Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Cinemas was founded in 2013, Apple Studios was founded in 2019. Apple Inc didn’t start producing Apple Original Series content until 2016, nor Apple Original Films content until 2019. As Apple Cinemas is a functioning business who actually offer a service/product, yes I am in favour of them since they picked the name Apple first in the TV/Movie industry.

The only way I’d be supportive of Apple Studios in this is if Apple Cinemas was a copyright/patent troll with no footprint anywhere.
To be honest, Apple TV predates the Apple Cinema by 6 years, if that's the standard... First gen AppleTV was launched in 2007.
 
Apple Cinemas existed many years before Apple Inc. established Apple Studios.
Yea, but previously they existed locally. Now that they're going nationwide, it's a whole different story. Apple has EVERY right to bring this lawsuit!!! I never heard of Apple Cinema before today. Upon first reading the name in this post, I initially assumed it was a new Apple venture. But it wasn't.
 
OK I joined to say Apple cinemas are literally garbage. Its disgusting in them. Seats dont work, dirty bathrooms etc.... Im rooting for apple on this one. lol
 
Apple is in the movie distribution business but not the restaurant business. Trademark registration requires selecting one more “classes” (industries) in which your mark applies. Also, if you don’t defend your trademark you can lose it.

Ok, I've seen this reason a lot and I can accept it as something that makes sense. It just seems so petty and kind of predatory to me though. Trillion Dollar Company going after a small business. As for the logo's they look nothing alike.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ardent73
I hope Apple does not discover supermarkets selling Apples promoting health. People might start buying those instead of iPhones.
 
Oh yeah…

Dead ringers…

Apple-Cinemas.jpg
View attachment 2533893

Are you seriously suggesting these two look the same?

Who could possibly be confused?
Law is based on precedent. If this is OK, then what's next? Every company has to protect their brand. Maybe some watch company can call themselves IBM watch company - right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kitKAC and SFjohn
I don’t get how this is possible in the US.

Apple is quite a common word. I mean if it was a made up one like Microsoft, Toyota, Lexus, IBM, TikTok … but Apple?

No common words should be able to be trademarked. Period.

It’s not that the word became famous because of the company. I mean, a guy on a fruit diet, goes to an apple farm, comes back and suggests to his partner, Apple to be the name of their company.

Even though I totally understand Apple position. It makes no sense that one can own the use of these words for any purpose.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nrose101 and mwhite
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.

Me too. Also, if I were the judge I would make excessive use of the gavel, refer to myself as "the court" at every opportunity and, on April Fools Day, I'd show up in one of those white powdered wigs like the judges wear in England.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wyliej
can someone remind me when apple started making movies and when exactly did Apple Cinemas small business was founded
Unfortunately this is one of those trademark issues that makes Apple look like the big bad guy when they are just trying to protect their IP from future theft. US trademarks are a broken system that Apple must engage through lawsuits, otherwise counterfeit Apple Cinemas could appear and confuse consumers and Apple would have no legal recourse because they didn't defend it. Obviously, this also means that Apple is looking into brick and mortar theater chain building and wants to nip counterfeit theaters in the bud.
 
Established in 2013, Apple Cinemas maintained a limited presence in the Northeastern U.S. until last month, when it opened a theater in San Francisco. The complaint alleges that Apple Cinemas is pursuing a nationwide expansion across the U.S., including in areas near Apple's headquarters
This is kinda blatant if you ask most people. I just looked at the list of the 14 cinemas….all 14 are located within New England (and 2 in New York) so I don’t know what they thought was going to happen when they opened a new location smack in the middle of San Francisco?!?

They probably would’ve been fine had they just stuck to the northeast (and eastern part of the US)

lol anywhere in the US (EXCEPT) San Fran - that’s just a dumb (and provocative) business decision on Apple Cinemas’ part
 
The story is hilarious, of course, people complain. Apple is too generic an idea to claim only Apple.com has the rights to it. People are going to jump all over the story and crap all over it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hagen_o_hagen
The problem isn't with the name Apple Cinemas. If Apple Cinemas had stayed in the Northeast where I am assuming they are regionally recognized, Apple Inc. wouldn't be suing. It is because they are increasing their footprint nationally that is creating the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hagen_o_hagen
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.