Why would a company, believing it is taking action to protect its trademark/IP, pay to buyout another company. Particularly when that company has no trademark, and was even denied a trademark. That's crazy.
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 Movie Theater Chain With Similar 'Apple Cinemas' Name
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hopefully all these posts are sarcastic. A small group that wants to go national can't slide under the radar anymore.
I think Apple is right on this. Apple Originals releases films, and CODA won Best Picture and F1 has made over half a billion dollars. It is perfectly reasonable to think that some people might think that Apple owns the theaters.
Even in 2013, the people who started the chain should've taken into consideration that they were using the name of one the world largest companies. The name came from Apple Valley Mall? Then why not call it Apple Valley Cinemas? Probably because Apple Valley Mall didn't want confusion over the name!
Even in 2013, the people who started the chain should've taken into consideration that they were using the name of one the world largest companies. The name came from Apple Valley Mall? Then why not call it Apple Valley Cinemas? Probably because Apple Valley Mall didn't want confusion over the name!
I suppose timing is everything here. If this chain preceded Apple productions, then Apple has no ground.
Like others are saying, they don't hold the trademark for apples, which is ...too funny really. Then again, with the law who knows how things will go. I'm not sure what I would do under the circumstances. Probably a settlement.
Like others are saying, they don't hold the trademark for apples, which is ...too funny really. Then again, with the law who knows how things will go. I'm not sure what I would do under the circumstances. Probably a settlement.
i still remember when Steve named a company after his favorite band's (the beatles) record company 🙃
by this very logic, Apple Computer is equally guilty of said allegation:
The Story of Apple Records | The Beatles
Archive Feature The Story of Apple Records
it's even why the beatles music was missing from apple music/itunes for years.
Apple Corps v Apple Computer - Wikipedia
Yes you are right, which is why Apple paid two settlements and then ultimately purchased the rights. So this is a perfect example of a company protecting its trademark. Exactly what Apple is now doingby this very logic, Apple Computer is equally guilty of said allegation:
The Story of Apple Records | The Beatles
Archive Feature The Story of Apple Recordswww.thebeatles.com
it's even why the beatles music was missing from apple music/itunes for years.
Apple Corps v Apple Computer - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Coming soon: Apple sues fruit trees that produce a fruit named “apple” due to trademark infringement.
“As for how the Apple Cinemas name came to be? According to the complaint, the company behind the chain claims they adopted the name due to a planned first location at the Apple Valley Mall in Rhode Island, but they never opened a location there.”
Apple Valley Mall! Come on Apple! As long as you are already at the courthouse, you might as well sue the mall owners too.
Apple Valley Mall! Come on Apple! As long as you are already at the courthouse, you might as well sue the mall owners too.
LMAO I bet an Apple employee living in SF went to the new one that just opened at the old AMC Van Ness and told corporate. Otherwise this chain wouldn’t have been on their radar.
It’s not a great theater (I saw Superman there on the day they soft opened) but they definitely don’t deserve to get crushed in court by one of the wealthiest companies in history.
It’s not a great theater (I saw Superman there on the day they soft opened) but they definitely don’t deserve to get crushed in court by one of the wealthiest companies in history.
Apple is being a bully. If I were the judge I'd toss this out immediately and make them pay Apple Cinemas legal expenses. Trying to force a smaller company out of business should be a DOJ call on your " delusional vision of owning the word Apple." Maybe they can sort the monopoly.
I know a lot of people are making fun of apple here but the way trademarks work is if you dont vigorously defend it you legally lose protections. So Apple is working within the legal confines of the law. This happens with nearly all big companies, and every time people accuse them of being petty but they have to be, by law.
Don't hate the player hate the game.
- Business owner who owns multiple trademarks
Don't hate the player hate the game.
- Business owner who owns multiple trademarks
They better have oxygen sensors in their watch
To be comparable, Apple would have had to to be involved in the movie industry before Apple Cinemas, Apple Cinemas existed before Apple Studios, and before any Apple Originals came out.
This example now would be more like if Apple Inc sued Apple Records instead.
You don’t generally go after companies using generic item names in their branding in industries you aren’t involved in, and it’s pretty poor sport to go into an industry at a later date and then start legal action against a company that’s been in that industry longer than you have.
Perhaps you want to consider how many companies in the EU would sue for the exact same thing. Has nothing to do with being humble.
They don’t really have much choice, if they don’t defend the trademark they could lose it.
To everyone complaining. Read law. You have to protect your name.
Apple isn't a chain restaurant, so they don't operate in the same space as Applebee's.
Apple has been making devices that allow you to watch movies, the same way people watch movies in theaters, for decades. Apple has a streaming service that allows you to rent and watch movies. Apple produces and develops movies. So they have put enormous resources into building products and services that allow people to watch movies with their devices and services. The suit alleges that Apple therefore operates in the same space as this movie theater chain.
Unlike a chain restaurant, or an orchard.
And that's how trademark lawsuits work. Companies have to defend their trademarks, or they are in danger of losing them. If Apple didn't defend its trademark, it could even leave itself open to a lawsuit by stockholders.
Apple has had a series of suits and settlements with Apple Corps over Apple developing devices and services that produce and distribute music, for decades. That's a much closer comparison to the current situation than the "what about apple orchards? What about Apple suing apples the fruit har har?" comments in this thread.
When I first saw the cinemas logo, I did wonder if it was apple. That logo does them no favours. If it’s true that people have commented on the cinemas website believing it to be part of apple then that will cause them issues. If I walked past a such a place in London I too would think it’s part of Apple Inc.
One of those theaters was in the neighborhood where I used to live so reminded me of the time we took my wife's then-very-young nephews to see Kung Fu Panda. Turned into a bit of adventure when the theater showed a trailer for House Bunny (Anna Faris) by mistake lol, and then there was an issue with the main feature so couldn't see it. Got free tickets though.
So....I guess that's an exciting story for.....exactly no one and....has nothing to do with this news item.
OK, good night!
So....I guess that's an exciting story for.....exactly no one and....has nothing to do with this news item.
OK, good night!
Pathetic posts in here. This infant theater knew exactly what they were doing, and had ample opportunities to change their logo. Stop with hyperbolic comments. It’s like Reddit in here….