Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Targeting Indie Director Over 'Apple-Man' Film Title Trademark

Like a few people have stated, its not really about the movie or its title. Its the application for the word mark "Apple-Man":

The actual trademark application and case file

What he claiming as his is the wordmark "APPLE-MAN"

ImageAgentProxy


in regards to these goods and services:

Goods and Services​
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Downloadable computer game software for use on mobile and cellular phones; Downloadable e-books in the field of superhero stories; Downloadable e-books in the field of comics and graphic novels; Downloadable fiction e-books on a variety of topics; Downloadable video and computer game programs; Downloadable films and movies featuring superheroes provided via a video-on-demand service; E-books featuring superheroes recorded on computer media; E-books featuring superhero comics recorded on computer media; Fiction e-books on a variety of topics recorded on computer media; Recorded computer gaming software for recreational game playing purposes; Downloadable comic strips; Downloadable films and television programs featuring superheroes provided via a video-on-demand service; Motion picture films about superheroes


for an indie filmmaker, this is not standard behaviour. I would think especially the claim of "Downloadable computer game software for use on mobile and cellular phones" and "Recorded computer gaming software for recreational game playing purpose" will be a no go anyways

The list of Apple word mark claims

Apple Inc.
Mark: APPLE S#:77172511 R#:3928818
Mark: APPLE S#:73120444 R#:1078312
Mark: APPLE S#:78430230 R#:3317089
Mark: APPLE S#:77388864 R#:3621571
Mark: APPLE TV S#:77152380 R#:3359045
Mark: APPLE TV S#:88353819
Mark: APPLE TV + S#:88519804
Mark: APPLE ARCADE S#:88404177 R#:6420494
Mark: APPLE ARCADE S#:88404100
Mark: APPLE NEWS S#:86819678 R#:5346816
Mark: APPLE NEWS+ S#:88541065 R#:6375548
Mark: APPLE ONE S#:90270584
Mark: APPLE MUSIC S#:86659491 R#:5209933
Mark: APPLE MUSIC S#:86658508 R#:5330141
S#:77648705 R#:3679056
S#:78943482 R#:3298028
S#:76426501 R#:2715578
S#:78155196 R#:2951270
Mark: TV S#:87801324 R#:5603336
Mark: TV 4K S#:87605802 R#:5443286
Mark: TV S#:87069662 R#:5612350
Mark: TV S#:88353773 R#:6015048
Mark: TV S#:88353795 R#:5994244
Mark: TV S#:88631283 R#:6046302
Mark: TV + S#:88519625 R#:6148889
Mark: MUSIC S#:86663005 R#:5330145
Mark: MUSIC S#:86663019 R#:5209941
Mark: NEWS+ S#:88559819 R#:6015367
Mark: NEWS+ S#:88560204 R#:6375552

Note that the application was not actually approved ever, but posted for possible opposition for 30 days and that triggered the automatic response by apple in the trademark system.

Seems like standard stuff. Call your film "Apple-Man" if you like, but don't try to claim ownership in the US trademark system.
 
Last edited:
MacBH928 said:
"You Either Die a Hero, or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become the Villain"

and this is why 2022 is like 1984!

- Brought to you by CSAM!





Apple has trademark on "Apple Inc." not the english dictionary. They should not allow trademarks on dictionary words in the first place. You can trademark something like "Xbox" or "iPhone" but not "orange" and "walking" .
Click to expand...

So you think that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to trademark Windows, Office, Word, Excel, Outlook, Teams, Remote Desktop, Azure, Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, Exchange, Dynamics?
 
docbop said:
Screw Apple if name your company after a common thing like a fruit, it doesn't give the right to now tell the world how they can use the name of the fruit. Bottom line the company with more money than god is just looking for some free media coverage, by whining about this.
Click to expand...
This makes zero sense.

By company you mean this rando’s film studio? He made a B movie and he is using a standard and reasonable legal response to increase awareness.

The guy is the one looking for free media coverage. He made the big deal about it. He wants the publicity.
 
MacRumors said:


Apple is unhappy with the "Apple-Man" title that indie film director Vasyl Moskalenko is planning to use for a comedy film that's in development, with the Cupertino company opposing Moskalenko's "Apple-Man" trademark registration application. (via iPhone in Canada).

apple-man-film-trademark.jpg

Moskalenko in 2020 launched a successful Kickstarter project for "Apple-Man," an action comedy film that's about a part-human part-apple superhero who can levitate apples, and now that the film is in post-production, Apple is taking issue with the "Apple-Man" name. In a YouTube video, Moskalenko explains that Apple opposed the Apple-Man trademark and "initiated trial proceedings," sending him a 467-page document "full of lawyer terminology."


"My film has nothing to do with Apple corporation," Moskalenko says in the video. "I've never mentioned anything about MacBooks, iPhones, iPads and so on. Not a single word." Moskalenko says that his movie is about apples, "the fruits." Apple appears to be concerned that consumers will think "Apple-Man" is associated with or approved by Apple.

In an appeal to Apple, Moskalenko says that he has "nothing but respect" for the company, and that his film is in no way related to the iPhone, MacBooks, or other Apple products.Moskalenko says that he is "open to any negotiations" and hopes that he can reach an agreement with Apple. He also told iPhone in Canada that he is worried he'll have to spend his Kickstarter money on litigation.

Should his trademark registration be denied, Moskalenko is also concerned that Apple would be able to demand that the film is deleted following its release. "It actually looks like trademark bullying," he said to iPhone in Canada.

Apple has gotten involved in other major trademark disputes over designs that seem to have little relation to the company. Last year, Apple opposed the trademark of Prepear because the pear-shaped logo looked too much like Apple's own logo. Prepear and Apple were able to settle the issue after Prepear made small tweaks to the leaf design of the pear.

Article Link: Apple Targeting Indie Director Over 'Apple-Man' Film Title Trademark
Click to expand...
This is what you get, Apple, from using a word that identifies a fruit that existed long before you became a company. „Microsoft“ did not exist before the company. And if someone made a movie named „Broken Windows“, i doubt the director would be intimidated by Microsoft. The word Apple belongs to all speakers of English. You are going to pay us royalties, Apple, for using a word that is ours?
 
The title isn't even being ambiguous. It is in reference to actual Apples.
I hope he takes this to court, represents himself and wins the case without saying a word.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
It's not a suit over use of the word 'Apple' (capitalized or not) - it's a suit over a trademark involving the word 'Apple'.

Neither the film producer nor Apple are evil or nefarious in their actions. Calling either evil or publicity-seeking is out of line.

He is reasonable in wanting to trademark "Apple-Man". That is the key to monetizing more than just an initial movie or concept - additional movies, games, toys, whatever. If he doesn't trademark, then anyone can make "Apple-Man" movies or other stuff, and he has no legal standing to make them stop or to be paid for creating the character in the first place. He might end up benefiting from some publicity but that is clearly far from the only reason to file for trademark.

Apple is reasonable in defending its trademark because he is filing for trademark in specific domains that are of interest for protecting their name - even if the outcome is nothing more than a legal agreement between the two parties about his use of the specific mark and doesn't interfere with his distribution of the movie in any way.


To the people commenting about him and the movie being in Ukraine, that's irrelevant. He isn't trademarking just in Ukraine, and can't do it just in Ukraine if he wants to protect it outside Ukraine. He has to trademark in the United States in order to protect his intellectual property here. (or whatever other countries)

To people commenting about fruits and grocery stores, again completely irrelevant. Trademarks apply to a particular commercial domain. Neither he nor Apple are engaging legally over fruit and grocery stores - they're focused on movies and other electronic domains.


I commend the guy for being so positive in his response. As can be seen by so many comments on this forum, there are plenty of people out there who would have gone over the top with their response and followed the route of 'Apple is evil for suing me!!' and cursed at them and thrown all sorts of unwarranted accusations at them. Instead he expressed his admiration for what Apple has done for people at large and for people in his line of work in particular. Well done, Vasyl.


(The expression of these opinions are mine and mine alone. Should they bear any resemblance to those of any other entity, regardless of whether affiliated in any way with me, that is either purely coincidental or at minimum completely of completely independent nature.)
 
hans1972 said:
So you think that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to trademark Windows, Office, Word, Excel, Outlook, Teams, Remote Desktop, Azure, Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, Exchange, Dynamics?
Click to expand...

Yes. Azure is a colour . "remote desktop" and "active directory" are just words in a sentence. "I am controlling this pc via remote desktop" . "You will find the file in the current active directory" .

The only way I see its copyrighted is for a 1:1 competitor , so no other OS can name itself Windows or maybe an app to not confuse things. If I make a book called "Excel Accounting" or a Booked called "Azure Scapes" Microsoft should NOT have any rights to this.
 
yodajacobs said:
I commend the guy for being so positive in his response. As can be seen by so many comments on this forum, there are plenty of people out there who would have gone over the top with their response and followed the route of 'Apple is evil for suing me!!' and cursed at them and thrown all sorts of unwarranted accusations at them.
Click to expand...
No. Apple has become evil… and… they do stuff like auto patent squat for trivial nonsense like “Apple-man” that’s totally unrelated to anything that they ever plan to produce.

Apple could have solved this issue with a phone call first, but they pay lawyers to try to bully and steamroll people first before even thinking. There’s no universe where thats right.

Unwarranted? This is the company currently celebrating “black” history month, that has ethnic segregated slaves forced to work their supply chain… and hasn’t done one single damn thing to address it. Instead they bend over backwards to appease the government responsible so it doesn’t affect their bottom line, while Tim Cook personally extracts more wealth from the direct, literal oppression of other humans. He’s no better than pre-Civil War plantation owners, and it’s abhorrent than anyone would defend his hypocritical crap.

But let’s get real, just me and you… my dear, you are in an abusive relationship, and this creep is just going to keep doing this garbage. It’s time for you to snap out of it, and dump this dirtbag, not only before he seriously hurts you, or the kids, but also before he hurts more people and makes you culpable and an accessory. You were fooled and lied to, but now you know that he’s done it before, and you can’t make him stop. It’s time to worry about getting as far away as possible from all this. There’s lots of support out there if you need it, but you first need to not only accept reality but personally take responsibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back