Copyright and trademark is not the same thing.
Apple's Trademark for 'There's an App For That' Approved
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Copyright and trademark is not the same thing.
roland.g
macrumors 604
So one moment you guys attest patents and now you applaud it.
at·test [uh-test]
verb (used with object)
1.
to bear witness to; certify; declare to be correct, true, or genuine; declare the truth of, in words or writing, esp. affirm in an official capacity: to attest the truth of a statement.
2.
to give proof or evidence of; manifest: His works attest his industry.
3.
to put on oath.
verb (used without object)
4.
to testify or bear witness (often fol. by to ): to attest to the reliability of an employee.
ap·plaud [uh-plawd]
verb (used without object)
1.
to clap the hands as an expression of approval, appreciation, acclamation, etc.: They applauded wildly at the end of the opera.
2.
to express approval; give praise; acclaim.
Should I be the first person to say, "Put down the wiid."
I think you meant to say detest and applaud as those would be contradictory and attest and applaud are not.
cmaier
Suspended
Maybe. They could have done it prior to registering the trademark, too. Either way they would have to prove that the use of "There's a map for that" is likely to confuse consumers into thinking that the verizon product being referenced is an Apple product. Seems unlikely, given that the ads were actually a dig at Apple (or at least a dig at Apple's product as sold only for AT&T).
So one moment you guys attest patents and now you applaud it.
A patent and a trademark are two completely different things.
roland.g
macrumors 604
McDonald's -> McD's -> I'm Lovin' it -> McLovin' it -> McLovin
Can McDonald's sue the makers of SuperBad?
Phil A.
Moderator emeritus
Apple haven't copyrighted those 5 words, what they've done is registered the phrase "There's an App for That" as a Trademark: Two completely different things
dscottbuch
macrumors member
First, its not copyright, its trademark. If there was copyright protection for this phrase it would have adhered at first use - but there wouldn't be.
For trademark, this phrase is very 'trademarkable' and they have done it. IMO 'There's a Map for That' would infringe and Verison knows it so you won't see that again. A common way to phrase the legal standard for infringement is "Would A Moron In A Hurry Be Confused by..." which, IMO, 'There's a Map for That' does (confuse a Moron).
firestarter
macrumors 603
A good comparison.
"There's an app for that" is equally trite, annoying and lacking in class.
*LTD*
macrumors G4
It's a trademark.
Anyway, why are you so angry about this? How does it affect you personally?
zeemeerman2
macrumors 6502
Take it easy, mon... They're not going to arrest you. They only give you... how to put it...
Death Sentence!
That's all.
seamuskrat
macrumors 6502a
This is not a paten or copyright - it is a trademark.
There is a substantial difference.
A trademark simply menas you cannot use the protected logi, phrase, etc. in trade/commerce of a like nature. You saw the article discussed splittinginto two categpries. This just says that no other computer maker can use the phrase there is an app for that in the contest of computing utility functions.
It is not banned from use in other means or even other business functions if it is proved to be wholly different.
Copyright is for works - like writing, music, photos, etc. It is a bit fuzzy about software, software is a work of code, but what is protected- the code to do say copy and paste or the end result of copy and paste. A patent covers an invention or device. It can also cover a software application.
Why this all gets confused is that when these laws were written the world of software, apps and GUI did not exist. So how do you legitimately protect intellectual property and trade secret info like gestures, compression algorothms, GU Interfaces? Is it a patent for the function? Or a copyright on the code? What is someone writes new code that does the same thing? i.e. Windows vs. Mac. Same concept/idea, different code.
As a non lawyer I would love to bolame them all for this mess, but the whole system needs an update for the current techniques and technologies.
Afterall, if I say something witty of Twitter or Facebook who owns it/ Me, Facebook? public domain?
There is a substantial difference.
A trademark simply menas you cannot use the protected logi, phrase, etc. in trade/commerce of a like nature. You saw the article discussed splittinginto two categpries. This just says that no other computer maker can use the phrase there is an app for that in the contest of computing utility functions.
It is not banned from use in other means or even other business functions if it is proved to be wholly different.
Copyright is for works - like writing, music, photos, etc. It is a bit fuzzy about software, software is a work of code, but what is protected- the code to do say copy and paste or the end result of copy and paste. A patent covers an invention or device. It can also cover a software application.
Why this all gets confused is that when these laws were written the world of software, apps and GUI did not exist. So how do you legitimately protect intellectual property and trade secret info like gestures, compression algorothms, GU Interfaces? Is it a patent for the function? Or a copyright on the code? What is someone writes new code that does the same thing? i.e. Windows vs. Mac. Same concept/idea, different code.
As a non lawyer I would love to bolame them all for this mess, but the whole system needs an update for the current techniques and technologies.
Afterall, if I say something witty of Twitter or Facebook who owns it/ Me, Facebook? public domain?
*LTD*
macrumors G4
It's actually quite clever and memorable. It doesn't need "class" - all it needs to be is catchy and positive.
It's about selling a product to a large market, not about formulating a synopsis for a Master's Thesis.
In any case, when it comes to marketing, I'm quite sure Apple knows more than you.
TheShinyMac
macrumors 6502a
adds generic* "MY LEG" yelling
cmaier
Suspended
You can still use the phrase, even in the context of business dealing with computing - you just can't use it in a way that would likely confuse a consumer as to the source of your product. So you could, for example, have a verizon commercial that says "Apple says 'there's an app for that,' but is there really?" You could also probably say "there's a map for that" so long as there was no likelihood consumers would think your product is made, sold by, or otherwise endorsed by Apple.
firestarter
macrumors 603
It depends on market. While this may be lapped up in North America, I don't think these wise-guy one liners go down quite as well in the UK.
Exactly what is clever about 'there's an app for that'?
And when it comes to my personal opinion (which my comment was), I think I probably know better than Apple, thanks.
NicoleRichie
macrumors 6502
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
You are all correct, there's a trademark for that as well.
You are all correct, there's a trademark for that as well.
roland.g
macrumors 604
cmaier
Suspended
It reminds consumers, in a concise manner, that Apple's huge app store provides a long tail meaning that no matter how obscure the customer's needs, there is likely to be at least one app available to meet them, unlike other competing platforms with fewer apps.
BJMRamage
macrumors 68030
clever phrase.
Apple seemed to "coin" that phrase and it works for their iOS devices so fittingly. When talking to someone who doesn't have a clue about iPhones/Pads/Pods and we describe something and say "there's an app for that" as a reference to how easy it is to use these devices.
All for the trademark of it. Many many many companies trademark phrases. take a look at some and you would be amazed. and I could see Verizon "getting in trouble" for Map for that phrase as catching it offhand, it sounds very similar and could see it being confusing to some.
people should chill for getting so worked up about this.
Apple seemed to "coin" that phrase and it works for their iOS devices so fittingly. When talking to someone who doesn't have a clue about iPhones/Pads/Pods and we describe something and say "there's an app for that" as a reference to how easy it is to use these devices.
All for the trademark of it. Many many many companies trademark phrases. take a look at some and you would be amazed. and I could see Verizon "getting in trouble" for Map for that phrase as catching it offhand, it sounds very similar and could see it being confusing to some.
people should chill for getting so worked up about this.
firestarter
macrumors 603
It's easy to get that message across without coming up with an repetative catchphrase to push out in every advert.
Just think of the Intel 'four note' jingle. Annoying, yes?
Why is this even news? Windows took on iOS and Android earlier today with an operating system of their own while over here on MR we discuss a cheesy slogan.
Funny, posters were asking you just that on this thread when you spat out your dummy and likened Spotify to piracy. Maybe you should head back over there and answer some of the questions posed before coming in here spraying your hypocrisy.
Funny, posters were asking you just that on this thread when you spat out your dummy and likened Spotify to piracy. Maybe you should head back over there and answer some of the questions posed before coming in here spraying your hypocrisy.
cmaier
Suspended
The four notes are semantically null, however.
gnasher729
Suspended
Apple didn't get a freaking copyright on seven words. They got a trademark. A completely different thing. You can use these exact words anywhere you like, except for trying to sell software.
spillproof
macrumors 68020
Stevey should also trademark "One more thing..."