Amazon Responds to Apple's Trademark Lawsuit Over 'App Store'

[pyramid6]

I think that these two quotes from Tim Cook during the last Apple quarterly call, put the nail in the coffin:

"We've got the largest app store ..."

"... iPhone's integrated approach is materially better than Android's fragmented approach, where you have multiple OSs on multiple devices with different screen resolutions and multiple app stores with different ... "

Since Apple itself uses the word generically, I don't see how anyone can argue that it's not.

Isn't this what Amazon filed recently?

There are some interesting reads about trademarks on Wikipedia. I think one of the reasons Google doesn't want people to use the term "google it", is because it makes the trademark generic, and they can lose it.

 

[mefck]

NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image

Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.

Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.

Now step away from the keyboard.

Thank you for saving me the time to post this.

There is NO trademark yet.

 

[mefck]

Apple, Mac, Macintosh are all generic terms and should not be a compant or product name.

Some for the name Windows for Microsoft.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

If you are not, please stop comment of things you know nothing about, i.e. trademark law.

 

[mefck]

And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.

Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.

If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.

A huge difference.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image

Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.

Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.

Now step away from the keyboard.

Yes Apple was given approval to use the trademark but not the final awarding of the trademark. See my other post. I acknowledged this.

And I'm still at my keyboard.

Thank you for saving me the time to post this.

There is NO trademark yet.

Yes I was wrong and discovered the error.

 

[urbanj]

does apple compare themselves with other brand using the term "apps"

If they do I'd think you'd have to say it's a generic term since apple is calling the stuff run on other devices apps as well.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

It is my understanding that "Application Store" is a generic term, however "App Store" could be considered a trademark even though it is an abbreviation of the former.

I am not saying that is right or Microsoft and Amazon is right, I am looking at this as what the term generic means. Having an abbreviation of a generic term might mean has a case, then again its a grey area.

My prediction, the Judge will simple inform Microsoft and Amazon and Others to change it to "Application Store" and all will be well.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

does apple compare themselves with other brand using the term "apps"

If they do I'd think you'd have to say it's a generic term since apple is calling the stuff run on other devices apps as well.

I remember the abbreviation "App" being used long before related it to its "App Store." Nothing new to see here, just trying to brand something that was used generically in the 90's.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

I still think amazon can win this case as their name is "appstore" instead of "app store" in many icons. When typed as text, the full name given is usually "amazon app store", not just app store.

So it is possible Apple could get the final app store trademark approval after challenges from Microsoft, etc. and still lose this case against amazon.

 

[CalBoy]

I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.

Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.

"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.

Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.

Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.

In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.

The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.

Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.

The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.

Apple will win this.

This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.

Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.

You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?

I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.

You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.

Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.




It was.

Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).

 

[LagunaSol]

trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.

Trademarking office. How pompous. What's next, trademarking word and windows?

And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.

Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.

If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.

A huge difference.

No difference at all, really. The concept of windows in GUI computing was introduced long before Microsoft decided to clone Mac OS. Windows in computing is just as generic a term as windows in your home.

 

[pmjoe]

Trademarking office. How pompous. What's next, trademarking word and windows?

[...]

No difference at all, really. The concept of windows in GUI computing was introduced long before Microsoft decided to clone Mac OS. Windows in computing is just as generic a term as windows in your home.

What Microsoft sells is an Operating System, not a GUI element. Apple is welcome to rename their OS to "Buttons" or "Menus" and trademark that for their OS name if they choose.

 

[roadbloc]

"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.

So is "Apple".

Why can't anyone come up with original company names? Like Microsoft.

 

[gnasher729]

trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.

Well, last saturday I went to a shopping centre, and they had two computer stores, at least three book stores, a pet store, and exactly zero app stores. Have you ever, ever in your life gone to an app store? You know anyone who works as a sales assistant in an app store? Any app stores offering jobs?

 

[bassfingers]

well we all know who really controls the goverment and everyone involved ... companies. so whoever throws more money at them is obvs gonna win

silliness

 

[silentnite]

All I can say is why didn't I think about trademarking terms like app store back in my O.S.9 & apple Mac works 6 days, etc. The hell with all of it. I would have been having the last laugh today.

 

[Genetheninja]

Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.

I agree!!

 

[LagunaSol]

What Microsoft sells is an Operating System, not a GUI element. Apple is welcome to rename their OS to "Buttons" or "Menus" and trademark that for their OS name if they choose.

Microsoft has a trademarked OS name that is a common GUI element. They also trademarked the word "Word" for a word processing application. Where's the outrage?

Amazon could have very easily chosen a suitable name that did not exactly mirror what Apple had already chosen. Apple's other competitors have managed to do so. What would be wrong with "Amazon Apps?" Amazon picked Amazon Appstore looking for a fight.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

I see people here still digging up the old WORD and WINDOWS argument that gets debunked every damn time someone brings it up.

Microsoft has a trademarked OS name that is a common GUI element. They also trademarked the word "Word" for a word processing application. Where's the outrage?

Amazon could have very easily chosen a suitable name that did not exactly mirror what Apple had already chosen. Apple's other competitors have managed to do so. What would be wrong with "Amazon Apps?" Amazon picked Amazon Appstore looking for a fight.

Because its actually "Microsoft Word".

Big difference.

"Apple App Store"

Done! Call it a day. Job well done.

 

[macthetiger85]

Windows and Amazon are not a generic names. If Microsoft would have named it "Operating System" then that would be generic. If Amazon were named "Online Store" then that would be generic. I'm sure Amazon could have named App Store something else, but then again, it's such a known term now that instantly helps customers identify what they are looking at.

I like Apple products, but they're beginning to be one of the most anal companies out there.

Actually windows is generic - a windows OS is an operating system with a GUI that uses a desktop and windows (such as finder, word processors etc) developed by XEROX and first mass produced for the Apple Lisa. The generic term for that type of OS among others was windows OS - then Microsoft came out with a windowing OS and called it Windows and trademarked it. Microsoft is actually arguing against Apple exactly what they did years ago. Back on topic though - it doesn't matter - Amazon is using it while Apple has already filed for the mark. The courts will settle this and if it goes to Apple, Amazon will pay big and have to change their name. Would have been simpler to just change their name to begin with.

 

[LagunaSol]

I see people here still digging up the old WORD and WINDOWS argument that gets debunked every damn time someone brings it up.

Not "debunked." More like "skirted."

Because its actually "Microsoft Word".

Big difference.

Nonsense. I dare you to develop and release a word processing application for Windows called "Mattie Num Nums Word" and see how long it takes before Ballmer is on the phone with you.

Google Word? Apple Word? These would never fly and you know it. Your argument holds no water.

 

[macthetiger85]

Also i've never had a Mac.

Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.

If that is the case all Apple is doing is shortening their Mac name Applications to App. Everyone else is just copying them.

Everyone else can call them programs and lets call it a day.

Mac OS has used applications since i can remember - Jobs has used apps in keynotes to refer to Apple's apps way before iPhone.

 

[fxtech]

Amazon "One Click" not only use generic words but also patents obvious methods.

What does this have to do with patents?

 

[macthetiger85]

I think you are missing the point:

"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?

Registration may be refused if the mark is:

• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"


Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf


App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.

This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.

Example:

Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.

so a geographic term like, o, let's say, Amazon would fall within that same rule right?

 

[macthetiger85]

And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.

Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.

If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.

A huge difference.

that's innacurate