Apple didn’t sue that company.Lol....well this is kind of amusing after reading Apple suing some little 5 person outfit over a pear logo that looks like a pear and only a pear.
Apple didn’t sue that company.Lol....well this is kind of amusing after reading Apple suing some little 5 person outfit over a pear logo that looks like a pear and only a pear.
Lol....well this is kind of amusing after reading Apple suing some little 5 person outfit over a pear logo that looks like a pear and only a pear.
They applied in 2000, but it was granted in 2008. But none of that matters at all - trademarks are not "first in best dressed" they are granted to whoever is best known in the community.
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.
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.
Apple's Brazilian dispute comes just after news that Apple has opposed the trademark application for Prepear, a recipe and meal planning app that uses a pear for an Apple logo. Apple fears people who encounter the pear logo will associate it with Apple.
Software is easy to change. They just localize “iphone” to something else in Brazil. It’s one line in a resource .plist file.I don't believe that will work since the word iPhone is in iOS running on the phones.
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.How can you know for sure they had those intentions? This company was founded in the 60s, and its origin can be traced about 20 years before Apple even existed. They were also producing electronics when Steve Jobs was still in basic school.
They registered the brand name iPhone in 2000, 7 years before Apple released their product and they have been in the business ever since, not your average company troll.
When you say “obviously” and “popular” it is as baseless, just your conjecture. Macs are still not that prominent in Latin America, and 22 years ago in 1998 they had penetrated the market even less, Windows was (still is) king back then in Latin America.
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.They should just pay IGB Electronica for the trademark. It's not like they can't afford it. And I'm betting IGB Electronica wouldn't mind a huge sum of money.
I know this will sound a little silly, but I like how they did it with the Apple TV. It'll be a bit longer to say "Apple Phone" but the apple symbol next to "Phone" would be pretty sweet.
All in all, i think the suit is extra at this juncture seeing how long apple's been in the market and that Gradiente's iphone (a) isn't even on their site as a product to buy and (b) is an old-ass android (any other android is going to be significantly better). What are they really wanting at this point besides just money?
it's all about trademark, branding not the product phone.Two diff segmentI 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.
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.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 just about money, give the company in brazil sole reseller right . solve problem.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).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.
I don’t know how many phones Apple sells in Brazil, but I bet the Apple Phone would sell just as well.
Let the morons have their iPhone trademark (obviously filed because of Apple’s popular iMac product line debuted in 1998).
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.Yah, it all depends on the amount of sales. I'm sure it wouldn't be cheap to rebrand and produce a product for one specific country. Manufacturing, branding, OS, documentation, web presence, advertising, etc all have to be specialized. It might not be worth it and be cheaper to just pull out of Brazil.
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.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.
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.it just about money, give the company in brazil sole reseller right . solve problem.
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).Is that an observation specifically grounded in Brazilian law? Or just an observation based on familiarity with your country's laws?
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.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.
it cannot consider as diff country. If same country like cisco give to apple it's diff matter.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.