Apple Defends Against Microsoft in 'App Store' Trademark Dispute

[rogerdee123]

"APP" is the abbreviation for "APPLE" isn't it ...


It's only coincidence that "App" could also possibly be misunderstood as "Application"

I is known that Microsoft has referred to Applications as "Apps"...Longer than Apple.

Windows Mobile 6.5 has had times when they refer to them as "App's" too

So by the same logic Apple is using,...

Microsoft should be allowed to block Apple from using the term "App" All together !!

Now don't go all fanboy on me guys,....

I'm just pointing out a fact.

 

[parish]

What's the betting Apple already have trademarked 'iStore'? Although it wouldn't work too well for the Mac App Store (and Apple haters would probably call it 'eye sore' ).

Also, I suspect that after the years that this case will no doubt drag on for, the term 'App Store' will be so entrenched in the public's mind that it will continue to be used even if Apple loses - how many people have stopped referring to the Mighty Mouse even though Apple lost that one and now just call it Apple Mouse?

 

[tatonka]

pics like this make me happy

I always wonder why that is ..
I don't know whether you own Apple stock or not, but what is the point of being happy about MS not doing as well as Apple does?

On topic. AppStore is way to generic to become a trademark in opinion. As for Windows, I believe their trademark on that term is very limited to certain applications and even that is debatable. However, just be because MS was granted some BS trademark, doesn't mean everybody else should have the same right. It should mean, somebody should go against that BS trademark in the first place. Two wrongs do not make a right.

T.

 

[twilson]

I guess in a sense its replacement.

iChat is on my Hackintosh, but I'm sure Lion wont have it.

Should have put it differently.

iChat is an instant messaging/desktop sharing application with a deep routed heritage in text-based communications.

Facetime is ONLY video calling.

I should have spelt it out originally, it would seem.

 

[tatonka]

What is the point for MS to fight Apple for this?

You think "App Store" . . . you think "Apple."

MS already lost. Mindshare is on Apple's side. Overwhelmingly.

Maybe if they spent more time actually bringing great things to market like Apple they wouldn't spend time and money on wasteful BS like this. Skewed priorities and lousy management at MS causes retarded decision-making, causing them to look like idiots in major growth markets.

Yet another reason Apple has MS in their rearview.

Fix your lousy consumer products, MS. Fix your mobile stuff. Fix your OS. Quit adding complexity on top of more complexity. Quit promising things today that you'll only manage to deliver 3-4 years AFTER someone else has already perfected the idea. Quit shoving bad OSes onto 1000000 different hardware configurations. Start paying attention to detail. Grow some balls and take risks. Start making your own hardware and start controlling the platform. Stop whoring out your bad software to anyone that can slam together a box. You didn't actually win the desktop wars, you just licensed your crap to everyone, so that eventually everyone was running different versions and configurations of the same crap. This is why you make Apple look so brilliant these days.

It's all about priorities. Pursuing Apple over what Apple already chewed up and spat out; getting people to install cameras in their living rooms so they can jump around in front of their Xboxes; being late to market with stuff someone else did better two years ago, etc. The list goes on.

I hope MS loses (not that "winning" in this case will make any difference for them), because it might finally wake them up to market realities, namely, that they're a lame organization that can no longer compete on product strength (I can't recall the last time they really did) but on licensing rackets.

A couple things. First, no offence, but I don't think you are able to judge what people think when they hear AppStore. And again, no offence, but you seem to like Apple a lot, to say the least, and probably many of the people you interact with on a daily base do too .. not exactly an unbiased environment there.

MS products may be "lame", but know what .. in the business world, IT managers do not and should not care for exiting and magical products. They should and do buy things that get the job done best for a good price. And currently that is mostly MS stuff and a plethora of PC hardware vendors backing them up. There is simply no point in spending $1000-1500 for the cheapest Mac to equip a single desk, when a $500 PC will do the same job.

Lastly. Of all things, you pick the XBox and the Kinect system to bash MS? MS gaming is the most successful department in the entire company and the Kinect system is truly revolutionary in the level of accuracy and detail it captures. The XBox is the most sold console these days, unmatched in its online capabilities .. what more do you want?

T.

 

[Steve121178]

Apple deserves this trademark! They pioneered apps and the multitouch devices they work on!

No they didn't.

 

[kwfl]

The trademarks don't include "Microsoft" in them though. That's where your argument fails on point 1.

As for patents:
1) Yes you can. It's actually easier when you are the first to market since you are the prior art which prevents anyone else from patenting it before you (in the US anyhow).
2) These aren't patents, they are trademarks. The trademark was filed for which takes some time to process. Microsoft has filed a complaint which is partly the reason for it taking it slow.

Ok, since they dont have the word microsoft in front of them, i agree.

I have to admit this difference between trademarks and patents got me confused, but the whole idea of restricting terms like these, windows, office, apple, app store, are really crazy. Maybe, they can help innovation by driving people to invent new english words. Something that might be a big acheivement to some.

 

[Locker]

I is known that Microsoft has referred to Applications as "Apps"...Longer than Apple.

Windows Mobile 6.5 has had times when they refer to them as "App's" too

So by the same logic Apple is using,...

Microsoft should be allowed to block Apple from using the term "App" All together !!

Now don't go all fanboy on me guys,....

I'm just pointing out a fact.

AFAIK, Apple have used the term 'Applications' or 'Apps' for their desktop software for a longer time, as opposed to Microsoft calling them 'Programs' - so I don't think that's a valid point.

 

[08380728]

Microsoft go fsck yourself. You've NEVER used the th term "Apps" in your *****TY monopolist world, your term is "programs" or "proggies". Stop crying, stop copying and stop trying to cash in on the good fortunes and innovations of other companies, ESP Apple. Die a horrible death for all I care, and stop feeding monkey boy cheese, his head is uglier than ever.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

you mean repair shop websites?

lol

I'm also laughing at the argument on this thread that Apple is the one copying others for being innovative. Talk about a warped view. Apple is the most copied company in the tech world.

 

[Denarius]

Microsoft go fsck yourself. You've NEVER used the th term "Apps" in your *****TY monopolist world, your term is "programs" or "proggies". Stop crying, stop copying and stop trying to cash in on the good fortunes and innovations of other companies, ESP Apple. Die a horrible death for all I care, and stop feeding monkey boy cheese, his head is uglier than ever.

The question isn't whether MS used the word app to refer to an application, the question is whether enough people in general referred to any application as an app in order for it to be considered generic.

Easiest way is to check whether app turns up in a dictionary as an abbreviation for application before Apple attempted to trademark it.

Interestingly, if it is established that the term is generic then Apple's case is weaker than Microsofts: what Apple calls an app is an application program. Microsoft Windows however is not strictly just a group of windows objects: it's an operating system and nobody was referring to Operating Systems generically as windows before Microsoft. That's the distinction in my view.

 

[zin]

No they didn't.

Who did?

 

[ten-oak-druid]

As I recall, Apple shortened the term application when it launched the first real smart phone. The term then carried over to programs on other smart phones that copied Apple's iphone.

 

[spazzcat]

A couple things. First, no offence, but I don't think you are able to judge what people think when they hear AppStore. And again, no offence, but you seem to like Apple a lot, to say the least, and probably many of the people you interact with on a daily base do too .. not exactly an unbiased environment there.

MS products may be "lame", but know what .. in the business world, IT managers do not and should not care for exiting and magical products. They should and do buy things that get the job done best for a good price. And currently that is mostly MS stuff and a plethora of PC hardware vendors backing them up. There is simply no point in spending $1000-1500 for the cheapest Mac to equip a single desk, when a $500 PC will do the same job.

Lastly. Of all things, you pick the XBox and the Kinect system to bash MS? MS gaming is the most successful department in the entire company and the Kinect system is truly revolutionary in the level of accuracy and detail it captures. The XBox is the most sold console these days, unmatched in its online capabilities .. what more do you want?

T.

Do you have any idea how many millions companies must pay Microsoft every year? Even if they don't upgrade or do anything diffenent...

 

[Kildeer]

The way I see it is that it has always been called applications (app for short) in OS X and programs in Windows so take a hike MS.

 

[Popeye206]

lol

I'm also laughing at the argument on this thread that Apple is the one copying others for being innovative. Talk about a warped view. Apple is the most copied company in the tech world.

Personally... I just think it's funny people are so wound up on Apple trying to get a silly trademark.

For a trademark, it does not matter who did what, it's a matter of is it unique and can you defend it. Boring lawyers can sort that out. As for us, arguing about it is silly.

 

[Denarius]

Personally... I just think it's funny people are so wound up on Apple trying to get a silly trademark.

For a trademark, it does not matter who did what, it's a matter of is it unique and can you defend it. Boring lawyers can sort that out. As for us, arguing about it is silly.

Fair point. It's reasonable that people might be interested in the challenge and have an opinion on the eventual outcome, but it's odd that anyone should get so excited about a naming argument between 2 large corporations. Maybe they should have corporate litigation on Pay per View instead of football.

 

[JAT]

Yep. Unlike being forced to go crying back to Apple who will take care of you for a couple hundred more dollars for a 5 dollar fix.


But they love you!

Seriously, if you need a $5 repair and can't do it yourself, how the hell did you even find the internet to get on a forum like this?

 

[nedz06]

Hello to all! I'm really new to this forum and I think I really will enjoy staying here.

You'll surely do.

 

[lPHONE]

The single greatest most epic part about all of this is the psychology of persistence: Remember when this story first came to light and people here were siding with Microsoft? I don't know if people are just sick of hearing about it or it's been implanted in their skulls, but the mentality has clearly shifted...

The sound of victory is resonating in the air. 

 

[Monkey Butler]

Wow, so many replies to this thread and such little understanding of IP law.

Here's the thing: you can't trademark a generic name. I can't start selling chairs and then apply for a trademark for the word 'chair'. A chair is a chair, and that's it. I could probably get away with a trademark for selling chairs under the brand name 'Lemons', because using a generic name for a totally different product may be protected (like calling a computer program Windows, for example), and I could possibly get away with a trademark for the brand name 'Chares', because a misspelling is no longer generic (which is why you see so many brand names with 'Ezy' or whatever), but that's not what MS has filed a complaint about. What MS is complaining about is that, in their eyes, 'app store' is just a generic term for a virtual software marketplace, and so should not be given the protection of trademark.

To get around the 'genericness' test, Apple has to demonstrate that even though 'app store' may be generic, the term has become intrinsically linked in the public's perception to Apple's app stores.
MS are certainly making this complaint for selfish reasons (and really, why shouldn't they try to, if they think they can win?), but the amount of mindless bashing going on here is frankly embarrassing. Personally, I'd say the term is too generic to warrant a trademark, but it really doesn't affect anyone here in the slightest.

 

[tatonka]

Do you have any idea how many millions companies must pay Microsoft every year? Even if they don't upgrade or do anything diffenent...

Not sure what your point is?

Every Windows copy could be purchased in on their own as a one time purchase, no recurring payments necessary. Larger companies buy these bulk licenses, because they are actually cheaper than single licenses, so they are saving money by doing so.
Second, since there is soo many different PCs you can buy, every company can get exactly what they need. For a regular accountant desktop, there is no need for fancy graphics or excessive amounts of memory or disk space, so you can buy a pretty cheap (still brand) computer.

T.

 

[Winni]

Apple's got the best lawyers and $60 billion dollars. You aren't going to beat them in court, ever, anywhere.

That statement only shows how screwed up the US-American legal system is. So poor people never have a chance in court against rich people? What happened to equality before the law?

The good news in this case is that Microsoft also has excellent lawyers and a chest full of war money to spend on such things and Microsoft is not afraid of that company that they internally call "RD South". And they've won more serious battles against Apple before.

 

[Gurner]

Henry Ford didn't invent motorized personal transportation. Then why is he credited as "inventing the car?" He did it right. He invented the assembly line, created a vastly superior motor vehicle that got it right, and made it practical and realistic for every day people to purchase.

That's a really poor example.

1. The motor car was invented by Karl Benz. I don't think Ford is credited as 'inventor of the car' anywhere (outside of the USA... )

2. The first mass-produced motor car which had a layout anything like a car of today was the Austin 7. Any driver of a modern car would be able to drive an Austin 7, whereas you'd have to be taught how to drive a Model T.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_7

3. The only thing Ford 'got right' was the mass production, not the car itself. Saying Ford invented the motor car is a bit like saying Michael Dell invented the computer.

 

[lPHONE]

I always wonder why that is ..
I don't know whether you own Apple stock or not, but what is the point of being happy about MS not doing as well as Apple does?

Did you miss the part where I wished they'd die and burn in hell?

Your next question might be one of "why do you care so much about MS?"
My response to that would be "Why do you care what I think?"

Since you so covertly asked: Because I hate Microsoft.

I hate how they ripped off the Mac and took credit for it and I hate how they did a half ass job at it and still flooded the world with their crapware. I hate how XP embedded itself as the business standard and how I was forced to buy a PC for work. I hate how Bill Gates being the richest man in the world and can't wait for him to fall. I hate how Apple released the iPod and Microsoft copied them with the Zune. I hate how Apple released the iPhone and MS copied them. App Store: Copped. iPad: Copied. I hate how they can't come up anything original. I think their scum and they should be exterminated.

What?