Apple Takes Legal Action Against Small Company With Pear Logo

[ArtOfWarfare]

Oh look, free publicity for a small company that nobody has ever heard of before and nobody would have ever heard of if not for that legal stunt. What a coincidence...

It's not free publicity. The world's most valuable company is suing them, costing them tens of thousands in legal fees, stress, and they had to layoff 20% of their employees just to cover legal costs.

We're hearing about it because this David is choosing to stand up to Goliath instead of just dying, and they've successfully gotten MacRumors to run an article (no small feat - I've sent MacRumors dozens of tips over the past 15 years and only a single one resulted in an article.)

Apple did absolutely nothing to assist with this - Apple would have much rathered just silently smother the company out of existence before anyone ever heard of it. Apple might realize what an idiotic move this was and back off. Alternatively, they might continue with it (continuing the hope to murder the company before too many people hear about it) but risk bigger outlets picking up the story. At some point, it might grow to the point where Apple can't just back off and instead has to do more and issue a public apology.

 

[GhostRaider]

Honestly they don't look similar. I think Apple needs to get their eyes checked on this one. Unless they're hurt because its a fruit.

 

[ck2875]

I stared at this for a while being like “wtf is Apple seeing that I’m not” before I saw it, but I think the similarity that Apple might have an issue with is that the white space inside the pear’s leaf (when rotated 90°) is nearly identical to the Apple leaf shape.

 

[justperry]

Apple is not suing in a court. They are filing a complaint with the patent office.

Not really clear from the article, I might have read or misunderstood what I read though, but, why does it cost them money then?

As I said before,I am not familiar with US legal system.

 

[justperry]

If they taught even basic trademark law in high school, half these folks would have removed their posts by now.

We aren't all US citizens on MR.

 

[Rob_2811]

Hope they fight it, I hope they put out a laptop in response to this.

Imagine Apples lawyers when the Pearbook Air launches !!

 

[hans1972]

Two companies selling liver pills with similar logos/packaging. Prepear is not selling phones, computers, watches, speakers, or tablets. Actually they aren’t selling anything that Apple sells. Their logo isn’t remotely similar. Their name isn’t remotely similar.

Apple doesn’t need to protect the trademark; they want to. And in this case, they’re just being dicks for no reason at the same time they’re being investigated by multiple states and countries for anticompetitive practices.

If you are a law student you would now that it is important which class they want the trademark registered for. Apple is only oppsosing Super Healthy Kids, Inc.' (not Prepear) trademark in class 42 and class 45.

Class 42 is "Scientific and technological services and research and design relating thereto" and class 45 is "Personal, Social, and Security Services". Both seems to be overlapping with Apple since their trademark is also in class 42 and class 45.

 

[superlawyer15]

Could you elaborate?

That’s a misrepresentation of the law.
Note my username.

 

[hans1972]

The main issue is that trademark protection incentivizes companies to sue even if they actually know very well that they don't have much of a case.

Good thing Apple as sued then.

 

[hans1972]

It's not free publicity. The world's most valuable company is suing them, costing them tens of thousands in legal fees, stress, and they had to layoff 20% of their employees just to cover legal costs.

Apple is not suing them in a court. They have filed a complaint with the patent office.

 

[JPSaltzman]

Oh, for the good ol' days when Apple Corps (UK - Beatles) kept suing Apple Computer (US - California) for trademark infringement, especially when Apple Computer entered the music world with iPod, iTunes etc etc etc. -- particularly after Apple Computer (in the days of Steve Jobs) kept insisting that they were strictly a computer company and would never enter the same market as Apple Corps.

And Apple Computer kept insisting, "Oh, there's no way anyone would mistake the Beatles' Apple for our Apple!"

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Before all the youngsters enter. They need to do this to defend their own logo. Go read law.

Oh cool. The Apple apologists are making things up in the first comment.

 

[hans1972]

Of course it doesn’t preclude them from filing a suit, but the optics are terrible. Filing a facially ridiculous lawsuit to bully a tiny company and probably put them out of business doesn’t exactly get Apple any sympathy.

And the fact that Prepear develops for the App Store actually does put this firmly in the purview of the anti-competition investigations.

I now have serious doubt you are a law student specialising in IP law. Apple has not filed a lawsuit. They have filed what I would call a complaint in lay man's term.

 

[cycomiko]

Its not legal action, nor is it a patent opposition (as the article states).

its just normal trademark activities.

 

[ethanwa79]

I see no similarities between the two logos, and I don’t see how anyone could be confused between the two. One is clearly an Apple and the other a Pear. They don’t use the same colors, shape, and even fill. They also have vastly different products. I think this is going to be a loss for Apple.

 

[hans1972]

So your argument is as follows: “Apple has good lawyers, so every single lawsuit they file must be justified and defensible.” Bravo! Maybe Apple should be paying you to just walk into the courtroom, lay this devastating argument on the judge, and just walk out the door.

Apple has been doing this for decades and their goal is not to win but to file complaints and sometimes lawsuits. So by filing this complaint, they have already won, even if they loose.

 

[cmaier]

This isn't a lawsuit. It's apple objecting to the pear company's attempt to trademark the pear - that is, apple objects to the pear company being allowed to prevent others from using logos that look like the pear. Even if apple won, it wouldn't mean that the pear company couldn't use the pear for itself.

 

[Martinpa]

Of course it doesn’t preclude them from filing a suit, but the optics are terrible. Filing a facially ridiculous lawsuit to bully a tiny company and probably put them out of business doesn’t exactly get Apple any sympathy.

And the fact that Prepear develops for the App Store actually does put this firmly in the purview of the anti-competition investigations.

Does it though? Many here have already pointed out that the two companies aren’t competitors, there is no overlap in the products they offer. Correct me if I’m wrong (and I very well might be since, like I said, I don’t have the legal knowledge required), but isn’t anti-competitive behavior when a company uses its favourable /monopolistic position in a market to give itself an unfair advantage in another market? That’s how I understood it. If they’re not competing, then by definition, they can’t be using anti-competitive behavior in this case. And since, from my understanding, antitrust isn’t applicable here, investigations/cases/rulings pertaining to antitrust shouldn’t be taken into account in this instance. Justice is blind.

I’m not arguing it doesn’t have the potential to look bad to the public though. But, as someone already pointed out earlier in the thread, most people will have forgotten about it tomorrow...

 

[majordude]

The leaf is the same.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Sounds anything but “free”.

The system is broken. Apple has to do this, and small companies are hurt. No one wins.

Depends on the value of the free publicity. If they got $500,000 worth of publicity for $10,000, that’s a lot of free publicity.

Let me guess how this ends: pear company ends up settling with Apple and changes their logo. Apple may even pay for some associated costs of replacing stationery and such. Pear company gets loads of free publicity.

 

[aleni]

Y

Before all the youngsters enter. They need to do this to defend their own logo. Go read law.

You better take off that profile picture of yours before Tim Cook sues you!

 

[mdridwan47]

Just noticed these two apps on my iPhone.

These companies have more of a claim than Apple does. Absolutely ridiculous!

What's going on with Apple lately? First the app store controversies now this? Where are the grown ups?!

 

[jarman92]

I now have serious doubt you are a law student specialising in IP law. Apple has not filed a lawsuit. They have filed what I would call a complaint in lay man's term.

I haven’t done a deep dive into the situation, I’m just going by what this particular story said at the time I read it.

 

[iMi]

By this standard any logo infringes on Apple’s logo. Ridiculous. It honestly makes me question Apple as a company and damages its brand, in my mind.

 

[Osamede]

Obscene.

Apple has too much money and no new ideas. Which is why they now think god gave them the right to own all fruit logos. They can’t. Not even within the tech sector.