Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 10, 2013, 05:17 AM   #151
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlCKB0Y View Post
Actually, it is about confusion. Most trademark infringement laws around the world have a requirement for "confusing similarity". In the US this is known as the "likelihood of confusion test".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...confusion_test

A very good example of this was actually legal action against Apple in Apple Corps v Apple Computer.

Apple Corps is a multimedia company created by the Beatles. They sued Apple Computer over trademark infringement numerous times. An original settlement stipulated that Apple Computer could continue to use their name as long as they weren't involved in the primary industry that Apple Corps was (ie. Music) as they would likely result in confusion.

They were later sued for breaking this condition once they created the iPod and iTunes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_C...Apple_Computer
I wonder if it mattered there that "Apple" didn't exactly describe the computer. App Store just defines what is sold there. Apple is just large enough to claim acquired ubiquity. Also of course they were sued for breaking their agreement.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 06:24 AM   #152
Mr.damien
Guest
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkswamp View Post
No, they still have them. They've just been redesigned to look flat.
Hahaha, so true.
  0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 07:54 AM   #153
Beautyspin
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by gibbz View Post
Tim Cook seems a lot more willing to settle and avoid these lawsuits.
He has realized there is no way he can win this hence running with his tail behind his legs..
Beautyspin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 08:36 AM   #154
Jack Shaftoe
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CylonGlitch View Post
Actually it isn't ridiculous at all, I think you completely underestimate the stupidity of the average person.

Just the other day I was in iTunes doing something and had an app open. Someone I was talking too saw it and asked if I could download that for their Samsung phone . . . from iTunes. I said, sorry, it's in iTunes, it's only for Apple products. They told me I was wrong and they would do it themselves. I haven't heard back from them.
Except they probably did exactly what they said. Example, Candy Crush Saga. Runs on my Galaxy S2 just fine, downloaded it from the Appstore last week. When other Android owners talk to me, they call it the Appstore too. It stopped being an Apple term years ago.

I think you underestimate the stupidity of your example and assumptions. Even my 60 year old parents know that all mobile operating systems have an "Appstore".
Jack Shaftoe is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 09:52 AM   #155
MVRL
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbru View Post
Haha no. Apple had the App Store. Amazon released appstore. Apple preemptively sued, to protect one of their revenue streams. After realizing that Amazon is not even remotely a threat to their business model, they dropped the lawsuit.

Sure, Amazon gets to use "appstore," but Apple is the clear victor.

----------



They didn't. They sued 2 days after the Amazon Appstore was announced. It was preventative. They dropped the suit when it was clear that there was not going to be enough of a problem to matter.

This happens all of the time. It costs like $195 to file a lawsuit, better to get it in early.
you can't be serious.. I genuinely hope that's sarcasm coming out of you..
MVRL is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 10:09 AM   #156
CylonGlitch
macrumors 68030
 
CylonGlitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SoCal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Shaftoe View Post
I think you underestimate the stupidity of your example and assumptions. Even my 60 year old parents know that all mobile operating systems have an "Appstore".
Except in your reference there is no mention of AppStore, just iTunes, which, is APPLE ONLY. As for name calling, that's uncalled for, especially when making a comment that is clearly out of context.
__________________
Last edited by CylonGlitch : Tomorrow at 37:05 AM.
MRoogle
CylonGlitch is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 12:16 PM   #157
Jack Shaftoe
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CylonGlitch View Post
Except in your reference there is no mention of AppStore, just iTunes, which, is APPLE ONLY. As for name calling, that's uncalled for, especially when making a comment that is clearly out of context.
This is a thread about the use of the term "Appstore", not "iTunes" and your example was an "app". Out of context = thinking I called you stupid when I was referring to your example. If you aren't slow, then you can read it again and realize your mistake.

Instead of answering "their" question properly and telling them they might get it from the App Store on their device (whatever it may be called), you responded with an intentionally deceptive and self satisfyingly inaccurate reply - which when I witness I am more than happy to call people out on. It's petty. Now that you've invited many 3rd party observers to the conversation, you are open to the criticism whether you like it or not.

Back to using my rMBP with my Samsung phone. (FWIW I have no loyalty to either platform and switch when necessary)
Jack Shaftoe is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 12:33 PM   #158
KdParker
macrumors 68030
 
KdParker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirpie View Post
I can't imagine explaining to my kids and wife / husband what I did for a living for this time period of my life.

"I was part of a team of high powered lawyers that fought against another group of high powered lawyers over the name appstore for 3 years."

Humans are so ODD.
You wouldn't have to explain. It's a job, that pays (well) and takes care of the family.
__________________
64g iPhone6+Space Grey; 16g iPhone6 Silver;16g iPhone5s Space Grey;
15" retina - MBP 2.6 GHZ 16 RAM;
iPad4 retina
KdParker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 01:33 PM   #159
chrisbru
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVRL View Post
you can't be serious.. I genuinely hope that's sarcasm coming out of you..
Quote:
Originally Posted by MegamanX View Post
Nope you are still wrong.
Apple pretty much is the loser here. Dropping this case is a pretty sure fired deal they will not get the trademark on App store which was being objected by pretty much everyone else as being descriptive which can not be trademarked simple as that.

This just pretty much sealed the deal that Apple is not going to get that trademark. They are giving it up.
For Apple to win the case they first would have to win the trademark which was being hotly contested, then they would again have to win in court that the trademark was valid and then prove Amazon's appstore was causing confusion. Amazon just had to win on any one of those and the risk was very high that Amazon was going to win at stage 1 or 2 and then turn around and sue Apple to make Apple pay all of their legal fees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
Oh. This should be fun. Do tell us how Apple is a clear victor when they didn't achieve what they wanted....
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHateMachine View Post
Nice corporate cheerleader spin ya got there. Bottom line is Amazon gets to keep using the name that Apple wanted them to stop using.
Quote:
Originally Posted by akm3 View Post
Apple is the 'victor' in the sense that their appstore makes more money, but this lawsuit was about using the term appstore.

Apple tried to make it a trademarked term, like Coca Cola. You can have lots of colas, but only one COCA cola. If someone else made a drink called Coca Lola, and Coke sued them, and they can still use the name at the end of the lawsuit, Coke lost. Even it makes more money selling Coca Cola.

Apple lost this one.


I just meant in the scheme of things. I mean, clearly they knew this was a losing case, so Amazon has won the battle against Apple trademarking "App Store." But Apple wasn't wrong to sue on it either, it's better to be preemptive and decide to drop the case later than act too late.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
It is impossible that someone can believe this, even Tim Cook won't believe such PR spin.
That was a joke, it seemed to be the spin MR was trying to put on it.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by chirpie View Post
I can't imagine explaining to my kids and wife / husband what I did for a living for this time period of my life.

"I was part of a team of high powered lawyers that fought against another group of high powered lawyers over the name appstore for 3 years."

Humans are so ODD.
I mean, it's not like those lawyers were working solely on this case. Legal work is kind of cyclical... It will ramp up on one case during discovery, then stall for a while, the ramp back up for more discovery, then stall for a while, then have work to do on pre-trial motions, then stall for a while.

There is a lot of waiting in lawsuits. I'd imagine this one didn't see a whole ton of work hours going into it.
chrisbru is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2013, 09:08 PM   #160
saberahul
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: On my iPad
"With more than 900,000 apps and 50 billion downloads, customers know where they can purchase their favorite apps." > slap in the face to all competitors.
__________________
iPhone iPad MacBook Pro
saberahul is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2013, 11:31 PM   #161
wigby
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I disagree. The whole point of Apple suing was to get Amazon to not be able to use App Store. Ultimately, they failed in doing that. Now you can consider it Amazon's win or Apple's loss. Or you can just state that Apple no longer cares what Amazon calls their app store. Either way, Amazon succeeds in their desire to use the phrase.
There's never just one whole point to suing when dealing with these giant companies. By suing Amazon, Apple scared and stopped hundreds or other appstores from calling themselves app stores. Apple hope to send a message hat they caged a brand and for other to back off. If they won in court, this would've been much easier but they still accomplished this goal to some degree because in 5 years time, this won't matter.

Did they spend a little time and money on a non-verdict? Yes. Would they have liked to have won the lawsuit? Yes.

Did this case cost them any real damage? Nope.
wigby is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2013, 07:06 AM   #162
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by wigby View Post
There's never just one whole point to suing when dealing with these giant companies. By suing Amazon, Apple scared and stopped hundreds or other appstores from calling themselves app stores. Apple hope to send a message hat they caged a brand and for other to back off. If they won in court, this would've been much easier but they still accomplished this goal to some degree because in 5 years time, this won't matter.

Did they spend a little time and money on a non-verdict? Yes. Would they have liked to have won the lawsuit? Yes.

Did this case cost them any real damage? Nope.
I never said they were damaged. And it never really mattered to anyone except the parties involved. No customer cares what the "store" is called as long as there is one - and it has apps.

Please keep in context my post as it was a reply to someone else who said "the case was dropped by apple so it's not a win. there was no ruling or verdict."
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2014, 03:10 PM   #163
Heltik
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilo777 View Post
Nice spin. Of course Apple won. And what do you think Apple loss would mean in this case? The court banning Apple from using the term App Store? Or jailing Tim Cook?
Admittedly, Jailing Tim Cook is a pleasant fiction.
Heltik is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amazon A9 Executive Joins Apple to Work on Maps, App Store Search MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 34 Apr 8, 2014 09:39 PM
'Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition' Returns to App Store Following Contractual Dispute MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 13 Aug 16, 2013 01:35 PM
'Apple Store' iOS App Update Coming Tuesday with Free iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore Deals MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 77 Jul 31, 2013 03:48 AM
Apple and Amazon Ordered to Enter Settlement Talks Over 'App Store' Trademark Issue MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 350 Jan 26, 2013 05:54 AM
Apple and HTC Settle Patent Dispute, Agree to Ten Year License MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 252 Dec 6, 2012 01:23 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:47 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC