Apple is in the movie EXHIBITION business and has been for years. Their exhibition platform has been an AppleTV rather than a theater.
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
The logo is so bad, if it were on a sign, I might not notice it. It looks kore like the ATT globe.
But the name Apple Cinemas is what counts. Apple has a trademark on ALL previous versions of their titles as well.
From what I’ve found, there’s no lawsuit, just normal trademark actions. Don’t know what the current state of that is, but if Woolworth’s” removed “electronic store” or “computer” from their trademark description, then it was likely over with that.In Australia Apple sued the Woolworths grocery chain over its logo. It's still using it...
Apple Records sued Apple Computer first in the 1980s. After Apple moved into music, they issued the lawsuit again, they settled in 2007. Shortly after that, Jobs renamed Apple Computer to Apple.
What? No way! It is not the same apple shape, no bite out of the apple, this cinema logo is clearly made up of a curled film strip. I saw that logo and wouldn't have thought for a split second this was somehow related to Apple Inc.
What an utterly pathetic over reach by big bully Apple. I hope they lose this case big time and Apple Cinema counter sue and win. Logo looks nothing like Apple’s and it’s a friggin cinema, NOT a mobile phone manufacture… There is protecting your IP then there is Apple and it’s over excitable over paid lawyers.
They are required by trademark law to defend their marks.
Do we really need more proof of Apple being an extremely arrogant and entitled company? I thought Guy Kawasaki's influence was over years ago...
Apple is obligated to make an attempt defend their trademark; it doesn’t mean they’re vindictive (or even think they’ll win). It’s up to the legal system to decide if they do (or do not) have a case.
What if it’s a crappy adult cinema? What about a bookstore called Face Bookstore?
What if it’s a crappy adult cinema? What about a bookstore called Face Bookstore?
Apple Inc. (the iPhone company) distributed its first film in late 2019, a documentary entitled "The Elephant Queen." "The Elephant Queen" premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2018, then Apple struck a distribution deal with A24 (the film's studio) in 2019. Apple Cinemas started doing business in 2013 — more than half a decade before Apple Inc. got into the movie business. Evidently Apple Cinemas incorporated in 2010, although the first Apple Cinemas theater opened in 2013.
Apple should be focused on the bigger picture. They just look like a**holes doing things like this.
In a federal court in Massachusetts on Friday, Apple sued a small movie theater chain named Apple Cinemas over alleged trademark infringement.
"Apple Cinemas is knowingly and intentionally using the name Apple to sow confusion for its own benefit," alleged attorneys for Apple, in a complaint filed against all Apple Cinemas locations, and a Sand Media Corp Inc. company connected to the chain.
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 and retail stores, leading Apple to take action.
"Faced with Defendants' plan to expand to 100 theaters nationwide, as well as widespread public confusion about Apple's involvement in the theaters, Apple has no alternative but to file this lawsuit to protect its brand and customers from deception," the complaint states.
Apple Cinemas currently has 14 locations, according to its website.
Apple's "repeated efforts to resolve the matter amicably" were unsuccessful. The lawsuit alleges that the companies behind Apple Cinemas have received multiple warnings that the name would cause confusion among consumers, but carried on. The complaint includes examples of some people who believed that Apple Cinemas was owned by Apple, in the comment sections of various online news articles and social media posts.
The first warning came from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which in October 2024 denied Sand Media Corp Inc.'s trademark applications for the "Apple Cinemas" and "ACX — Apple Cinematic Experience" marks, given they were likely to cause confusion with Apple's prior trademark rights, according to the complaint.
Apple has very strong trademark rights in connection with a wide range of goods and services, including movie distribution, its attorneys said.
The second warning came in December 2024, when Apple sent Sand Media Corps Inc. a cease and desist letter directly, according to the complaint. Apple's attorneys also communicated with the company by phone and in writing several times, but it knowingly pushed forward with its Apple Cinemas expansion plans, the complaint adds.
As for how the Apple Cinemas name came to be? According to the complaint, the founders of the chain claim 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 is seeking both an injunction and monetary damages.
Article Link: Apple Sues Movie Theater Chain With Similar 'Apple Cinemas' Name
Now, I'm usually very anti Apple in these cases but... it's not like these people had the idea buying apples at the market and may not have thought of the coincidence: Apple just became the most valuable brand in the world in 2013, if I googled that right, and was a global phenomenon.
They've been kind enough to let someone's nephew draw the logo so that hardly anybody seeing it could mistake it for the Apple we know, but still.
Since the way it went with Apple Records, we know it's more complicated that "those guys were making cinema-stuff first".
They've been kind enough to let someone's nephew draw the logo so that hardly anybody seeing it could mistake it for the Apple we know, but still.
Since the way it went with Apple Records, we know it's more complicated that "those guys were making cinema-stuff first".
I know Apple is in the filmmaking business now, so I guess it's fair enough that they wouldn't want people to mistake this cinema chain for them. It seems kind of boneheaded to make such a mistake when you look at the logo, but there are plenty of people out there dumb enough to make that mistake.
I still think it's a little small fry for them, but maybe the idiots who named the cinema should've just gone with "Apple Valley Cinema" to be safe.
Never mind that Apple had to settle with Apple Corps over their name.
I still think it's a little small fry for them, but maybe the idiots who named the cinema should've just gone with "Apple Valley Cinema" to be safe.
Never mind that Apple had to settle with Apple Corps over their name.
A lot of pretending you wouldn’t be doing what Apple is if you were in their shoes. Apple Cinemas with an apple logo, c’mon. You might not agree, but objectively there’s a justification. This is normal business and legal stuff, and Apple is a business - they don’t act with emotions.
Maybe they did expect a fight. Maybe they were squatting on that name in order to be bought out by Apple, and make a big profit.
I don’t know.
“This does not constitute legal advice. Please refer to a legal and/or squatting professional. Thank you.”
On a positive note, I’ve recently bought three lbs of organic delicious sphere-shaped fruit whose name I cannot post here for the fear of being sued by Apple lawyers for tademark infringement. Instead of biting into it, I will use a knife to cut small pieces off it to avoid being sued for imitating the Apple’s logo.
Last edited: