ITV Warns Apple (Again) Not to Use Their Name [Updated]

[MacRumors]

Amidst the growing chorus of rumors about an Apple branded television, The Telegraph reports that the UK TV network ITV has written a letter to Apple to warn it against using the name "iTV" for its future television product.

This is actually not the first time that Apple and ITV have been in contention over the name. When Apple first announced their set top box in 2006, they originally called the product "iTV":

The original name for the Apple TV set top box​

Apple later changed the name to "Apple TV", but reportedly later reconsidered changing the name back to iTV. ITV executives were said to be "furious" over the possibility.

The Telegraph reports that Apple gave reassurances back in 2010 that they would not use the name, though they note that Apple is now under different leadership.

However, insiders fear that the world's biggest company might take a different stance under Tim Cook, who replaced Steve Jobs as chief executive shortly before Mr Jobs died in August last year.

Apple is believed to be actively working on a standalone television product. A recent report claimed Canadian cable companies already had the product in their hands. That report and others have been casually referring to the upcoming product as the "Apple iTV", though Apple has yet to officially name or even acknowledge the project.

Update: In a statement to The Verge, ITV has denied that it sent any such warning to Apple.

In a statement to The Verge, ITV said that, "The Telegraph's piece is entirely speculative, and there has been no communication between ITV and Apple. ITV has no further comment on the matter."

Article Link: ITV Warns Apple (Again) Not to Use Their Name [Updated]

 

[Santabean2000]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

 

[buckers]

It would be a bit weird in the UK. ITV is a household name, like BBC and CNN. There probably would be some confusion.

 

[Jayse]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

Apple could just buy ITV and problem solved!

 

[Theclamshell]

This may be a stupid question but aren't the names, "ITV" and "Apple ITV" different. Could apple just use the second name and not get in trouble?

 

[Qwaf]

I have said before, it didn't stop them using iPhone and iOS, two Cisco trademarks. Cisco are many times the size of ITV. (Before they came to the legal agreement)

Granted, iPhone wasn't really a known product and Cisco IOS isn't on consumer devices, most regular people who never hear about it.

Whereas ITV is a name people recognise in the UK, it being like, the second biggest broadcaster (I'm not entirely sure) after the BBC. With the UK being a large market for Apple they may choose to stay away from the name or just perhaps have a different name for it in the UK?

*shrugs*

 

[MonkeySee....]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

Apple could just buy ITV and problem solved!

Its like saying Apple should buy NBC. And do what with it. Use the name?

Its not about money. The thing apple will announce will NOT be called the iTV.

 

[hollerz]

Or they could just continue using Apple TV. The i moniker is getting a bit old now anyway, every company is using it!

 

[kemo]

This may be a stupid question but aren't the names, "ITV" and "Apple ITV" different. Could apple just use the second name and not get in trouble?

I'd say not, basically it would be similiar to this:

Big Mac Menu - McDonald's
KFC Mac Menu - KFC

MC would not like that KFC use theirs "Mac" in the name of their menu..

 

[mixel]

It would be a bit weird in the UK. ITV is a household name, like BBC and CNN. There probably would be some confusion.

Agreed. This is going to cause confusion.

Saying that, I'd find a legal battle between Apple and ITV pretty amusing. ITV have had a rough time in recent years, but they do seem to mostly churn out junk.

 

[SPNarwhal]

I think Apple TV sounds a lot better than iTV anyway.
and even if they called it "Apple iTV" that wouldn't really change anything, people wouldn't call it the "Apple iTV" they would call it iTV.

And then the box would say "Apple" branded, and then "Apple iTV"? That would look silly.

Apple TV works.

 

[bartzilla]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

Well that's up to ITV. Apple can't "just buy the name if they wanted it" - ITV would have to be willing to sell. And given the cost of rebranding themselves, etc. I think that it would be an expensive purchase even if ITV sold the name as cheaply as possible just to cover their costs (but why would they do that?)

 

[daviesified]

I have said before, it didn't stop them using iPhone and iOS, two Cisco trademarks. Cisco are many times the size of ITV. (Before they came to the legal agreement)

ITV is the company, as well as the product. If Apple had brought out at a product called the "Cisco", I imagine Cisco would have been a little bit more protective.

 

[OllyW]

I have said before, it didn't stop them using iPhone and iOS, two Cisco trademarks. Cisco are many times the size of ITV. (Before they came to the legal agreement)

Granted, iPhone wasn't really a known product and Cisco IOS isn't on consumer devices, most regular people who never hear about it.

Whereas ITV is a name people recognise in the UK, it being like, the second biggest broadcaster (I'm not entirely sure) after the BBC. With the UK being a large market for Apple they may choose to stay away from the name or just perhaps have a different name for it in the UK?

*shrugs*

Unlike Cisco and the iPhone name which was used on a little known and obsolete product, ITV is the name of the company. You can't seriously expect ITV to give it up their brand name after using it for the last 50 years?

 

[Mac2012]

How about calling it "i couldcareless" he he...

 

[Themaeds]

This may be a stupid question but aren't the names, "ITV" and "Apple ITV" different. Could apple just use the second name and not get in trouble?

Try and open a restaurant called Bill's Burger King.

 

[Dr McKay]

Now comes the flood of angry people insisting that Apple deserves the name more than ITV because they like Apple better.

There has already been the usual flood of "Apple should just buy...."

 

[Nielsenius]

It's gonna be pretty weird if Apple starts selling TVs. Sure, TVs are consumer electronics, I just don't see it as Apple's thing. On the other hand, if they revolutionize the TV like they have done with so many other products, it could be a huge success.

 

[KnightWRX]

I have said before, it didn't stop them using iPhone and iOS, two Cisco trademarks. Cisco are many times the size of ITV. (Before they came to the legal agreement)

Uh ? Cisco sued them over the iPhone and for iOS, Apple got permission prior to the announcement. So yeah, Cisco did stop them from using both trademarks without proper licensing.

ITV doesn't seem to want to license their name out, so in the end, yes, it does stop them, in the UK at least (and other places where ITV holds the trademark).

So while you've said it before, it doesn't make it right or true at all.

 

[Lesser Evets]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

ITV is an ancient and renowned television company which made/distributed shows such as Captain Scarlet, UFO, the Avengers, Benny Hill, Fireball XL5, (pretty much anything by Gary Anderson's Marionation group), Wooster & Jeeves, Mister Bean, the Prisoner, Quatermass, the Saint, Space 1999, and hundreds of other famous programs known mostly across the UK colonies.

This wouldn't be just a case of "buying a name" but of ripping away a dear trademark and trying to rebrand it to something else with all positive/negative/misleading baggage it carries.

Apple should just ditch the idea of iTV as a name.

 

[SimonTheSoundMa]

Agreed. This is going to cause confusion.

Saying that, I'd find a legal battle between Apple and ITV pretty amusing. ITV have had a rough time in recent years, but they do seem to mostly churn out junk.

ITV Drama productions are probably one the best in the world though.

 

[elpardo]

Well that's up to ITV. Apple can't "just buy the name if they wanted it" - ITV would have to be willing to sell. And given the cost of rebranding themselves, etc. I think that it would be an expensive purchase even if ITV sold the name as cheaply as possible just to cover their costs (but why would they do that?)



That assumes the ITV trademark isn't worldwide. I think ITV sell TV programmes to networks in other countries outside the UK.

ITV is an international company and with the exception of Downton Abbey which won several Golden globes, they churn out crap like the X factor and its ilk which I doubt apple would want to be associated with.

 

[SimonTheSoundMa]

I guess Apple could just buy the name if they wanted it.

Could ITV stand in their way..? Or will Apple's Billions just trump them.

ITV is worth $306bn, I can't see Apple taking it over just for the trademark "iTV".

 

[miles01110]

How about calling it "i couldcareless" he he...

Doesn't have the same ring as "iTV", so they probably wouldn't use that.

 

[Dr McKay]

Fixed.
If you could care less, it means you care at least a little...

I could care less, but that would require more effort

ITV is worth $306bn, I can't see Apple taking it over just for the trademark "iTV".

Really? $306Bn? Wow I had no idea they were worth that much.