Analysts: iPhone Trademark Dispute Likely To Be Resolved Quickly

[nemaslov]

what the heck does the "i" mean anyway. what happened to having the company in the name. macbook, why not a apple phone, i mean apple tv... i bet when it is released, it will be called the apple phone

it started a decade or so ago when the first iMac was released...basically an (internet) mac which was promoted as the first computer specially made to go on line surf the net and check emails. It was all about the INTERNET.

How about: eyePhone since you can view it as well as talk it!!!

YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST! i think. Geez I should copyright that fast.....CARP I just checked and someone in Great Britain has the domain name registered....

 

[UrsaMajor]

I love Apple, but Cisco does have rights here and was using it first. Apple's legal team is quick to jump on any kid or company that slaps *pod on anything, it's difficult to feel for them when they blatantly take someone else's name and run with it.

True, this legal debacle could give extra attention to their product, we'll see what they're really up to in time.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Meh!!

Apple could call this thing the iThingy and I would still buy it. The only thing holding me up is this Cingular thing.

 

[chromos]

A vote for ApplePhone (or Phone). I mean, they recognize the strength of the Apple brand (with their recent name change), so why not eat the dog food? I'm kinda tired of i-everything too.

Besides, there's no conflict now, but what will happen when the iPhone does VOIP?

 

[cxny]

fonePod? I don't really care I just want to know when I can get one without that annoying phone part. They seem to be sitting on the video iPod of our dreams and have CRIPPLED it with the Cingular bull. They could sell 10x more without the phone attached (and probably will....)

 

[Whistleway]

Cisco should release a music player called iPod

 

[icrew]

iPod Phone

Not that my opinion matters, but they should call it "iPod Phone" and build it on top of the huge success of the iPod brand.

Exactly! Everyone would abbreviate it to iPhone anyway.....

 

[reevans]

BINGO!!! I was wondering if this was planned with Cisco actually? Is Steve chummy with anyone at Cisco upper management?



Ain't that the truth! Again, I fall back to my conspiracy theory that this is brilliant marketing through the press!

Cisco couldn't buy their advertising for the IP-phone either for the price of starting a bogus litigation. Both Apple and Cisco will come out ahead when they agree to a name change in May or there abouts.

 

[iAlan]

Other iPhones...

Comwave
http://www.comwave.net/CDN/iPhone/iPhone_mobile.htm
http://www.comwave.net/CDN/iPhone/index.htm

Teledex
http://www.teledex.com/index.cfm?page=LP_3&crid=13

Etronicsland
http://www.etronicsland.com/VOIP_SKYPE_Phones-iPHONE_VOIP_SKYPE_USB_PHONE.html

egenius
http://www.evortex.co.uk/product_info.php?products_id=5114&osCsid=5ebdba9ff71128699f05b011cc8e9180

maltanet
http://www.maltanet.net/page.jsp?id=6520&siteid=1&mainid=6520

iPhone
http://iphone.com/

Software
http://www.freenet.de/freenetiphone/download/software_telefon/index.html

I love Apple, but Cisco does have rights here and was using it first. Apple's legal team is quick to jump on any kid or company that slaps *pod on anything, it's difficult to feel for them when they blatantly take someone else's name and run with it.

True, this legal debacle could give extra attention to their product, we'll see what they're really up to in time.

It seems Cisco was not first either...

I also read somewhere that Apple has registered iPhone in the USA under a different category than Cisco - one being a communications device the other a computer peripheral or something like that(don't know squat about intellectual property)

All I got to say is that iPhone will become the generic term for any phone that has VoIP or 'real' internet access - much like 'Scotch tape' is the general word for adhesive tape, 'lino' or 'linoleum' for plastic flooring material, 'escalator' for moving stairs, 'walkman’ for portable tape player - the list goes on. Sure the companies behind these 'brands' fought hard to keep the rights but these are now general vocabulary for most of us. Let's not forget about 'to Xerox' now meaning 'to photocopy' or 'Google' meaning 'to search for something on the internet'.

Anyways, Apple (or Apple logo) iPhone should work fine...

 

[rish]

It's all about the stash, I mean cash

It seems Cisco was not first either...

I also read somewhere that Apple has registered iPhone in the USA under a different category than Cisco - one being a communications device the other a computer peripheral or something like that(don't know squat about intellectual property)

All I got to say is that iPhone will become the generic term for any phone that has VoIP or 'real' internet access - much like 'Scotch tape' is the general word for adhesive tape, 'lino' or 'linoleum' for plastic flooring material, 'escalator' for moving stairs, 'walkman’ for portable tape player - the list goes on. Sure the companies behind these 'brands' fought hard to keep the rights but these are now general vocabulary for most of us. Let's not forget about 'to Xerox' now meaning 'to photocopy' or 'Google' meaning 'to search for something on the internet'.

Anyways, Apple (or Apple logo) iPhone should work fine...

As always Apple has received a great deal of attention world wide regarding the trademark dispute.

Guarantee that Cisco will leverage their position for an increased licence fee for the right to use the "iPhone" based on media ,attention. This will be resolved and we'll soon forget there ever was a dispute.

On the other hand Apple goes nads in hand to court with Cisco and prevail based on many comms devices already using the iPhone name, what the Cisco iPhone trademark description is (how it differs from Apple etc) add to the mix that there are other trademarks under the same name for differing products. Oh the merriment.

 

[Hashton]

As always Apple has received a great deal of attention world wide regarding the trademark dispute.

Guarantee that Cisco will leverage their position for an increased licence fee for the right to use the "iPhone" based on media ,attention. This will be resolved and we'll soon forget there ever was a dispute.

On the other hand Apple goes nads in hand to court with Cisco and prevail based on many comms devices already using the iPhone name, what the Cisco iPhone trademark description is (how it differs from Apple etc) add to the mix that there are other trademarks under the same name for differing products. Oh the merriment.

With a lawyer that Apple has, who left IBM to get hired by Apple, they can literally call their product anything they like, even if Cisco has a trademark that doesn't mean a thing! Their Lawyer is a Monster hehe

And their was a great assumption in some mac forum, related to why Apple didn't sign the papers, it might be that Cisco asked quite a bit more of a fee for the Name, after they saw the Macworld's intro of an actual iPhone and Steve just sad if you want to sue, bring it on...one of the conspiracy theories, that might be true *smiles*...I personally do not see any challenge or what the dispute is about...

 

[Counter]

This will resolved quickly as it does neither party any good. Unless the lawyers smell blood (money) that is...

It could do Cisco a whole load of good ($$$$$$$$$$$$)

I'd be very surprised if Cisco didn't know that Apple was going public with iPhone as the name for their phone. As the last rumor said. Because if they didn't, that is Apple shooting themselves in the foot with a very large cannon. They are far more committed to the iPhone name now than they were when just in discussions with Cisco before Macworld. Cisco could charge them ten fold for the name now.

And if did go through full court proceedings, surely it would only take the judge 7 seconds to realise "Uh, Cisco trademarked iPhone, you can't use it" *throws case out of court*

Something ain't right in the news related to the iPhone name.

 

[chibianh]

Check this out...

An investigation into the ongoing trademark dispute between Cisco and Apple over the name "iPhone" appears to show that Cisco does not own the mark as claimed in their recent lawsuit. This is based on publicly available information from the US Patent and Trademark office, as well as public reviews of Cisco products over the past year. The trademark was apparently abandoned in late 2005/early 2006 because Cisco was not using it.

Here's the article I found this from.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=236

I guess Apple found out right before Tuesday, so they never sent back signed papers to Cisco.

 

[timon]

Your right about all of the other iPhones. If Cisco looses the trademark that will be the reason why. Those have been around for a while and Cisco did nothing. Also Apple never said anything about iPhone in the months leading up to the launch but everyone else did. Everyone talked about iPhone being Apple's new phone. The market place made the iPhone name to Apple connection not Apple. I'm not a legal expert but Apple can say: Cisco did not use the trademark for over 6 years so they abanded the trademark and the world made the iPhone to Apple connection. We shall see what we shall see.

Your totally wrong about Intel though. Switching to Intel was the best thing Apple did to help get more people using the Mac. Since the Intel switch the number of Macs sold has gone way up. Also it's much easier to be able to support those few applications that only run on a PC. Thumbs up Apple.

Other iPhones...

Comwave
http://www.comwave.net/CDN/iPhone/iPhone_mobile.htm
http://www.comwave.net/CDN/iPhone/index.htm

Teledex
http://www.teledex.com/index.cfm?page=LP_3&crid=13

Etronicsland
http://www.etronicsland.com/VOIP_SKYPE_Phones-iPHONE_VOIP_SKYPE_USB_PHONE.html

egenius
http://www.evortex.co.uk/product_info.php?products_id=5114&osCsid=5ebdba9ff71128699f05b011cc8e9180

maltanet
http://www.maltanet.net/page.jsp?id=6520&siteid=1&mainid=6520

iPhone
http://iphone.com/

Software
http://www.freenet.de/freenetiphone/download/software_telefon/index.html

 

[SpookTheHamster]

When I saw that they were calling the iTV the TV, I thought that they were thinking about moving away from the "i". It's getting tired now, too many companies are copying it.