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 Legal Filing Cites Fear of 'Inferior' Amazon Appstore Tarnishing its Reputation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Of course the equivalent would have been Ford claiming that GM couldn't have dreamt of using "Motor" because before they only understood "horseless carriage". Essentially Apple is accusing other companies of being primitives compared to their prescient genius.
I'll be surprised if Apple wins this court battle. I consider the phrase "app store" to be merely descriptive, not a brand name, and I think this cat is already out of the bag.
Last edited:
wow - i love apple and all but that was seriously snotty 
good luck in stopping amazon which we all love
good luck in stopping amazon which we all love
the point isn't what argument Apple gives. The real point is that they filed and were approved for a Trademark on the term App Store for mobile device software (though now several folks are trying to appeal that judgement). And under Trademark rules you have to protect your trademark from anyone else that tries to use it or you will lose the protection. And unlike patents you have to do it right away. You can't wait 19 and a half years until someone has made a fortune off your stuff to file a suit. Apple is just doing what they have to do to stay in the game.
Really?
What I'm shocked over is Microsoft - the ones who register trademarked "Word" and "Window" - is the ones leading the charge!
Really Microsoft?? Those that live in glass houses . . .
What I'm shocked over is Microsoft - the ones who register trademarked "Word" and "Window" - is the ones leading the charge!
Really Microsoft?? Those that live in glass houses . . .
The argument is a bit dodgy to me.
What if Amazon's AppStore was as tightly controlled as the Apple one's? So would Apple allow Amazon to use that name? No. The argument is foul.
What if Amazon's AppStore was as tightly controlled as the Apple one's? So would Apple allow Amazon to use that name? No. The argument is foul.
Zune is the name of Microsoft's MP3 player, music service, and...
Oh right, I'm on a mac board
Back on Topic, I feel like Apple would be good to let this die. Otherwise they'll have to fight the Microsoft AppStore, Amazon AppStore, BlackBerry AppStore, HP/Pre AppStore, Android AppStore, and Chrome AppStore.
I just don't see them winning, and ultimately it'll be just as bad for them as not having Word trademarked is for Microsoft
This is worth repeating.
Zune is the name of Microsoft's MP3 player, music service, and...
Oh right, I'm on a mac board
Back on Topic, I feel like Apple would be good to let this die. Otherwise they'll have to fight the Microsoft AppStore, Amazon AppStore, BlackBerry AppStore, HP/Pre AppStore, Android AppStore, and Chrome AppStore.
I just don't see them winning, and ultimately it'll be just as bad for them as not having Word trademarked is for Microsoft
Those other ones already have different names.
I agree it's rather lame for Apple to do this, but I still feel like App Store should be granted to them for trademarking. The first page of a Google search for App Store is nearly all about Apple's App Store. www.appstore.com redirects you to an Apple page. Hell, over half of Apple's name is part of the potential trademark App Store.
I see the reasoning behind it being too generic and descriptive of a name, but the fact of the matter is, it's been widely adopted as to be referencing Apple's App Store. Not Android's marketplace. Not Amazon's AppStore.
If Microsoft can trademark "Internet Explorer", something so descriptive as to be exactly what you're doing while using it - exploring the internet - then Apple should be able to trademark App Store.
I see the reasoning behind it being too generic and descriptive of a name, but the fact of the matter is, it's been widely adopted as to be referencing Apple's App Store. Not Android's marketplace. Not Amazon's AppStore.
If Microsoft can trademark "Internet Explorer", something so descriptive as to be exactly what you're doing while using it - exploring the internet - then Apple should be able to trademark App Store.
That's not a word, and it fails to appropriately describe anything. (sorry pet-peeve)
Exactly. This is almost a required response from Apple since "trademark defense" is about showing a dilution of your brand. There are two basic tenants they can stand on:
1) Customers will be confused about who they are buying from.
2) Customers will feel that things associated with the trademark (e.g.: "App Store") are of low quality.
Apple would have a hard time proving (1) since both companies are high-profile. But they will probably make a few statements with respect to (1). Their lawsuit with Samsung over trade dress and design patents is more inline with (1).
Apple's stance on there being "more malware" on the Amazon App Store is probably the best case they can make for (2). Both stores have bugs and issues (albeit Amazon has more), but Apple's is far from perfect. Apple is saying that they want to associate the term "App Store" with a malware-free no-worry download place and Amazon is tarnishing the meaning. I am pretty sure the future of the "Macs are Malware-Free" motto is going to be based on a decision to require an extra step to enable software installations that did not come from the "Mac App Store" since Trojans are so prevalent these days. Already the iOS App Store is a nice malware-free place to purchase apps. So I can see Apple's point regarding malware here. In any other ways they try to say the Amazon App Store is inferior it would just come down to a subjective opinion -- that is not going to hold up.
I dont much care how this shakes outI can see both sides.
But I can see Apples point on this particular issue. Its miraculous how safe installing apps on iOS is: non-techie people (like my parents) are not afraid to just try any old app they feel like. Even I (a tech-head) am cautious about that on Mac and Windows! (And I would surely be nervous on Android too.)
The fact that apps are so VERY safe and hassle-free makes the App Store and iOS apps in general feel (and work!) like something truly new. Kind of like the widespread use of the term apps is new, and the term App Store itself.
If people think of the App Store as safe, when computing in general is so dangerous, and then Amazon (combined with Android) starts to make people think app stores are NOT safe (among those all-important people who arent yet iOS users), then that does indeed tarnish Apples App Store product and harm their business.
But I can see Apples point on this particular issue. Its miraculous how safe installing apps on iOS is: non-techie people (like my parents) are not afraid to just try any old app they feel like. Even I (a tech-head) am cautious about that on Mac and Windows! (And I would surely be nervous on Android too.)
The fact that apps are so VERY safe and hassle-free makes the App Store and iOS apps in general feel (and work!) like something truly new. Kind of like the widespread use of the term apps is new, and the term App Store itself.
If people think of the App Store as safe, when computing in general is so dangerous, and then Amazon (combined with Android) starts to make people think app stores are NOT safe (among those all-important people who arent yet iOS users), then that does indeed tarnish Apples App Store product and harm their business.
If MS can trademark - Word, Windows, Internet Explorer. Then Apple can trademark AppStore. There is no difference between Apple's and MS's trademarks. Both are trademarks of seemingly very general words. But oh yeah there's a good potential amount of money to be made if you beat Apple. And you can set a precedent if you beat Apple. That's the only reason why people are suing Apple these days. For the money.
I have to say Apple is going about this in a rather arrogant fashion. But the truth of the matter is, if Apple loose this case then people should target MS's patents using the Apple case as precedent. But that won't happen. The world and his dog knows Apple is popular now and is trying to use Apple's success leech publicity for themselves (and their own companies) using this fact.
Apple deserve to win this. And they probably will if they don't get too arrogant over themselves. If they do then they might lose. Getting the court system to like you is a good way to help you to win. I know it's supposed to be 100% about the law but heck everyone knows it's more then that. Hard to win any case if the court hates you when you walk in the door.
I have to say Apple is going about this in a rather arrogant fashion. But the truth of the matter is, if Apple loose this case then people should target MS's patents using the Apple case as precedent. But that won't happen. The world and his dog knows Apple is popular now and is trying to use Apple's success leech publicity for themselves (and their own companies) using this fact.
Apple deserve to win this. And they probably will if they don't get too arrogant over themselves. If they do then they might lose. Getting the court system to like you is a good way to help you to win. I know it's supposed to be 100% about the law but heck everyone knows it's more then that. Hard to win any case if the court hates you when you walk in the door.
Now I know why the courtyard of the new purposed Apple campus is so large, so Apple legal's balls of steel could fit there.
Wait, Apple is first to say App Store ? They did this prior to 1998 ? Because someone filed a trademark for AppStore in 1998 :
I think you need to revise your position. Apple sure didn't coin the term "App Store" and sure weren't "first".
Considering most of the work done on Amazon's store is outsourced, just desserts.