...

Thanks Apple. That phone is ugly as hell...

MRSucks said:

Shipload!

*cue for sheepload comments*

/s know your are being sarcastic too

Click to expand...

I think you meant to say "boatloads".

Oh no - think of the confusion in the marketplace in Brazil!

bryanescuela said:

I wonder how much Apple paid... to the judge

Click to expand...

Oh....I LONG for the downvote. The haters are making coming to MacRumors a chore.

ChrisCW11 said:

I mean its a silly lawsuit, of course Apple was going to win.

But what this ruling is saying is that trademarks do not matter if you don't have a product to apply it against, which I agree with.

Which means that some of the countless trademarks held by Apple and Google and Microsoft for potential future products should also be fair game to be taken by someone if there is no product to slap it against.

I don't like meaningless lawsuits, but I also don't like double standards. Apple better get an iWatch out there soon before some Brazilian company slaps iWatch on an actual product and has Apple eating crow.

Click to expand...

What's a reasonable amount of time to get a trademarked product to market? 1 year? 2? What if you can prove the product was actively in development for 4 or 5 years? 12 years seems a bit much, especially if nothing was in the works for most of that time.

Using that extensive cash pool for good use to pay off suits.

cire said:

Oh....I LONG for the downvote. The haters are making coming to MacRumors a chore.

Click to expand...

yes - such a chore

I guess it's just cooler to post that samsung must have paid off judges in threads like these. That's far more productive, accurate, and acceptable

I'm not saying corruption doesn't exist. But most of the time someone goes for the easy post of bribery just because they don't like the decision - is just silly.

BC2009 said:

Good... Finally some reason in this case. I don't know what Brazilian law is like, but in the USA, if you fail to use and defend a trademark, you lose it.

Click to expand...

It's the same in Brazil; but I am afraid the judge's decision was not exactly sound - it just catered to a higher commercial interest. His statement that the mark connected "internet" and "phone" makes no sense whatsoever, as this "descriptive" principle would also have to apply to Apple, thus leading to zero protection for both companies.

In fact, Gradiente HAD a lawful trademark as well as a device making use of it within the prescribed time period. This is the relevant article of Brazil's main IPR law:

"Article 143 - A registration will become forfeit, on the request of any person with a legitimate interest, if, after 5 (five) years from its grant, on the date of such request:
I - use of the mark in Brazil has not been initiated; or
II - use of the mark has been interrupted for more than 5 (five) consecutive years or if, within that time, the mark has been used in a modified form that implies alteration in its original distinctive character, as found on the certificate of registration.
§ 1 - The mark will not become forfeit if the registrant justifies the lack of use for legitimate reasons.
§ 2 - The registrant will be notified to reply within a period of 60 (sixty) days, the onus falling on him to prove the use of the mark or justify its lack of use for legitimate reasons."

And yes, Gradiente has already said it will appeal - I still think that the most probable outcome will be that Apple pays some undisclosed sum and Gradiente shuts up.

slapppy said:

Toombs: I shoulda taken the money. LOL

Click to expand...

Extra points for the Riddick reference

According to Wikipedia, even in the States, (3) companies used the iPhone name before Apple started using it:

Infogear
Linksys
Cisco

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco_iphone