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.
Brazilian Supreme Court to Determine If Apple Can Continue to Use 'iPhone' Trademark in Brazil
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The legal action was a process known as filing form PTO-2120, aka a Trademark "Notice of Opposition" and was filed with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
I looked at their website and they don't don't even sell any phones at all, just kids toys and DJ equipment and stereo speakers that I can see. They don't appear to be using the iPhone name on any product that I can see.
Is that an observation specifically grounded in Brazilian law? Or just an observation based on familiarity with your country's laws?
The court really should take this into account. The company is probably just looking for a payout; if they win they'll just license the "iPhone" trademark to Apple for $BIGNUM.
That said, maybe this is why Apple removed the name "iPhone" from their devices. They can just quietly stop using the name iPhone in Brazil, call it the Apple Phone there and give this company the middle finger.
I'm surprised Apple hasn't just gone with 'Apple Phone' by now. It's a no brainer from a branding perspective, it'll boost sales guarenteed — it's also consistent with Apple's recent branding convention. I'm sure it's a current point of divide within Apple, and is more of a matter of 'when', rather than 'if'.
I don't believe that will work since the word iPhone is in iOS running on the phones.
No, Apple's Brazillian dispute came in 2012 and then came up again periodically, most recently "earlier this year" according to a few paragraphs earlier.
Software is easy to change. They just localize “iphone” to something else in Brazil. It’s one line in a resource .plist file.
Well, what I find weird is Phone is not how you spell the word in Portuguese. It's telefone or celular. Strange that they would trademark "iPhone" in 2000 and not file it until 2008 after the iPhone had already debuted when it isn't even the Portuguese word for it.
Indeed, no clue about the costs of things on this front, but I would assume that having to redo tons of advertisement pieces, banners, online and physical, packages, anything iOS/iPadOS drivers, software, apps can’t mention iPhone, etc etc etc plus the time for that could be instantly evaporated away by paying for the trademark share.
I mean, the ripple effect how far can it go? If you have a Mac or Windows and you connect an iPhone, can it display it with the iPhone name? MacOS also would have to have a special localization tag for anything iPhone as ApplePhone or whatever they choose?
Or maybe the same reason Apple is trying to get a trademark denied from a company that has a pear for a logo? Brand protection? Rightful ownership to something? I mean, this company was the first to file, and 7 years before the iPhone even was announced... so yeah, they kind of have a case. The only reason Apple is allowed to share the name is because they probably threw gobs of money at Brazil in some shape or form.
it's all about trademark, branding not the product phone.Two diff segment
No the reason they are allowed to share it is because the trademark wasn't granted until 2008. After the iPhone already existed. There was no chance for apple to change the name if they were already selling the phones when the trademark was granted. Hence the sharing.
It sounds like they registered for it and didn’t actually use it in commerce until much later? If so, in many countries that can invalidate the trademark (the idea is to prevent people from speculatively applying for tons of trademarks that they have no intention of using).
1. It is nowhere near obvious that they filed for IPhone because of Apple. IGB filed probably because of the I in IGB.
2. Morons? Really? That contemptuous?
I dont think that Apple will ever allow this happening. A small local company in Brazil wining through extorsion against the big Apple? Not a chance. Apple can approach all local carriers in the country and forbid them from selling this fake iPhone or they will never do business with Apple again. They can do the same with all external suppliers this company has so at the end of day, it will be out of business in less than a year and the trademark they have would be finally sold for a penny or deemed abandoned. Apple could destroy this company if the final court's decision is not in their favor.
why does extorsion ? So big coop/company only can registered trademark? . Like me i have 2 wait 10 years for a domain name hold by tucows which not used for 6 years and 3 year year with 1 single page. This can consider extort.
Yeah, Apple will honor this company with the sole reseller rights after being blackmailed by them for years. It happend with Qualcomm, but it will never happen with this joke company that is not even 0,1% the size of Apple.
Having lived in Brazil, the problem is that Apple hasn’t greased the right palms. This specific claim has come up multiple times at this point, which goes to show that Apple isn’t playing by the Brazilian political rules.
Otherwise, it would’ve been quashed for good by now.
Otherwise, it would’ve been quashed for good by now.
It's based on general background knowledge of how trademarks work everywhere in the world, with broad details enforced by international treaties. Specific details vary from country to country and sometimes from state to state or city to city (fun fact - trademarks were originally created for bakers, and they only applied within reasonable walking distance of the baker... because without preservatives people generally ate their bread shortly after buying it).
Nobody ever "owns" a trademark. All you're granted is official recognition and registration as a method of dealing with (and preventing) confusion when two competitors use a similar name or logo or iconic design (think coke bottle shape). As long as *your* business is the one customers associate with your trademark, you can use it. If for any reason people stop associating the trademark with your business then the trademark is void.
Kleenex for example had their trademark stripped. And Google is in real danger of having the same happen to them.
Often two businesses will be allowed to use the same (or a similar) trademark, as is the case here. It actually happens all the time especially when a business starts small and grows to be larger. And while it may be allowed initially, that decision can be changed later.
Trademarks are fluid. And the fact that this Brazilian company doesn't seem to really use "iphone" much, while in Apple's case it's one of the most recognisable brands in the world, that means Apple is likely to win this case. It just might take forever to come to a decision.
Last edited:
This company could sell this trademark to Apple for a fair price and I'm sure Apple made a very generous offer initially. What most likely happened is that this company and its shareholders asked for many many millions and Apple response was "see you in courts then". So yes, it is extorsion when you pretend obtaining a huge amount of money and retairing all your shareholders just by selling a single trademark.
it cannot consider as diff country. If same country like cisco give to apple it's diff matter.
