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

Cisco Suing Apple For iPhone Trademark Infringement

I agree at the very least Cisco will loose the name due to all the public uptake. Of course they will be allowed to use the product name just like any company can call their product iPhone. They should have sued 4 years ago or at the very least when Apple got the the name Iphone.Org or when the Internet Phone Company got iphone.com. Cisco should have known better. But whats cooler is that Apple actually wanted this phone to work with Skype or VOIP so when you came home it would go off the Cingular network and ODOMADICALLY connect with the your Home or Biz VOIP network.

Also, Apples Xphone is like a cancer drug, they may say if you don't allow us the name we will not bring it to market. So, the future of telephony stops there with all the patents.

Pfizer, "So you won't let us name our drug that cures cancer "iPod" ok, well we won't bring it to market and everyone will die... thanks.
 
This was dumb on apples part.

The real end result though, is that people will always call this device "iPhone" just as they refer to most macs as "imac" Cisco has no worries, noone is going to buy that thing once more cellphones get built in VOiP.
 
Waddya wanna bet Cisco bought up the name in anticipation of a free payday from Apple (I know they acquired "iPhone" around 2000 from an acquisition). Kind of like people buying "walmart.com" then trying to sell it to the actual Wal-Mart.
 
clevin said:
trademark law sue always have benefit, but i wouldn't call ppl low just because they sue the guy who invade their trademark.
Click to expand...

Do we know when Cisco applied for the iPhone trademark? If it is after any buzz that Apple was going to make an "iPhone", wouldn't that be an opportunistic move? Like if I knew you were going to call a product or possible product "XYZ", I rush to trademark that name before you do... and make a similar product with that name.

Cisco has every right to protect its trademark, just that the bargaining tactics of trying to get in with Apple isn't necessarily just.
 
cgc said:
Waddya wanna bet Cisco bought up the name in anticipation of a free payday from Apple (I know they acquired "iPhone" around 2000 from an acquisition). Kind of like people buying "walmart.com" then trying to sell it to the actual Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...

lol, remember Cisco get iPhone trademark in 2000, and the original company who own iPhone and bought buy Cisco has the trade mark since 19xx.

ur comparison should be like "some guy registered walmart.com 6 years before walmart company appear and then trying to sell it to the company"
 
SpaceJello said:
Do we know when Cisco applied for the iPhone trademark? If it is after any buzz that Apple was going to make an "iPhone", wouldn't that be an opportunistic move? Like if I knew you were going to call a product or possible product "XYZ", I rush to trademark that name before you do... and make a similar product with that name.

Cisco has every right to protect its trademark, just that the bargaining tactics of trying to get in with Apple isn't necessarily just.
Click to expand...
.

cgc said:
Waddya wanna bet Cisco bought up the name in anticipation of a free payday from Apple (I know they acquired "iPhone" around 2000 from an acquisition). Kind of like people buying "walmart.com" then trying to sell it to the actual Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...
 
SpaceJello said:
Do we know when Cisco applied for the iPhone trademark? If it is after any buzz that Apple was going to make an "iPhone", wouldn't that be an opportunistic move? Like if I knew you were going to call a product or possible product "XYZ", I rush to trademark that name before you do... and make a similar product with that name.

Cisco has every right to protect its trademark, just that the bargaining tactics of trying to get in with Apple isn't necessarily just.
Click to expand...

Cisco bought a company in 2000 called Infogear Technology, who owned "iPhone" since 1996. at that time, there wasn't iMac nor iPod
 
cgc said:
Waddya wanna bet Cisco bought up the name in anticipation of a free payday from Apple (I know they acquired "iPhone" around 2000 from an acquisition). Kind of like people buying "walmart.com" then trying to sell it to the actual Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...

That's really kind of goofy, their acquisition of the iPhone name predated even the iPod....... there was little reason to expect Apple to release a product called iPhone.

Now, Cisco's decision to release an actual product with the name so recently is more curious (this is a name they have been sitting on, and it seems like they decided they finally needed to slap iPhone on the name of one of their products and get it released so they could have some basis for defending the trademark). Especially since we now now that Apple has been begging them to use the trademark for a while, it's not like Cisco couldn't put two and two together and figure it out.
 
combatcolin said:
Not the wisest of moves.
Click to expand...

Has anyone considered the stupidity of just skipping the keynote this year when everything is focussed on this? Especially when apple is under heat about dirty stocks? Stockholders need to feel safe with their investment.

My guess is that cisco knew apple was desperate to announce this and was prolonging it to be able to get more money out of apple in the deal.

I say boo on cisco for trying to jump in on apple's namespace. iMac, iPod, iPhoto, iDVD, iWeb, iLife, iWork, iTunes.. It would have been different if cisco called it Microsoft Phone, because that would have been trademark infringement. You can't trademark part of a name.

That's business though. Steve's not the guy to get pushed around, and he's not the kind of guy not to have thought this through. Public opinion and reputation is now part of the equation. Before it was some judge that had the only say. Now cisco is gonna have to think what this'll do to their brand name.
 
Infogear registered iPhone in '96 I believe and marketed a product through CIDCO as the "CIDCO iPhone"

http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/features/3118/Cidco_iPhone.html

Cisco acquired Infogear and supported iPhone purchasers for a couple of years.

Interestingly, InfoGear had several ex-Apple people (Ike Nassi of Copland fame, et al).

The BU that was InfoGear was shut down in the big Cisco layoffs.

One of the executives from InfoGear went on to head Linksys after their acquisition by Cisco.
 
Cisco is NASTY for taking a name they for sure KNEW apple would use, just to make a buck, and scandel. why now cPHone? Apple should just trademark "i Insert Capital letter"
 
I think Apple was smart to settle on the name, iPhone. It's what "everyone" dubbed this product that went unseen for many years. To use anything else would have been seen as "dumb". Jobs is no dummy.

However if they do have to change it, why not call it the iPhonePod?
 
Cassie said:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070110/cisco_apple.html?.v=1

Who else knew this was coming?
Click to expand...

Don't quote me on this, but....

I heard that Apple does not want the device to be branded as just a phone or even called iPhone, but there was so much market expectations on the "iPhone" that Apple ran with it to catch the press. They also plan to catch the press a second time in May (not june) when they officially launch the 6th Generation iPod (the device formally known as the iPhone).

Two additional configurations will be available - iPod 80GB and iPod 60GB with no phone, but all other features (this will also allow Apple to sell out their remaining inventory of Video iPods).

Again, please don't quote me or bash me (well go ahead and bash me), just wait and see.
 
bigraz said:
The name iPhone is now overused and the phone is truly not just a phone. I would prefer MacMobile, MobileMac.

There is the Mac Mini, iMac (this should just be The Mac), and Mac Pro in the computer line, ... so why not make the phone line as follows - 4GB MacMobile Mini, 8GB MacMobile, and 80 GB hard Drive version, (I can dream) - MacMobile Pro.

Let Cisco have iPhone, People will buy whatever is branded with the Apple.

They can call it Phone an it will still sell.:)
Click to expand...
Maybe we should have a naming contest.

How about calling it the Newton.
Or Accident, as in what it will cause when used in a car.

I hope my posts don't appear back to back, I feel like such a loser when that happens.
 
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