I think Apple's fortunes are far too tied to a closed off communist government. I think they need to diversify. I see no one complaining when the Chinese government prioritizes the interests of Chinese business first but let someone like Donald Trump prioritize American workers and American business people get all upset....
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 Forced to Share 'iPhone' Trademark in China With Leather Accessory Maker [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Companies buy rare earth magnets/materials from China because it is cheap, mined by companies partly owned by the Chinese gov. in a country with weak environmental laws. Apple is can pay more for the materials from USA companies anytime it wants.
What USA companies? I hope you're not talking about Molycorp. They're damn near a dead man walking. They're working through bankruptcy trying to shed about $1.5 billion in debt. The idea of trying to mine rare earths in an environmentally responsible way, while noble, proved to be their undoing. Maybe Lynas out of Australia could boost their supply. China controls 90-95% of rare earth mining and processing. Not sure why you think Apple has all of this leverage. They don't.
THANK YOU. China has massive clout in this area and people like to simply say "oh it's because it's cheap" and while partly true, it tells nowhere near the extent of the story.
To actually tackle a complex issue you first have to admit that it is one.
Wow, dont like that comparison at all. Is the word window or windows immediately associated with Microsoft? No. When you say iPhone to anyone, do they immediately think of Apple? Yes. Under your analogy (and Im asking, as I dont know) I could start making a jacket and put decals all over the jacket and call it Ford. Its the Ford windbreaker. After all, they just own the name Ford for cars. So people wont think my jacket is made by the Ford motor co??? Come on. Of course they would.
I think you're right.
Apple Phone, Apple Laptop, Apple Pad... It's a terrific naming convention.
Sadly Apple has a death grip on their culture of Narcissism. Created, nurtured and advanced by none other than Steve Jobs, iEverything was the result. Frankly I was surprised when someone at Apple approved "Apple Watch" leaving out the i.
Regarding this issue in China, it's no surprise to me. Only those who don't understand that country, it's politics and practices, are surprised. Common misconceptions about China abound.
You're wrong. I keep saying MR forum members should never use cars in analogies because we have no idea what we're talking about. Evidence? Your quote. Ford has trademarks in multiple categories, clothing being just one.
http://companyprofiles.justia.com/company/ford-motor/trademarks
I stopped on page 8 of their trademarks. I have no idea how many they actually have.
Patient to wait for current launches. No anything will do. Prototype iMac from 2000, prototype iPods, etc.
The difference:
- Windows is a generic name, so they don't even have IP rights over it in every country. iPhone is Apple's name for their phone and they have the IP everywhere.
- Some shonky company (more than likely with corrupt government links) stole the name and rigged the court decision. People will now buy their cases (which they wouldn't have even known about if it weren't for them breaching Apple's IP) and some corrupt Chinese dudes will be raking it in.
A more apt analogy would be if Pepsi tried selling Pepsi in China. Some corrupt company with government links then backdated the IP register (without ever having a product) and said 'nup... we own Pepsi, sorry guys.' They then start using Pepsi's logo and selling cola in China, where they make lotsa cash. When Pepsi say 'heeey you can't do that!!' they then get told by the courts that these guys have had the IP for Pepsi since before China's cultural revolution. Everybody knows it's BS, but they are forced to accept an unfair, corrupt decision with a heavy amount of anti-American bias.
Just because he has a few bright idea's does not excuse everything else he has said on done. Hitler wanted a cheap massed produced car and that's how the Volkswagen Beetle came about. Otherwise the dude was pure evil.
Kind of like how Apple never gets an unfavorable ruling or decision in an American courtroom with an American jury and Judge Lucy Koh.
In trademark law a point of contention arises when one brand is trying to pass itself off as another brand.
In this case the court ruled that IPHone leather goods were not passing themselves off as Apple iPhone as they had a different market and brand identity.
You would be fine to sell Window's Windows as long as your brand identity didn't resemble MS.
The Ford Jackets thing would be great too, just keep away from using a blue oval logo with white writing on it.
That is true, but you have to agree that the Chinese legal system is far more protectionist (and easily corruptable) than the European or American system.
I don't think it really matters as long as apple isn't blocked from using the name.
It seems like a bit of a stretch if apple applied for the trademark first by quite a few years.
It seems like a bit of a stretch if apple applied for the trademark first by quite a few years.
Yep, and of having exclusive use of it for phones. It's nothing like the extreme (and not real) examples some people have given.
It's actually a bit surprising that Apple waited until 2012 to complain about the leather company. That seems to demonstrate what the leather company claimed: that Apple's phone wasn't well known enough in China yet to be confused over.
The article only said Apple applied. And Apple was not the first to use the "iPhone" name.
Apple could've easily been denied a China trademark for that name for phones back then, for the same reason they could not get one in the US during the same time... because "iPhone" already belonged to another company for use with phones.
Plus, if China is like the US (unknown), then you must use the trademark or lose it. Filing that long ahead, even with extensions, would likely have caused it to lapse.
Last edited:
When company registering tread mark, company need to choice categories tread mark applies to.
For example, when Apple register iPhone, Apple registered under portable computing system. So when tread mark application approved, you get exclusive right to use this tread mark under that category. So other company cannot make portable computer related product named as iPhone.
The Chinese company registers iPhone under category related with wallet. Apple did not apply tread mark iPhone under wallet, so it is entirely legal in China to register tread mark "iPhone" under different category.
The judgement from Chinese court is entirely legal, but it up to debate if it is reasonable.
For example, when Apple register iPhone, Apple registered under portable computing system. So when tread mark application approved, you get exclusive right to use this tread mark under that category. So other company cannot make portable computer related product named as iPhone.
The Chinese company registers iPhone under category related with wallet. Apple did not apply tread mark iPhone under wallet, so it is entirely legal in China to register tread mark "iPhone" under different category.
The judgement from Chinese court is entirely legal, but it up to debate if it is reasonable.
Isn't this utterly pathetic? The usual bully idiot Apple at it's finest. They steal the name from CISCO and now they want to force a f****** leather bag name to change!!!
Apple most definitely without doubt has a edifice complex.
I also fail to see what else Apple can now do anyway? As I understand reading this story elsewhere the last appeal that was rejected was as high as Apple could go, perhaps Cook can go and cry at the feet of Xi Jinping and lick his shoes to beg for a win? It certainly wouldn't be the first time Apple has stooped low enough to lick the shoes of a president to get it's own way.........
Apple most definitely without doubt has a edifice complex.
I also fail to see what else Apple can now do anyway? As I understand reading this story elsewhere the last appeal that was rejected was as high as Apple could go, perhaps Cook can go and cry at the feet of Xi Jinping and lick his shoes to beg for a win? It certainly wouldn't be the first time Apple has stooped low enough to lick the shoes of a president to get it's own way.........
Last edited:
I'm laughing at the "move manufacturing out of China" and "they don't have good human rights" nonsense going on here. If people really cared about that, they wouldn't consistently support American unions and socialist policies like the $15 minimum wage. Americans have helped to drive manufacturing overseas probably more than any foreign has in the past 40 years.
You do realized the Dump can't force another country to change their own Trademark law, President of the USA or no, right?