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.
Cisco Suing Apple For iPhone Trademark Infringement
- Thread starter majiklantrn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I somehow knew this was going to happen...
What's wrong with MacPhone. I like that name better than iPhone
What's wrong with MacPhone. I like that name better than iPhone
hmm I always found it kinda odd that apple never trademarked the whole *i* thing. I mean they started it (too my knowledge, please correct me if I'm wrong) and they use it the most.
That's an easy one.
Cisco tried to postpone a settlement till after the keynote to gain some leverage. Apple had already prepared the prototypes and the demo slides, and wasn't willing to cancel the presentation. It was all a matter of days after all. However, if no settlement is reached, they'll naturally pick another name for the phone when it ships.
P.S. If you've wondered why the phone won't be coming to Europe before Christmas: They'll need to add GPRS/UMTS, or they won't stand a chance. EDGE isn't available in Europe.
Cisco tried to postpone a settlement till after the keynote to gain some leverage. Apple had already prepared the prototypes and the demo slides, and wasn't willing to cancel the presentation. It was all a matter of days after all. However, if no settlement is reached, they'll naturally pick another name for the phone when it ships.
P.S. If you've wondered why the phone won't be coming to Europe before Christmas: They'll need to add GPRS/UMTS, or they won't stand a chance. EDGE isn't available in Europe.
imo
This move was totally planned by Cisco. These talks have had to be going on for quite sometime. In the keynote Steve pointed out that they patented 200 elements of the iPhone. He looked like he was under the impression it was a done deal. This is someone at Cisco giving Steve the finger. Planned well in advance to delay the deal long enough for apple to publicly announce the product.
that cuold also be a valid point iMike..
and reading my feeds this morning, Apple might be sued again with their iPhone similarity with an LG handset!!!!!
the case continues
But it aint one of these
But I know which one I want... and it aint one of these...
http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/firstlook112.html
But I know which one I want... and it aint one of these...
http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/firstlook112.html
Attachments
P.S. If you've wondered why the phone won't be coming to Europe before Christmas: They'll need to add GPRS/UMTS, or they won't stand a chance. EDGE isn't available in Europe.[/QUOTE]
UMTS is dead in Europe. Phone companies paid a fortune for the UMTS rights and nobody uses it because it is up to 10 times more expensive than using local area networks. Wonder if iphone comes with w-lan though.
UMTS is dead in Europe. Phone companies paid a fortune for the UMTS rights and nobody uses it because it is up to 10 times more expensive than using local area networks. Wonder if iphone comes with w-lan though.
...I never liked the name iPhone, anyways...
I agree. The Mac/iMac isn't the "iComputer", and the iPod isn't the "iMP3Player", so why iPhone? They should either expand on the iPod or iMac name by saying iPod Pro or iPod Talk or whatever; or, come up with something completely different - but I don't know what. Like iPhod or something. Or maybe iNTouch to go with the new UI. But that is too contrived. "Mac" and "Pod" are nice and simple catchy words that don't mean much on their own; but they are now cultural icons here to stay. You would think there is some simple three letter word they could come up with. If they are reinventing the phone they could also reinvent the name.
Come ON! The boys at Cisco are a bunch of unoriginal plagarizing oportunistic crooks. Cisco needs to let this one go. Since the introduction of the first "iMac" and "iBook", "iWhatever" has been the creative property of Apple.
Unless it was a third party accessory to an Apple product, I can have no respect for anyone who names their product "i". Even though Cisco has held the copyright since 200?, it's a low blow and a sad way to try to get attention drawn to your product, whether you're intentionally timing the release or simply trying to capitolize on the success of an internationally recognized signature... "iPod", "iMac", "iTunes,iPhoto,iCal,iWork,iMovie,iLife etc..." we all know these things are Apple's iNvention.
Copyright or not, it's sad (pathetic) that out of the thousands of possible words, letters, numbers and symbols that could proceed "PHONE", the best thing Cisco could come up with was "i"
Unless it was a third party accessory to an Apple product, I can have no respect for anyone who names their product "i". Even though Cisco has held the copyright since 200?, it's a low blow and a sad way to try to get attention drawn to your product, whether you're intentionally timing the release or simply trying to capitolize on the success of an internationally recognized signature... "iPod", "iMac", "iTunes,iPhoto,iCal,iWork,iMovie,iLife etc..." we all know these things are Apple's iNvention.
Copyright or not, it's sad (pathetic) that out of the thousands of possible words, letters, numbers and symbols that could proceed "PHONE", the best thing Cisco could come up with was "i"
Apparently Orange are suitably equipped. I take your point though. All the other carriers have gone with 3G
No-one uses it...until now maybe. All the major networks are pushing it here in the UK. Have you evidence they are dropping 3G?
edit: i agree on the cost though (to the end user) no-one apart from t-mobile has anything even remotely resembling a sensible data plan (web'n'walk).
They'll need to add GPRS/UMTS, or they won't stand a chance. EDGE isn't available in Europe.[/QUOTE]
That's not true. EDGE is available in Europe. I think that more than one provider will offer the iphone in Europe.
That's not true. EDGE is available in Europe. I think that more than one provider will offer the iphone in Europe.
If Cisco and Apple both have trademarks for different countries other then the US this could get very messy.
Oh My God! you don't know what you talking about, Edge and 3G is available in Europe and several surrounding countries like for 2 years already...if not longer...
Apple should just invert the "i" and make it !Phone. Because people will still call it iPhone anyway, like... "Where did I put my iPhone?"[/QUOTE]
Very nice! I also like iCon(nect) or iCom(munication)
Very nice! I also like iCon(nect) or iCom(munication)
I hate to be crude, well not really, but that sounds like something you do in a bathroom.
Still phonetically the same.
Hmm maybe a bundle package?
iWiz + Wii
Looks like it's Asia and the UK first and the US to follow in 2008 when they've sorted the legal mess out over the US ownership then.
Never mind eh?
hehe yeah we can all enjoy our iPhones here.....our american friends can have their Apple Phones in 2007 or wait until 2020 for their iPhones
It is weird how iPhone is on apple.com but nothing is on apple.com/uk given apple can legally use the iphone name in the UK and we ship a matter of months after the states.
Lol yeah he has no idea.....the communications industry and indeed mobile phone networks in the UK and Europe are far more advanced and ahead of the American ones.
Thats no fault of the americans, just mobile communications took off FAR quicker here than it did there and hence how we got ahead.
PS - Remember when i was living across there in 2005 for a bit and it was like going back in time when i got a mobile etc
Take off your apple glasses and open your eyes!!!!!
Your too much of an Apple fanatic to see the light.
Cisco had the trademark since 2000, it was registered in the mid 90s.
OMG... how dare Cisco use their own trademark!!!
Apple don't own anything the brand i<something>.
Still today there are companies who bring out products called i<something>.
So, take off your Apple glasses and see reality. iPhone is Cisco's trademark, and Apple used the name without agreement. Cisco have every right to use their own bloody trademarks!!
If your droning on about originality - AppleTV isn't exactly an original name - how long did that take to think up, 5 seconds?
Your too much of an Apple fanatic to see the light.
Cisco had the trademark since 2000, it was registered in the mid 90s.
OMG... how dare Cisco use their own trademark!!!
Apple don't own anything the brand i<something>.
Still today there are companies who bring out products called i<something>.
So, take off your Apple glasses and see reality. iPhone is Cisco's trademark, and Apple used the name without agreement. Cisco have every right to use their own bloody trademarks!!
If your droning on about originality - AppleTV isn't exactly an original name - how long did that take to think up, 5 seconds?
Hey Stella!
It's not as black and white as you make out... consider this from the Macobserver:
I find it hard to believe that Apple would have backed away on a deal with Cisco unless they were pretty confident that they could prevail. I suspect that Cisco probably asked for too much money.
Therefore, although I’m not a lawyer, I did a little looking around and found the following:
From (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm)
“Moreover, non-use [of a trademark] for three consecutive years is prima facie evidence of abandonment”
Seems to me that Cisco MUST lose this one.
Comment by Not a lawyer - January 11, 2007 at 5:07 am
It's not as black and white as you make out... consider this from the Macobserver:
I find it hard to believe that Apple would have backed away on a deal with Cisco unless they were pretty confident that they could prevail. I suspect that Cisco probably asked for too much money.
Therefore, although I’m not a lawyer, I did a little looking around and found the following:
From (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm)
“Moreover, non-use [of a trademark] for three consecutive years is prima facie evidence of abandonment”
Seems to me that Cisco MUST lose this one.
Comment by Not a lawyer - January 11, 2007 at 5:07 am
Good link.
But how do you know Apple backed away?
Also, Cisco did use the iPhone name...
consider:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/779/smbiz/iphone/
Look at the copyright at the bottom of the page:
"All contents copyright © 1992--2000 Cisco Systems, Inc. Important Notices and Privacy Statement."
(c) 2000!!!!
There was a product called iPhone, so iPhone has been used and always was being used.
The release of the Cisco iPhone wasn't the first product, it was a revision.
Additionally quote, more recently:
"Though the launch of its new line may be strategically timed, this is not Lynksys' first mention of an iPhone. The company has shipped seven phones from its iPhone line since the summer of 2004."
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/54773.html
But how do you know Apple backed away?
Also, Cisco did use the iPhone name...
consider:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/779/smbiz/iphone/
Look at the copyright at the bottom of the page:
"All contents copyright © 1992--2000 Cisco Systems, Inc. Important Notices and Privacy Statement."
(c) 2000!!!!
There was a product called iPhone, so iPhone has been used and always was being used.
The release of the Cisco iPhone wasn't the first product, it was a revision.
Additionally quote, more recently:
"Though the launch of its new line may be strategically timed, this is not Lynksys' first mention of an iPhone. The company has shipped seven phones from its iPhone line since the summer of 2004."
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/54773.html
One must defend the patent to maintain it.
Infogear held the patent for many years before being bought by Cisco and it appears they never tried to enforce it.
It is not enough for Cisco to decide to enforce it now.
I believe it was consumers, starting largely at rumour sites, that attached "iPhone" to a rumoured, and either not confirmed or outright denied, Apple product.
Consumer and media groundswell naming is hard to overcome.
Rocketman