Okay. I'll talk about secondary meaning. Do people associate app store with the Apple App Store, or do they associate app store with any online market place that sells apps?
Care to explain this?
Last edited by a moderator:
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
Okay. I'll talk about secondary meaning. Do people associate app store with the Apple App Store, or do they associate app store with any online market place that sells apps?
Care to explain this?
google "trademark secondary meaning"
the more you know (shooting star):
."
ck, I wasn't asking what the term "generic name" means, I was saying that if you think app store is something that can be trademarked, then you need to tell me what the generic name is of that brand. I guess you can say something like,
"mobile application store"
but that seems like a stretch.
I think the "BINGO" message should have been directed at this.
Last edited by a moderator:
THANK YOU! That is the likely the only question that is important to the entire law suit. I personally think Apple has the association. I know my friends say the Android Marketplace. I don't know anyone with a WP7, so I can't judge that audience.
dazed and confused
http://www.marklaw.com/trademark-glossary/confuse.htm
Sorry, but the test for infringement based on likelihood of confusion does not require that a majority of people be confused. In fact, it does not require proof of any actual customer confusion at all.
http://www.marklaw.com/trademark-glossary/confuse.htm
ap·ple
1- the fleshy usually rounded red, yellow, or green edible pome fruit of a usually cultivated tree (genus Malus) of the rose family; also : an apple tree compare crab apple
2- a whiny little bi*ch of a company who always enjoys poking fun at Microsoft, but then ends up playing the same cards
1- the fleshy usually rounded red, yellow, or green edible pome fruit of a usually cultivated tree (genus Malus) of the rose family; also : an apple tree compare crab apple
2- a whiny little bi*ch of a company who always enjoys poking fun at Microsoft, but then ends up playing the same cards
I agree, and you're friends might say that, but if they saw App Store on a Windows 7 Phone, or Android Phone, would they be confused as to whether or not Apple is endoring that, or owns that, or has anything to do with it?
well trying to explain the best i can... descriptive trademarks are trademarks for the generic term. they are generally not markable, unless they have acquired secondary meaning. I was arguing that App Store is the generic term for any mobile application store (as you put it) but that apple has shoved the App Store term down the collective conscious of mankind so much that people think of Apple when they hear the term "app store." if that's the case the it is markable. using your example... had it been called "mobile application store" and everyone associated that term with Apple, then they could still trademark it even though it's extremely generic. hopefully that makes some sense and doesn't just come across as incoherent rambling.
Uh sure... so I guess by this logic Steve and Woz had more "money and production" than Xerox?
Annnyywayzzzzz.... Amazon sucks.
You don't have to have a trademark to have a company name. For instance, there are several businesses doing business as "The Auto Store" in different states, without having a trademark on that name. The Container Store, is, however, registered as a trademark, and could bring suit against someone else opening a store with that name, even if it were in a state where they don't have a store. That's why I used The Container Store as an example, a completely generic name made up of completely generic words that describes exactly what it is, and is registered as a trademark simply because they started using it in trade before anybody else.
As another example, I don't think anyone could use the word "Marketplace" as a store name, because it's much too generic. Microsoft added the name of their trademarked mp3 player and used "Zune Marketplace"
Amazon could probably even use "App Marketplace" - I don't think anyone has used it, and it draws a clear distinction between the Amazon App Marketplace, and the Apple App Store.
IANAL, but this seems pretty logical.
Amazon could probably even use "App Marketplace" - I don't think anyone has used it, and it draws a clear distinction between the Amazon App Marketplace, and the Apple App Store.
IANAL, but this seems pretty logical.
I bet you were also for Apple when they stole iOS and iPhone straight out of Cisco's trademark portfolio.
I have a Masters in Marketing Communications.
And the only thing stolen from Cisco's portfolio was "iPhone", which they bought the rights to. And no, I wasn't supporting their decision to ask for forgiveness instead of permission.
Steve stole nothing. PARC received a value of $125 Million in stock which they quickly divested.
Apple already holds an approved patent on the word for their store. So technically I think it would be illegal. However, that being said, I always think of app as a short way of saying application. Many companies make and sell applications right? Can you patent an abbreviation? My main question is wether the government should have approved the patent in the first place.
Could they patent the word application? Software? I don't think so. Why were they allowed to patent app?
or they can ust call it AStore (A = Amazon) ... then they can have like big promos that they can call the *****!
I think you're in for a hell of a fight (and a losing one at that) in this one. If "app" has been around for a while, then "app store" is merely descriptive, which is the same as generic and requires a secondary meaning to be formed. "Marks are often classified in categories of generally increasing distinctiveness; . . . "1 generic 2 descriptive 3 suggestive 4 arbitrary 5 fanciful. . . . The latter three categories of marks because their intrinsic nature serves to identify a particular source of a product, are deemed inherently distinctive and are entitled to protection. In contrast, generic [and descriptive] marks. . . are not registrable as trademarks [without secondary meaning]." 505 U.S. 763.
While the Supreme Court doesn't include the descriptive category with generic, it seems obvious that that was included as it specifies it is not one of the latter three categories. You need to form second meaning when people say App Store, which while possible I don't see. When people hear App Store, they think a place to find Apps, not Apple's App Store.
Patents have nothing to do with this situation. They're for protecting inventions being copied. They have nothing to do with this conversation.
Last edited by a moderator:
This guy's got it and explained it very well! I don't know if people think of Apple when they hear App Store (I don't think so, but I don't know). But this is the real question, I don't think Apple stands a prayer in arguing that App Store isn't generic/descriptive. The secondary meaning's the key.
Im with everyone who thinks apple is just going sue crazy!! they are like those retards that burn them selfs on hot coffee and sue the fast food joint for example! its becoming that stupid. I didnt care before when they have sued everyone else under the sun for the stupidest things They used the word touch, store!! but Amazon is the S@#! no one Fs with Amazon I love Amazon! apple is such a greedy multi-billion company and they sue over the most insignificant things ever and they dont discriminat they will sue who ever and whenever!
Last edited:
I don't think that's true - the "app store" as generic as it sounds, was Apple's place to download apps, just like the Android place to download apps is the Android Market.
True, Android in the name makes it much less generic, but I think Android *knew* better than to use "Android AppStore"...I'll bet their legal team advised them against it for this very reason.
Another thing - is Apple's store officially named "The Apple App Store" and just used casually?
Agreed to a point. I believe most don't ascribe the term App Store to Apple's App Store, but could be wrong, in which case Apple wins the suit. You and I don't have access to those sorts of polls which would actually matter here. The official name doesn't matter at all. Google knew others would and could sue and chose to save some money and let that happen. That's hardly evidence of a valid trademark.