You think the lawyers go to apple with these ideas?
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 Takes Legal Action Against Small Company With Pear Logo
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh good grief? Really? It’s an absolute certainty that the overwhelming vast majority of Apple users or potential users are either oblivious to these things or simply don’t care.
Just because there’s a few stories in tech websites, and folks like us talking, doesn’t ipso-facto mean that this is an issue the majority of users are even aware of.
This is why we have lawyer jokes. As for the people defending this kind of corporate bullying, well, I guess there will always be those on this forum who can’t see the forest for the apples.
As for this Apple customer, I expect more from Tim Cook and co. Signed the petition. Downloaded the Prepear app.
As for this Apple customer, I expect more from Tim Cook and co. Signed the petition. Downloaded the Prepear app.
Ask 10 people which other tech company logo they have in mind. 9 will say "Apple". Are you the tenth?
'Similiar' also means in association, not just graphically.
Has Apple gotten permission yet to use the name after they stole it from the Beatles? Asking for a friend.
None of the examples above have any relation to this lawsuit plus those are lawsuits that have some substance so of course they would fight and could possibly use. The case in this point is just bat crap out there. I'm a stronger believer in keeping your intellectual property safe but this is just nonsense because they aren't even visually similar. Both icons might provoke the visual idea of a fruit but are in no way visually similar. Second they aren't even in a grey area where their business might be confused... This might be Apple legal but Tim Cook needs to go at this point for allowing this stuff to happen and for some bad choices with prices and choice of product options for awhile now. I can just see Tim Cook saying, "well now that we don't have anything else to exclude from our products like a charging brick to bring up our revenue, let's just leave to legal for now and see what crazy idea they come up with."Speaking of...
Losing Trademark Rights - How Can It Happen?
Losing trademark rights is a real possibility - read our guide on how to avoid this potential disaster.secureyourtrademark.com
Only businesses that actively monitor and protect their marks, searching out and prosecuting cases of infringement, will continue to benefit from trademark rights. Businesses that fail to protect their trademarks will see their rights be diluted and possibly canceled through litigation.
Loss of Trademark Rights from Naked Licensing
Authored by D. Brian Kacedon, John C. Paul, and Susan Y. Tull Trademark owners may forfeit their trademark rights by engaging in "naked licensing" and failing to exercise adequate quality control ove...www.finnegan.com
A recent Ninth Circuit decision, FreecycleSunnyvale v. The Freecycle Network, No. 08-16382 (9th Cir. Nov. 24, 2010), found that a trademark owner engaged in naked licensing by failing to adequately control the use of its trademarks by members of its non-profit organization. Based on its analysis, the Court invalidated the trademarks.
Failure To Enforce Trademarks: If You Snooze, Do You Lose?
In the recent case of Abraham v. Alpha Chi Omega, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion regarding a fascinating dispute that involved a failure to enforce trademarks for more than 40 years. Background Thomas Kenneth Abraham is the world’s largest manufacturer of decorative...www.forbes.com
Trademark owners should diligently protect their trademarks from infringement and other misuse (e.g., blurring, tarnishment, unfair competition, passing off, false advertising and cybersquatting) that may harm the owner’s goodwill and business reputation. A trademark owner is not required to uncover all possible uses that might conflict, or immediately commence a lawsuit against every possible infringer. At the same time, a complete failure to enforce will lead to a weakening of an owner’s marks, loss of distinctiveness over time and, as we saw in this case, potential forfeiture of certain available remedies.
They're going to sue the iBible next? :O
No...no. Not 'sue.' 'Protest...' the use of the Apple....
Azrael.
I stopped reading there. This is not a lawsuit.
Wether Apple “has” to do this or not is moot. It is ridiculous. Besides the fact that they are totally different fruits, the logos are not even remotely alike. Who will they sue next? Fruit of the Loom underwear? 😂
By law they have to defend their logo and intellectual property rights or it’s like they abandoned them.
They are fruit. That is enough of a coincidence. /s
I hope they don't go after Spongebob for his pineapple house.
No. While they may have not sued, they certainly aren't interested in keeping the pear available for anyone to use. They are claiming it causes confusion with their logo and thus the pear logo cannot be trademarked. i\Uf another company uses a pear Apple may very well do the same thing again, depending on the logo design.
There is a difference between claiming it cannot be trademarked and claiming it cannot be used. You seem to be confusing the two issues. Apple hasn’t sued to prevent this company from using the pear as its logo. It has only objected to allowing the company to *trademark* the pear - if the company is permitted to trademark the pear, then *other* companies cannot use a similar logo.
But that is not the test, it's, as I understand it, a series of factors including similarity, likelihood odf confusion, strength of the existing trademark, user sophistication, markets it is used, or likely to be used, in, etc. that go into whether or not a prudent consumer is likley to be confused.
Simply because you can create a connection via a leading question does not mean it is confusing.
Last edited:
OK: I read more of your post, to wit:
The man has made Apple the most successful company in modern history and arguably one of the best CEOs in eons.
Yet you think "he should go" over this?
Thanks for the laugh, I needed that...
Oh, wait...you were serious?
Oh my....
Oh my, oh my, oh my....
I agree, and that is what trademark law is intended to do, within certain limits. Apple, however, in their notice of opposition, cites confusion and dilution, not that the pear is generic enough not to be trademark. In the former case, once the trademark is disallowed Apple can demand they stop using it, and do the same to any company that selects a pear logo Apple thinks is too close to theirs.
As a 'minimalistic fruit design with a right-angled leaf' is the source of trouble I believe I have come up with a remedy.
They don’t need the trademark to be denied in order to demand they stop using it; if they wanted this company to stop, they could have already taken action to make them stop.