And don't forget Motorola had iDEN back in the 90's. Looks like Apple copied again.
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 Sues Amazon Over 'App Store' Trademark
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And don't forget Motorola had iDEN back in the 90's. Looks like Apple copied again.
Apple relied on a strong guess that companies would give permission to use these names for some reasonable amount of money (and I didn't know that iPad was trademarked), which they did. Amazon is free to offer Apple say $50 million for the use of the name, and see what happens. Same as Apple did for the iPhone and iOS names, although we can only guess about the amount of money that changed hands.
And it doesn't matter that people used the word "app" before Apple used "app store". What matters is that nobody used the term "app store" before Apple did.
Reminds me of a case where Anheuser-Busch attempted to sue TicketBud for using "Bud" in the name. Busch lost in court to TicketBud and the name remains. I don't think Apple can pull it off, but when you got all that dough, why not try, right?
Apple doesn't have a trademark on the word "app", but on the term "App Store". Surely if Anheuser-Busch had a trademark on "TicketBud" that case would have ended differently. Same, if Apple had trademarked "app" and not "App Store" then all these people saying that the word "app" has been in use before would have a strong point, and Apple's case against "Amazon App Store" would be weaker, but Apple hasn't trademarked "app"; they trademarked "App Store".
What you are trying to do is creating a false analogy. You can't trademark word combinations that are in common use for something. "Shoe store", "Clothing store", "Jewellery store" are in common use for stores where you buy shoes, clothing, jewellery. "Handbag store", "Trouser store", "Glasses store", "App store" are not in common use for stores where you buy hand bags, trousers, glasses, or apps. Therefore, you cannot trademark "Shoe store", "Clothing store", "Jewellery store", but you can trademark "Handbag store", "Trouser store", "Glasses store", "App store".
There are more people buying glasses than people buying Apple products. And none of them uses the term "glasses store". And nobody used the term "app store" before Apple.
All of the above demonstrates clearly that you are wrong. And nice attempt at labelling anyone who is of a different opinion than you as "not in their right mind", "ridiculous" and a "flamer".
Since Apple actually _paid_ Xerox very generously for the tour and for any ideas gathered on the tour, your claim that "Steve stole" anything is wrong. And your argument that "Xerox just didn't have the money or production to create the products at the time" is ridiculous. At that time, Xerox had a lot more money than Apple, and Xerox _did_ produce the Xerox Star (which I saw at CeBit in the early 80's in a side by side comparison with an Apple Lisa, with the Lisa running circles around it at one fifth of the price).
Last edited:
"This is just pathetic. This is a BS trademark to begin with, no reasonable judge will side with Microsoft on this one. They should never have been allowed to trademark "Windows" in the first place. This is just more of lord Gates' megalomania."
"Windows" are holes in walls with glass in them. "Coke" is stuff made from coal. Please try and look beyond your need to troll and think about the subject before posting about it, because you obviously don't understand it at all.
No it isn't. It was coined by Apple. It's not how ordinary people use the term that matters, it's who has the trademark.
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone trying to argue this from a position of common sense or rationality (and that is most of you, even if you have your differences) is simply wasting their breath, trademark law doesn't work like that. Leave it to the lawyers... or just call for an end to their festering, parasitic trade
When you get through to BS tell him sorry for wasting his time because it turns out you were wrong.
I worked with Amdahl in 1998 and the phrase "killer app" was in wide use. And I'm pretty sure they didn't invent it.
Apple has every right to defend their trademark.
Almost no one was using the phrase "App Store" before Apple introduced theirs. Furthermore, people have known software on the Mackintosh platform as "applications" for as long as I can remember - perhaps longer than I've been alive (I am only 19); PC users have always known software on their platform as "programs", and software on cell phones barely existed before Apple come up with their model.
Take a look at the screenshots I've attached from Google Trends
People only started searching for "app store" in the lead up to Apple's launch of the App Store, and searches only took off after they did so.
Now, I'll admit Apple has been in the wrong in the past with trademark lawsuits - I remember when they made a fuss over New York using an apple as a logo for some environmental initiative - but in this case their actions are entirely justifiable.
Almost no one was using the phrase "App Store" before Apple introduced theirs. Furthermore, people have known software on the Mackintosh platform as "applications" for as long as I can remember - perhaps longer than I've been alive (I am only 19); PC users have always known software on their platform as "programs", and software on cell phones barely existed before Apple come up with their model.
Take a look at the screenshots I've attached from Google Trends
People only started searching for "app store" in the lead up to Apple's launch of the App Store, and searches only took off after they did so.
Now, I'll admit Apple has been in the wrong in the past with trademark lawsuits - I remember when they made a fuss over New York using an apple as a logo for some environmental initiative - but in this case their actions are entirely justifiable.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yay! Another thread if people not understating anything!
Let us shout random words like generic, windows, store, app, apple, amazon and get really angry because everyone knows everything about trademark laws!
Leave it to the lawyers people. I'm not pretending I know the answer, but at least I do know that I don't know the answer.
Yay! Another thread if people not understating anything!
Let us shout random words like generic, windows, store, app, apple, amazon and get really angry because everyone knows everything about trademark laws!
Leave it to the lawyers people. I'm not pretending I know the answer, but at least I do know that I don't know the answer.
That doesn't make any sense.
Are you serious? I and many, many hundreds of thousands of people have been using it since the early 90's, maybe even long before that for a lot of people...
Last edited by a moderator:
It is and thats why it is Microsoft Windows. Same goes for Appstore / App Store -> Amazon App Store / Apple App Store.
I fully agree. Applications have been Apps to me for a very long time. I find it strange that generic term like a "app store" can be registered.
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited:
I think a lot of people defending Apple's stance on this issue must be kids or people under the age of 20 or something. It's the only reason I can think that no one had ever heard the term 'app' before the iPhone.
When you get through to BS tell him sorry for wasting his time because it turns out you were wrong.
Actually when World Wide Web was introduced some predicted that Mosaic would be the "killer app" for internet. That was in ´93. The term "killer app" was used a lot in magazines targeted for professionals working with internet.
Someone needs some history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface
Its a good read for all
The term 'app' has been around for ages and everyone uses it to talk about Android 'apps' already.
I don't understand why people would want to defend Apple over this.
On the other hand, Apple are hardly alone among the big companies in terms of pointless lawsuits (pointless apart from the money that is).
I don't understand why people would want to defend Apple over this.
On the other hand, Apple are hardly alone among the big companies in terms of pointless lawsuits (pointless apart from the money that is).
My Texas Instruments TI84 plus from 2004 has an 'Apps' button on it that takes me to the list of installed applications.
Copycats are pathetic!
Lol, spot on mate!
Same for Amazon, HP, Samsung, Nokia, Etc. This guys are ridiculous, Apple started everything the way things are now, hate copycats!!!
Lol, spot on mate!
Same for Amazon, HP, Samsung, Nokia, Etc. This guys are ridiculous, Apple started everything the way things are now, hate copycats!!!
Mate, you need to wipe that steam off from those Apple coloured glasses of yours. Apple has brought us great user experience but it hasn't invented the features you are talking about.
-Invention of Mouse has nothing to do with apple
-Again, Apple has nothing to do with invention of GUI.
-Yet again you can thank Xerox for that bin/trash.
-Apple has nothing to do with invention of widgets on Mac. You can thank Konfabulator for the idea.
-We have a trend here. Yet, again apple has nothing to do with idea of calling applications apps.
EDIT: Same goes for tablet computing. Apple didn't invent that either. The fact remains, both Apple and Microsoft have either licensed, copied or just ripped of these innovations from someone else.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
When I hear App Store the first thing that pops into my head is Apple.
When I hear App Store the first thing that pops into my head is Apple.
We would still be living in caves if no one copied/borrowed ideas.
What car do you drive out of interest? I guarantee that whatever car you own, the manufacturer borrowed dozens of ideas from other car manufacturers.
What shower do you have? I guarantee pumps and mechanism designs have been borrowed from other manufacturers.
What phone do you have? What TV do you have? What microwave oven do you have? What freezer do you have? What kettle do you own? I could keep going on and on. The fact is that everyone borrows ideas to make their products compete with the competition and fight for a place in the market.
Apple have borrowed ideas from Microsoft and vice versa. It really doesn't matter. Quite why anyone gets upset over this or cares is a mystery. I'd wager these people are just sad muppets.
Why do people with exactly zero knowledge or understanding of IP law insist on making ignorant posts in every single "Apply sues...", "Apple being sued..." and "Apple files..." thread?
I may as well go trademark "grocery store" or "hardware store". The term "App" has been used to refer to mobile apps for at least a decade.
Amazon would have better luck trademarking "Amazon appstore".
Apple's behavior the past few years has become increasingly disturbing.
Amazon would have better luck trademarking "Amazon appstore".
Apple's behavior the past few years has become increasingly disturbing.
When someone uses the word AppStore, people think about the store that is built in their phone (or other mobile device). Nobody cares whether this is the Apple AppStore or the Amazon AppStore or the Google Marketplace or the Windows Marketplace (which has been around MUCH longer than Apple's AppStore) or whatever.
For people, the AppStore is an application on their device that allows them to purchase, download and install more applications on their gadget.
Oh, "Windows" is a generic name? Absolutely. It's about as generic as "Apple". But Apple basically tried to trademark something like the word "supermarket" or "grocery store" or "gas station", and I think that doesn't fly. "Application" has always been a common term in the software industry, and "app" is just an abbreviation of that word with a lot of marketing bam-bam behind it -- just like "gas" is short for "gasoline". It's rather pathetic that "App store" ever became a trademark, for those very obvious reasons.
I think Amazon has enough good lawyers and sufficient cash to fight - and win - this pathetic little battle.
Apple Inc. is pissed that somebody used one of their ah-so "original" trademarks? Good thing that they never had to pay off others for their own misuse of other companies' trademarks:"Mighty Mouse" (not the comic character, but the little company that produced computer mice for medical purposes), "iPhone" (Cisco), "iOS" (Cisco) and even "Apple" itself (Beatles).
We have a saying in Germany: "When you sit in a glass house, you shouldn't throw stones."
Because people are fed up of Apple trying to protect generic terms used by all? You don't need to be a lawyer to comment or have a view on this nonsense.