It would justify your attempt, at the very least. Your reasoning would make sense, regardless of how willing courts would be to apply it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Denied Trademark for Multi-Touch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It would justify your attempt, at the very least. Your reasoning would make sense, regardless of how willing courts would be to apply it.
lol i remember when i got my first iPhone back in the day everyone was like where is the stylus??? when i told them it doesnt have one everyone was like omg, how stupid is that
I know quite a few people who are actually very disappointed with the lack of stylus these days. Don't get me wrong, they do like the capacative screens, but when it comes to things like note taking many people prefer to use a stylus that transcribes, rather than type on a keyboard. It would seem that there's quite a market for it, but people are too obessed with the younger generation to take notice of the market that would actually like a stylus.
I agree that "multi-touch" is a generic term, but I'm 99% sure that Apple made the phrase popular with the iPhone.
I would LOVE a stylus. Drawing with a finger is like driving a car with your hands stuffed inside turkeys. I know people who can make amazing pieces on the iPhone but probably a few people would manage just fine with the turkeys. Most likely some would actually improve.
Doesn't really matter if the phrase wouldn't have become popular without Apple - because the term is used generically, Apple could not be granted the trademark. Trademarks could even be revoked if the population starts using it generically and the trademark owner doesn't make an effort to prevent this (Velcro and Aspirin are the two examples that come to mind... almost happened to Xerox and Band-aid)
I don't understand why it takes 4 years to decide?? Surely if they had decided back in 2007 the term wouldn't be commonly used?
I'm not saying apple should be granted a trademark but since it was applied for in 2007 they should decide a bit faster, don't you think?!
I'm not saying apple should be granted a trademark but since it was applied for in 2007 they should decide a bit faster, don't you think?!
If people are trying to trademark words like "multitouch" do you realize what else people are trying to trademark? EVERYTHING! It might have something to do with why it takes a bit of time.
Having been through the trademark process several times myself, the fastest I've personally ever seen it happen is 18 months from filing to issuance of a registration number.
This is provided no one opposes your filing.
As for the term "multi-touch" it has been used in the tech industry long before Apple thought of applying it to any of their products.
I thought it was a very presumptuous, if not out right arrogant of them for even trying to make such a claim to the term.
The USPTO does not rely solely on the general public's awareness of a word or phrase when making their determinations.
Some terms are industry specific but can still be considered descriptive or generic even though you and I have never heard of it before.
One thing people are forgetting: it only became commonly used after Apple developed and introduced it. Oh wait, it was purely coincidence that other companies released it sometime after Apple hurrrr durrrr
(less effectively, mind you).
This was a decision based on an April 20, 2011 hearing that was to an Appeal Board after their original request in 2007 was denied. All of that information is in the original post of this thread.
I didn't see a single thing in that video that was multitouch. Everything was based on using a single finger. That's not multitouch.
Ah, didn't catch that. If I read in depth the entirety of every article I see I'd never have time for anything else.
Trademark, trademark, TRADEMARK! If you're going to discuss IP rulings, at least manage to keep the three different types straight!
Edit: And while we're at it, complaining about Microsoft trademarking the name "Windows" for an OS when Apple named theirs "OS#" is extra rich.
I don't know which is more cute. That you think Apple developed Multi touch, or that you think everyone else is "less effective" at implementing it.One thing people are forgetting: it only became commonly used after Apple developed and introduced it. Oh wait, it was purely coincidence that other companies released it sometime after Apple hurrrr durrrr
Multi touch phones existed before the iPhone.
Making an existing technology popular doesn't mean you can claim ownership of it.
not shocking, too bad it took so long back in 07 they might have had a better chance. anyway life goes on
uh, no apple didn't invent the process, THEY BOUGHT THE COMPANY WHO DID INVENT MULTITOUCH CAPACITANCE screens though....
i've noticed an on going trend of clueless people commenting about stuff they have no idea about.. and no no one would be using the term Multitouch screen if the iPhone were never invented... not Android, not anyone.
although the term shouldn't be trademarked because most terms should not be trademarked, and most things should not be patented, the idiot review board using Android as an example is just plain idiotic, there would be no multitouch android capacitance screens if there was no iPhone, Android was a feature phone OS that had no touch capabilities, until Andy lifted the ideas from apple, by the way, Andy worked at Apple before buying Android, and then working for Google...
also Eric was on the Apple board while the iPhone was being developed..
hence the multi-touch Android system, (which still took nearly two years to modify the old Android to get to work as a poor copy of the iOS operating system after the iPhone had been shipping)
that is how out of touch that idiot is....
well Apple choose not to defend it either. Apple could of fought to keep it from being used by other companies as it was pending . Apple choose not to really defend it which tells you even Apple knew it would never really hold up.
App Store for example Apple is trying to defend it with Amazon but the judge pretty much told Apple that it is too generic and as such not going to grant a injunction against Amazon as he sees it being denied.
I don't know which is more cute. That you think Apple developed Multi touch, or that you think everyone else is "less effective" at implementing it.
Multi touch phones existed before the iPhone.
Making an existing technology popular doesn't mean you can claim ownership of it.
It's also real cute that you think Apple was trying to patent a technology when it is plainly clear that they were trying to trademark a word.
It's "commonly used tech" that came to market with the iPhone, and was implemented by the company who filed the application. No one else was selling a device with the mass-market appeal of this device at the time, and multi-touch wasn't a household term in 2007.
The USPTO should consider how commonplace "Multi-Touch" was when the application was filed.