1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Apple why are are you so Cheeky?

Discussion in 'Event Archives' started by Yeebles, Jan 12, 2007.

  1. macrumors newbie

    #1
    I love macs they are so cool. I'm a little skeptical over the iPod. But that's a different matter. I know Apple are always using iThis and iThat. However I think it is a bit cheeky that they are using there legions of lawyers to steal Cisco's trademark. I know that it has the i before Phone but thousands of products exsist with the i before product names. It's only because Apple wants the name. Hypothetically if you made a computer screen and called it iScreen. Then if apple made a screen and wanted to use your name How would you feel if they took it from you due to their stronger legal forces? Not happy I presume. That is the same thing happening to Cisco. I do have an idea which could help Apple. If they want to hear it they can email me.

    What is your opinion on Cisco and Apple's dispute?
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    someguy

    #2
    I'm sure they are dying to hear your plan.

    I say may the best man (company) win. To be honest, and this is just opinion, I think Cisco threw the "iPhone" out there because they knew the real iPhone was coming (as did we all) and wanted to bank on it somehow, just like I'm sure iPhone-related email addresses were swiped up recently too.

    I could be wrong, but prove it.
     
  3. SMM
    macrumors 65816

    SMM

    #3
    I think it provides a whole new subject for trolling. I also think it is between Cisco and Apple.
     
  4. Guest

    calculus

    #4
    iDontcare about this dispute.
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    #5
    you make a device that streams media from your mac to your tv .. and you dont call it iTV ..you call is apple tv! .. cuz callign it iTV would be too easy ..

    you make a phone, and want to call it iPhone, but wait! someone already has a device called iPhone .. so what do you do? call it apple phone? naa .. saddle up your lawyers and try to bully them out ..
     
  6. macrumors G4

    #6
    Cisco have owned this trademark for years. Apple were in negotiations to buy it, but for whatever reason they couldn't close the deal in time. Apple should therefore have not announced that the product was going to be called iPhone at the keynote.

    Doing so before the deal was done was a big mistake. Cisco can now triple the price for the name and Apple either have to pay or look humiliated.

    Apple can throw as many lawyers as they like at it now, but that name is still Cisco's property. Last time I looked, Cisco could afford a big legal team of their own. They can't be bullied here.

    EDIT : Although whether the situation worldwide is quite so clear cut is debatable. Article from The Register.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Sweetfeld28

    #7
  8. Guest

    calculus

    #8
    It's because ITV is a television network
     
  9. Moderator emeritus

    #9
    I was thinking that, but Linksys/Cisco filed for the trademark in 1999.

    Yes, it looks like there is more to it, namely expiration of the trademark without usage in time.

    Interesting links. The iPhone is dead, long live the iPhone.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    Sweetfeld28

    #10
    It would be interesting to find out if Apple had some sort of trademark on the letter 'i' when used with a computer, or communication related product. That might put Cisco in its place, being that the 'i'Mac was introduced on May 6, of 1996.

    I know it would be a long shot, but since the US Patent and Trademark Office's site is impossible to search, its just an idea.
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    #11
    and so there also exist ..

    mobitv (television network)
    mobiblu (famous Mp3 Player)
     
  12. macrumors G5

    AidenShaw

    #12
    Actually, it was 1998

    Even then, one could argue that Apple forfeited the right to all "i-products" when it didn't sue Compaq for the iPaq....
     
  13. macrumors member

    #13
    and there is no way they would be allowed to essentially copyright 1 26th of the alphabet.
     
  14. macrumors 68000

    illegalprelude

    #14
    wow, how many times is this topic going to get discussed. Dont Feed the Trolls
     
  15. macrumors regular

    #15
    When it comes right down to it there are many ways to look at this dispute:

    Apple pioneered the "i"XXXX nomenclature, and therefore it seems a little cheesy and cheap for any other company to release products with this format (imho). It's a little bit like Adidas releasing shoes with nike's "Air" name tacked on...

    On the other hand, Cisco did patent the name and release a product with the name - I'm sure apple could've come up with another cool sounding name for the product (one that hasn't been tossed around rumor sites for years).

    At the end of the day, it's really just a corporate debacle, one that has virtually no import to the consumer end, since the cellphone device that Apple has announced will almost certainly be released anyhow (perhaps not as the iPhone in all countries).

    Cisco (seemingly) played by the rules, but at the same time their decision to utilize an apple standard naming format is bigtime unoriginal and deserves to be doomed to the depths of whatever hell exists for such corporate donkeys.
     
  16. macrumors regular

    Annndy!

    #16
    Bottom line is, Apple's going to get the 'iPhone' name, and Cisco is going to be very well compensated for it. So who cares?
     
  17. macrumors 65816

    Luis

    #17
    Yep, totally the truth.
     

Share This Page