Awful name. Don't want Apple getting sold out. But, I didn't vote. I'm just assuming that's why.musiclover137 said:
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 Trademarks 'Mobile Me'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But i don't think it would be considered "broadcasting," that could be merely access (wireless and internet based) to these files that you upload. It's not like making your own radio station or whatever.ebunton said:
I'd Guess Not Working With Blackberry
The maker of Blackberry, the popular, hand-held device for mobile messaging, recently lost a crucial court ruling in a separate patent case which threatens to shutter its national network here in the U.S. That case is ongoing, and a judge may issue an order permanently prohibiting Research in Motion, the Blackberry producer, from operating its network with the technology it currently uses. Another firm, NTP, claims it owns the rights to the technology that Blackberry is using.
That case ultimately could leave millions of users without mobile messaging capability, including the federal government, which filed court papers, asking the federal judge in Richmond, Va.
Redwood Shores, Calif.-based Visto claimed in court papers filed Thursday that Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft had "infringed upon multiple patents Visto holds regarding proprietary technology that provides enterprises and consumers with mobile access to their e-mail and other data."
A Microsoft spokeswoman said that the company couldn't fully comment on the case. "Until we have an opportunity to review this complaint and investigate Visto's allegations, we're not in a position to comment specifically on them," said the spokeswoman. "In the meantime, however, we wish to underscore that Microsoft stands behind its products and respects the intellectual property rights of others."
Mobile Me Could be a blackberry alternative, as it has just as stupid a name as Blackberry.
The maker of Blackberry, the popular, hand-held device for mobile messaging, recently lost a crucial court ruling in a separate patent case which threatens to shutter its national network here in the U.S. That case is ongoing, and a judge may issue an order permanently prohibiting Research in Motion, the Blackberry producer, from operating its network with the technology it currently uses. Another firm, NTP, claims it owns the rights to the technology that Blackberry is using.
That case ultimately could leave millions of users without mobile messaging capability, including the federal government, which filed court papers, asking the federal judge in Richmond, Va.
Redwood Shores, Calif.-based Visto claimed in court papers filed Thursday that Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft had "infringed upon multiple patents Visto holds regarding proprietary technology that provides enterprises and consumers with mobile access to their e-mail and other data."
A Microsoft spokeswoman said that the company couldn't fully comment on the case. "Until we have an opportunity to review this complaint and investigate Visto's allegations, we're not in a position to comment specifically on them," said the spokeswoman. "In the meantime, however, we wish to underscore that Microsoft stands behind its products and respects the intellectual property rights of others."
Mobile Me Could be a blackberry alternative, as it has just as stupid a name as Blackberry.
bubba451 said:
That gets my vote. Forget all the stupid mobile phone nonsense. It's a new (and IMHO better) name for Home on iPod.
This would keep someone busy for a long, long timeDoctor Q said:
One favorite Apple tactic is to file marks in various countries so they aren't too easily noticed. A recent example was Numbers, for which Apple filed first in Malaysia, but there are many more like "iPod Boombox" floating around.I think that concept is dead. Apple started discouraging that kind of use a couple years ago, and now that they've dropped FireWire it's not as interesting an option.bubba451 said:
Hey, soorrrrry, but I'm a bit off topic.iMeowbot said:This would keep someone busy for a long, long time
I think that concept is dead. Apple started discouraging that kind of use a couple years ago, and now that they've dropped FireWire it's not as interesting an option.
On topic: I think it would be interesting to see how many US trademarks Apple has. B/c they're filing for a trademark right now here in the US, right? And how many do they actually use would be interesting.
Off topic: Um, in your signature, I'm being dumb
, but do you like the MacBook Pro and think it's really fast or no?
I don't know, I'm always thought MacBook Pro is sort of a cute name. Really high-powered sounding.doogle said:
And now people won't have to ask like when I talk about my Powerbook: "Duuh, is that a Mac or a PC?"
Suprising how many ask.
amateurmacfreak said:I don't know, I'm always thought MacBook Pro is sort of a cute name. Really high-powered sounding.
And now people won't have to ask like when I talk about my Powerbook: "Duuh, is that a Mac or a PC?"
Suprising how many ask.
I like "MacBook" but not the "Pro" bit. Reminds me of all those software packages that had "pro" on the end.
I guess I can always scratch that bit off the laptop
The Is No Topicamateurmacfreak said:
It's enough to explode perfectly good brains. Trademarks don't necessarily have to be registered at all to be valid, and there are some unregistered Apple marks (some don't even have applications).
For Apple at USPTO, I get 199 live, registered marks, 76 live applications that haven't yet been approved or denied, 195 dead, formerly registered marks, and 313 dead applications that were never approved. Many of those marks are duplicates (for example, the bitten apple logo is registered multiple times for different business areas).
Like everyone else, I haven't the foggiest idea because they haven't shipped yet. The board is full of definitive statements about what this hardware can do, but no one even has it yetOff topic: Um, in your signature, I'm being dumb
Personally, I would really like to see a device that combines the benefits of what many different devices offer now.
It would be great if I could replace my cell phone, PDA, and iPod with a single device that met all of my needs. I would pay a premium for that. It would probably be cheaper, which may be a detriment to some existing companies.
If I could take and make calls, check and send email, access the internet, add to works in progress, watch programming, or just listen to music (when I am not doing any of those other things) I would be happy.
Microsoft has long been hinting at a device that meets these needs, and more, through the PC tablet. The all encompassing personal organizer/media provider.
I hope that this at least a hint of Apples working on making a superior product that offers the reliability and innovations that only Apple has been able to offer so far.
Just an iPhone is small peas. The product of the future is more all encompassing, it has to meet so many more needs that just being able to get basic .Mac information, make calls, and listen to music.
It's really a device that is bound to become an integral aspect of all of peoples daily needs, in every aspect.
Images of Bill fooking Gates carting around his stupid tablet come to mind. Please Apple, provide an Apple worthy alternative, because it seems to be an idea worthy of realizing its time. It just won't be as good unless Apple gives them a reason to make it at least a somewhat Apple worthy knockoff.
It would be great if I could replace my cell phone, PDA, and iPod with a single device that met all of my needs. I would pay a premium for that. It would probably be cheaper, which may be a detriment to some existing companies.
If I could take and make calls, check and send email, access the internet, add to works in progress, watch programming, or just listen to music (when I am not doing any of those other things) I would be happy.
Microsoft has long been hinting at a device that meets these needs, and more, through the PC tablet. The all encompassing personal organizer/media provider.
I hope that this at least a hint of Apples working on making a superior product that offers the reliability and innovations that only Apple has been able to offer so far.
Just an iPhone is small peas. The product of the future is more all encompassing, it has to meet so many more needs that just being able to get basic .Mac information, make calls, and listen to music.
It's really a device that is bound to become an integral aspect of all of peoples daily needs, in every aspect.
Images of Bill fooking Gates carting around his stupid tablet come to mind. Please Apple, provide an Apple worthy alternative, because it seems to be an idea worthy of realizing its time. It just won't be as good unless Apple gives them a reason to make it at least a somewhat Apple worthy knockoff.
Guys, you are ALL missing the big picture here! It's obvious what "Mobile Me" is! The name says it all! Apple acquired the right to Windows Me from Microsoft, and "Mobile Me" is a version of Windows Me designed for mobile devices!
bennyek said:
Ha! What are you really going to do with it? (Assuming it is a joke that you hope to sell it back to Apple)
In case anyone didnt know this already, there have been several precident setting cases involving cyber-squatting. Basically the results have been bad for the squatters.
Some cases were lost based on a failure of the squatter to show any reason to have the name except to extort money from a company that had a more reasonable claim to it.
In at least one case I was really angered to see the little guy lose, because he really DID have a legitimate claim... I forget who was actually involved, but it was something like a guy named DuPont who had set up a website for his established Dupont Consulting business. (Again, it wasn't really Dupont... I just cant remember the real name). Anyway, this guy lost because the court found that the public would benefit more by the name going to the larger company, even though the smaller company had a good reason for the name and got there first.
HIllary Clinton paid $5000 during her campaign to get HillaryClinton.com, but that was only because she was in a hurry to get it up and running. Apple doesn't play that game, and has successfully taken iMac.com and others to court to avoid paying for domain names.
Evangelion said:
Yeah... It is going to be the undelying software for the new iPod Me. Duh. Everyone knows that.
Interestingly (or not) Apple don't own;amateurmacfreak said:
www.macbook.com - owned by a book site
www.macbook.co.uk - owned by an Apple reseller
www.macbookpro.com - registered on the 10th Jan in LA by a guy with the email address syntheticrhyme@hotmail.com and for sale
www.macbookpro.co.uk - registered on the 10th Jan and for sale
Yeah it is quite a bummer whenthe big guy gets his way just because he's the big guy. These sites are not always purchased so apple will buy them. Think of sites like powerbookzone.com or ipodlounge .com There will be sites that pop up to sell apple related stuff or services whenever a new product is released. It can't hurt to hang onto it and see what happens. Ya know?HumanJHawkins said:
