Apple leaked 'Street View' for their maps? (PHOTO) + (LINK)

[MozMan68]

That's not relevant. If Apple made the same feature and called it "Street View", they would get their arse handed to them in court. It doesn't need to be an exact match as long as the similarity would cause confusion.

Hah...nice try...the reason Google trademarked it as "Google Street View" is because the term was already in use with other software.

The only one getting their arse handed to them would be Google if they even tried to fight it.

----------

I don't see anything wrong with the image, but remember when the iPad came out and it looked like you could watch the Flash video on WSJ? There have been more examples, too. I really don't think that the people putting up the web content know the secret roadmap for Apple products and features.

But you can watch videos on WSJ...they obviously knew they were changing their content to work on iOS.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Hah...nice try...the reason Google trademarked it as "Google Street View" is because the term was already in use with other software.

It doesn't matter is someone else has trademarked "Street View", as it needs to be viewed in context. If Apple made a very similar product (i.e in the area of mapping) and called it "Street View", when Google sued them, they would almost certainly win.

If you were a glass maker and made a particular model of window called "Street View", it would be unlikely to infringe on the trademark as there is almost no room for confusion. Are you starting to get this?

Under trademark laws it's usually known as Confusing Similarity. Go do some reading... learn something.

Oh, and the word mark is for just "Street View", not "Google Street View", so you're wrong on another count. Source: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4010:yni7lr.2.2

The other exact word match is for a financial consultation firm:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4010:yni7lr.2.1

 

[MozMan68]

It doesn't matter is someone else has trademarked "Street View", as it needs to be viewed in context. If Apple made a very similar product (i.e in the area of mapping) and called it "Street View", when Google sued them, they would almost certainly win.

If you were a glass maker and made a particular model of window called "Street View", it would be unlikely to infringe on the trademark as there is almost no room for confusion. Are you starting to get this?

Under trademark laws it's usually known as Confusing Similarity. Go do some reading... learn something.

Oh, and the word mark is for just "Street View", so you're wrong on another count. Source: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4010:yni7lr.2.2

The other exact word match is for a financial consultation firm:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4010:yni7lr.2.1

I read and interpret contracts as part of my job....I know what I'm talking about.

And thanks for your worthless link...how about Google's own view on this?

http://www.google.com/permissions/trademark/our-trademarks.html

 

[SlCKB0Y]

I read and interpret contracts as part of my job....I know what I'm talking about.

Again, good for you if you can read a contract, but you clearly know nothing about trademark law.

And thanks for your worthless link...how about Google's own view on this?

Worthless link? That's the data on the trademark as held by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Haha. You're a total fail.

 

[armandxp]

It's just a typo guys...these things happen all the time on Apple's site.

Exactly!

 

[MozMan68]

Again, good for you if you can read a contract, but you clearly know nothing about trademark law.



Worthless link? That's the data on the trademark as held by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Haha. You're a total fail.

So what you are telling me is that based on the fact that Google FILED to own the term "street view" as a trademarked term that they actually do own it?

Notice the date of the filing? Does it mean anything to you? Is it just a coincidence that they filed right when Apple dumped them and announced their own Maps software? Why not file for it 6 years ago?

Nothing more than a long shot attempt to try an own a term that has been out there forever...even when it applies to maps or mapping technology. If they could have owned it, they would have done it when the registered "Google Street View."

They are simply trying to prevent Apple from registering the term "Apple street view" and nothing more.

At the end of the day, knowing Apple, they will probably come up with some other name for their version of "street view" since that is what they tend to do anyway.

 

[MozMan68]

So...taking bets on Apple's terminology....

StreetCam (utilized by C3 previously) would be my first bet.

Apple Street View

Ground View

...harder than you think....