Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I am a huuuuge fan of Apple. And not particularly a fan of ITV, I never really watch it. But ITV have existed for nearly 60 years. They have the right to this. And I sincerely hope Apple does not use its financial muscle to push this through.
 
aTV sounds fine to me.

Actually, ATV is/was a UK broadcaster as well before all the independents were borged into ITV (ITV used to be a sort of umbrella body for lots of independent regional broadcasters).

I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me if ITV own that trademark as well...

Basically, any name along the lines of [a-z]TV is likely to clash with a broadcaster somewhere.

iPlayer is taken by the BBC, too...

iView might be good (and would tick off Google who are working with several UK broadcasters on YouView).

Digital Convergence is going to be hell on trademarks :)
 
sTV (s for smart)
i

ITV in Scotland is called STV... ;)

----------

Actually, ATV is/was a UK broadcaster as well before all the independents were borged into ITV (ITV used to be a sort of umbrella body for lots of independent regional broadcasters).

I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me if ITV own that trademark as well...

I think they do. ATV became Central TV, which was bought by Carlton TV which merged with Granada to for ITV Plc.
 
Apple could save a fortune simply be creating a completely new character (as they did with their cmd symbol) which, and here's the clever bit, is pronounced "eye".
 
Silly troll :rolleyes:. Did you actually read the story on Cisco? Superior or inferior doesn't matter. What you're claiming is that it's Apple so therefore superior with a free license to do anything. It doesn't work this way. Note how Apple has previously negotiated on other trademarks. If Apple has a good product in mind, it'll be fine no matter what they name it.

It doesn't matter if it's Apple or not.. If you have a farm that produces mustard, you name your mustard iTV, and Apple (or any other company, for that matter) wants to release a television set that will revolutionize the way the human race consumes entertainment, you don't say "you can't do that, because I own the trademark to iTV in another country, change the name to something else because my mustard is more important than your multi-billion dollar television set."

**** your mustard.
 
It doesn't matter if it's Apple or not.. If you have a farm that produces mustard, you name your mustard iTV, and Apple (or any other company, for that matter) wants to release a television set that will revolutionize the way the human race consumes entertainment, you don't say "you can't do that, because I own the trademark to iTV in another country, change the name to something else because my mustard is more important than your multi-billion dollar television set."

**** your mustard.

Not a very smart comment. iTV does own trademark in USA and they actually do TV not farming. They are revolutionazing TV experience all over the World (putting it into language which is easier to understand for iSheep).
 
Not a very smart comment. iTV does own trademark in USA and they actually do TV not farming. They are revolutionazing TV experience all over the World (putting it into language which is easier to understand for iSheep).

Not a very smart comment. The entire television industry is going to collapse over the next 5 years... everything is being driven to VOD services & wireless mobile delivery... so...
 
It will be iTV in all regions but the UK, here it will be the Apple TV.
Lots of companies have different names for the same products in different regions.

Or they'll stick with Apple TV.
 
Except the entire television industry is going to collapse over the next 5 years... everything is being driven to VOD services & wireless mobile delivery... so...

So? ITV produces content. Delivery method does not matter. In 5 years you will be watching ITV programs on your iTabTV provided by Apple.
 
So? ITV produces content. Delivery method does not matter. In 5 years you will be watching ITV programs on your iTabTV provided by Apple.

Lots of studios produce content, and most of them will be undergoing some major changes once their revenue models are altered (advertising via iAds and AdWords vs traditional advertising). ITV isn't a studio that produces content here in the states, or maybe they are and the content they produce isn't relevant? Either way, we're at a point where the delivery is more important than the content, compound that with the emergence of user-created content and... let them eat iTV.

The ideal solution is change the naming scheme... Apple TV, Apple Phone, Apple Pad... adoption has gotten to the point that Apple no longer needs product names.. If you need a phone, here you go - if you need a TV here you go - don't worry about all the 3d, 600mhz garbage, that's just marketing.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter if it's Apple or not.. If you have a farm that produces mustard, you name your mustard iTV, and Apple (or any other company, for that matter) wants to release a television set that will revolutionize the way the human race consumes entertainment, you don't say "you can't do that, because I own the trademark to iTV in another country, change the name to something else because my mustard is more important than your multi-billion dollar television set."

**** your mustard.

I guess I've been successfully trolled as I'm responding here. First I wonder if iTV has the trademark registered worldwide. That would be interesting. Next you're silly for making assumptions about an unreleased potential product. Beyond that, look at the situation of Applecorps. It went into a legal battle and eventually Apple was granted the name with the condition that they not go into the music industry. When this happened decades later, they settled but Apple did end up paying. All you've stated is that Apple has a free pass to steal whatever they want.

Not a very smart comment. The entire television industry is going to collapse over the next 5 years... everything is being driven to VOD services & wireless mobile delivery... so...

And yet even if that happens in the future, it has no legal binding on the current situation.
 
television is a bit of misnomer anyway. 'Distant-Vision' Not really encompassing all the product can do nowdays

Bit like you tube - wheres the Tube? All the CRT's have been ditched.

Bit like the old threads about the apple tablet

iPad
iTab
iTablet
iSlate

Anyway if/when they bring one out I reckon on

iScreen
iVision
iPanel
iConnect
iSee ;)

Apple already owns "Apple TV." While a popular item, it's not as ubiquitous as iPod, iPhone or iPad. They could easily rebrand this to something else and call a their anticipated TV "Apple TV."

The current Apple TV could be rebranded as "Apple TV Remote" or "Apple TV Mini."

I find it interesting that a company is already preparing for what they feel is an inevitable name takeover, even though Apple can't simply "buy" a name if it doesn't want to be bought.
 
Ahhh this topic once again bringing out the clueless ignorant people with the "Apple should just buy..." posts :rolleyes:
 
I guess I've been successfully trolled as I'm responding here. First I wonder if iTV has the trademark registered worldwide. That would be interesting. Next you're silly for making assumptions about an unreleased potential product. Beyond that, look at the situation of Applecorps. It went into a legal battle and eventually Apple was granted the name with the condition that they not go into the music industry. When this happened decades later, they settled but Apple did end up paying. All you've stated is that Apple has a free pass to steal whatever they want.



And yet even if that happens in the future, it has no legal binding on the current situation.

Someone said they registered it in the US too but I'm not sure.

I don't think it's too far-fetched to make assumptions about how the TV will perform.. look at the rest of the products Apple has released, it's not because of iSheep, iSheep exist, but Apple gets it.. none else seems to get it.

@Stealing.. it's kind of like naming a child.. If your friend named their kid x, and you like the name x, you may ask for their permission to use the name but even if they say no, it's your kid, name it what you want. In this case, it's not like Apple is using the name to springboard off of any kind of existing brand-power; at the moment it's released, everyone will know exactly what the iTV is, and noone will have any idea what ITV is (except for those of us on internet tech forums).
 
I could be brave and say I'll eat my hat if Apple did buy ITV (and if I had a hat);).

No matter how large Apple's marketshare is and how deep their pockets are, ITV is just as established in the UK as Fox or CNN are in the US and it is not associated with the typical Apple iPhoto, iWorks, iPhone word make-up for sub brands. It would take more than just money to take over the name and make it their own brand.

Anyway, I will get a hat just in case.:)
 
Not a very smart comment. The entire television industry is going to collapse over the next 5 years... everything is being driven to VOD services & wireless mobile delivery... so...

Yeah, and who do you think is driving the transition to VOD? Who do you think is offering the content?

I'll give you a hint: the content providers. You know, the people who make the stuff you watch, and ultimately decide how it's distributed. They're also the people who are directly responsible for the fate of the future Apple TV. It could have the most awesome interface in the world. The most elegant solution to the daily grind of watching and recording video. But if the content providers don't agree to Apple's terms, then it doesn't get access to the shows everyone wants to watch. Then what's the use of the Apple TV?

Don't think that the future of television is in Apple's hands. It's more like the future of Apple's television is in the hands of the people who make the things people watch.
 
Yeah, and who do you think is driving the transition to VOD? Who do you think is offering the content?

I'll give you a hint: the content providers. You know, the people who make the stuff you watch, and ultimately decide how it's distributed. They're also the people who are directly responsible for the fate of the future Apple TV. It could have the most awesome interface in the world. The most elegant solution to the daily grind of watching and recording video. But if the content providers don't agree to Apple's terms, then it doesn't get access to the shows everyone wants to watch. Then what's the use of the Apple TV?

Don't think that the future of television is in Apple's hands. It's more like the future of Apple's television is in the hands of the people who make the things people watch.

Valid point, but I think the cost benefit of consolidating communications and entertainment into 1 device is going to siphon subscribers from cable/satellite at a steady rate, until content providers cave and conform to whatever our choice is. It's our choice, not Fox, ITV, etc.
 
Someone said they registered it in the US too but I'm not sure.

I don't think it's too far-fetched to make assumptions about how the TV will perform.. look at the rest of the products Apple has released, it's not because of iSheep, iSheep exist, but Apple gets it.. none else seems to get it.

@Stealing.. it's kind of like naming a child.. If your friend named their kid x, and you like the name x, you may ask for their permission to use the name but even if they say no, it's your kid, name it what you want. In this case, it's not like Apple is using the name to springboard off of any kind of existing brand-power; at the moment it's released, everyone will know exactly what the iTV is, and noone will have any idea what ITV is (except for those of us on internet tech forums).

Hehe.. well that's not really how registered trademarks work, and in the UK, it seems to be a household name rather than an unknown one. Naming a child has nothing to do with trademarks. Assuming there is a tv, which seems likely (although it's unconfirmed) I'd expect it to do well too, but we haven't seen it.
 
Hehe.. well that's not really how registered trademarks work, and in the UK, it seems to be a household name rather than an unknown one. Naming a child has nothing to do with trademarks. Assuming there is a tv, which seems likely (although it's unconfirmed) I'd expect it to do well too, but we haven't seen it.

This is where Apple flexes it's muscle..
"We'd love to release the iTV in the UK, but we can't. Sorry."
Chaos ensues.

----------

Forget :apple: iTV, waiting for the :apple: iBox 360.

The iTV will run on the A6 chip, which can handle 1080p gaming. Just need a bt controller with tactile buttons and we don't need the xbox/ps3/wii anymore. Uni-platform gaming with functional parental controls for everyone.
 
Valid point, but I think the cost benefit of consolidating communications and entertainment into 1 device is going to siphon subscribers from cable/satellite at a steady rate, until content providers cave and conform to whatever our choice is. It's our choice, not Fox, ITV, etc.

True to a point. In the end, it's our choice that determines the future of how our movies and TV shows are delivered to us. But don't think for a second that the old guard will let their old (and still very profitable) business model go softly into that quiet night without putting up a fight.

Like I've considered cancelling my cable TV subscription because I get most of my stuff through Netflix and Hulu these days (and occasionally torrents, but we won't go there). The only reason why I even have cable TV is for HBO, which I have to subscribe to for access to HBOGo for some dumbass reason.

But what if the content providers suddenly decide they're not making enough money off the VOD services, and start pulling all their shows? What if all the ISPs decide to force a data cap on us? What if...well, there are a ton of what ifs. It these what ifs that are the hook the future of internet VOD hang upon. If any of them come to pass, then guess what? We're all right back to regular oldschool scheduled TV.

So don't think the television industry are on the verge of collapse here. They're still in full control of the situation, and only acquiesce whenever a very, very, very large group of people start griping about it.
 
Somebody shoot me please

How many times do we have to have this debate.

ITV owns the naming rights worldwide coz they are not just a TV station they are also a production company that makes and sells content worldwide - including the US where they have a subsidiary ITV Studios Amercia.

See for yourself if you don't believe me... http://www.itvstudios.com

The Apple TV will not and never will be called the iTV. Period. End of.

----------

iPod, iPhone, iPad..... any clues? >>> How about iPlay
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.