You should pay more attention. Apple did not sue in this case and did not sue the political party in Norway. They filed a complaint with the patent office in the two countries.
It is a huge difference.
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
You should pay more attention. Apple did not sue in this case and did not sue the political party in Norway. They filed a complaint with the patent office in the two countries.
It is a huge difference.
Logos are not the same as trademarks. If Super Healthy Kids had not applied for a trademark but only used is a logo, then Apple probably would not have reacted.
They did not sue, but filed a complaint. Also you have to look at the trademark classes they have applied for (or been granted). The conflict is over class 42 and 45.
Could you elaborate on this? If the trademark in question isn't close then how could a company eventually lose it? Perhaps the answer is in McLean v. Fleming which, if that's the case, could you summarize the relevant part(s)?
It doesn't any more than making an ad means a company is in the advertising industry. They're more of a customer of the advertising or tech industry. That is, unless you're willing to argue that any company that makes an app is suddenly a tech company. Isn't that kind of silly?
This is about morals as much as law. Apple should be ashamed given the lack of similarity between the two companies and their logo. Apple's brand is not under any threat from this.
As I understand it, when you file an opposition, you've gone on the record as defending your IP, no matter how "close" something appears. If Apple didn't oppose this, someone could theoretically use this as an example of one that Apple should have defended. Damned if you do/don't. The bigger you are, the bigger the target you have on your back.
FWIW these decisions to oppose cost time—and thus money—as well. And they aren't made in vacuums. Clearly enough people at Apple thought this could be a problem down the road. You don't want to wait until someone hands you something that actually is close.
People talk a lot about David vs Goliath here. But Imagine if Google or Samsung bought this company. Now they have a fruit mark that is similar to Apple. I wonder if that would change anyone's opinions on this. Small companies can still cause big problems, anyone who's ever dealt with Patent trolls knows this.
Being in Apple's App Store for the last couple years has probably helped them tremendously, therefore they are benefiting from Apple—which is what Apple is somewhat alluding to in their filing. I wonder what would have happened if Prepear would have filed this early on before they made the app as known.
Last edited:
If anything, the macrumors logo has more similarities than this pear.
Which would be relevant if, say, Macrumors attempted to obtain a trademark on it, which apparently they have not.
Again, the issue here is not that this company is using that mark as its logo - the issue is that they are attempting to obtain an exclusive monopoly on that mark by trademarking it.
Because everyone knows a pear and apple look alike
. /sThe logos don't even look similar.
Perhaps Apple should take legal action against Musselman's for using an apple in their logo ?
Last edited:
Because everyone knows a pear and apple look alike
The logos don't even look similar.
Perhaps Apple should sue Musselman's for using an apple in their logo ?
View attachment 942600
Apple didn’t sue anyone
I'm an Apple fan, but I'm not with them on this. The logo clearly looks like a pear, which also is their name. Yeah it got a leaf and a fruit but so the ***** what?
Makes me remember Microsoft going after a teenager who's name is Mike Rowe and he registered a domain name called "mikerowesoft.com". He got sued becaused his domain phonetically sounds like MS's.
Makes me remember Microsoft going after a teenager who's name is Mike Rowe and he registered a domain name called "mikerowesoft.com". He got sued becaused his domain phonetically sounds like MS's.
But that's just it, I do know, before Steve died and Tim became CEO Apple was already successful and would have continued to be, maybe more than it is today. Tim has only ridden off the wave Steve had started. I can name numerous numerous products Apple released that were actually innovative and market changing devices. What has Tim Cook brought under his reign as CEO that has actually been innovative and game changing, or not already planned products since Steve Passed. The Touch bar? Apples semi apology for saying no one wants a touch screen but because they are to cocky to admit wrong you get the touchbar. Guess what else, you wouldn't have anything remotely similar to iPad OS, iPad Pro, Apple Pencil a keyboard attachment or crappy mouse support if it wasn't for Apple saying no one wants a 2 in 1, they would rather u have a tablet and a laptop separate, which Microsoft and every other PC OEM but Apple has proven that isn't what consumers want. You do realize Apple literally MAINSTREAMED multi touch displays and yet are the ONLY computer pc company to not have one in there laptops or display screens but once again you got the magical ***** touch bar at least and an iMac that doesn't have a swivel for the monitor unlike the Surface Studio....
I think this is the sticking point for me. The OP I responded to said:
"I don’t see the logos as similar, outside of them both being fruit."
I agree with them that I don't see these as similar at all. Given this what is the threshold for defending ones IP?
So, the thread is suddenly full of lawyers now ? Because Apple has not sued YET but went with a complex legal procedure against a company who likely will not be able to match the costs once this is escalated to courts, so that other companies are bullied as well ? If someone here has Apple stocks better be open about it instead of coming up with excuses every time, this is supposed to be a users' forum
Last edited by a moderator:
Welcome to the world in 2020. Many people think they’re an expert because they read a couple of webpages. Everybody waits for their turn to rant rather than listening to other people’s points of view.
If someone disagrees with you, they’re stupid, ignorant, or ill-informed.
Honestly, the way some (read: most) people communicate with each other online is disgusting. Moreover it’s spilling over into real-life, so prevalent is some people’s belief that they can’t be wrong and deserve to be heard.
Last edited by a moderator:
Which are you? The stupid, ignorant, or ill-informed? Or the person who thinks others are that?
No, you don't.
Jobs hated the idea of a stylus. The Apple Pencil has however been a massive success.
The Apple Watch has also been stunningly successful. That was initially a Jony Ive concept created and released under Tim Cook.
You Jobsians are quite comical in your belief in your chosen prophet: this, despite the fact Apple had many failures during is second tenure : iTunes Ping, "AntennaGate", G4 cube issues, iPod HiFi. There were even some badly received Mac releases under his watch, e.g. Lion and Leppard.
He also derided small tablets and big phones - both firm factors have been successes for the post Jobs Apple.
So no, you do not know how Apple would have been like if he was still alive today.
To think otherwise, quite frankly, rather delusional.
“Complex legal procedure?“ A trademark opposition? Seriously?
And if they wanted to sue, they wouldn’t need this procedure. They‘d sue. They aren’t alleging that this company infringes on Apple’s trademark. They are not trying to prevent this company from using the pear as their logo. They are simply trying to prevent the company from registering the pear as a trademark.
Things can be seen as "complex" when you don't understand.