The Telegraph can't get the simple fact that Steve Jobs died in October, not August correct and yet they want us to believe the rest....curious.
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.
ITV Warns Apple (Again) Not to Use Their Name [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Last time I heard, ITV was on the verge of collapse. Apart from a few 'hit' shows like X-Factor and Downton Abbey, they've been having a very tough time trying to retain advertising and viewer figures in the UK. The future of ITV looks rather grim, to match their program output 99% of the time.
So maybe Apple won't have to wait too long before having unlimited access to the name 'iTV'?
So maybe Apple won't have to wait too long before having unlimited access to the name 'iTV'?
The main problem is that Apple TV was a very stupid name for their current product as it's not a TV. They should have called it the Apple iStream or Apple iHub or something, but calling it the Apple TV when it's not a TV is just idiotic. It's like calling an electric toaster a "Bread".
I could care less, but that would require more effort
Really? $306Bn? Wow I had no idea they were worth that much.
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=ITV.L
EV (Enterprise Value), if you wanted to buy the company, all the shares, assets, debts etc is what you need to look at.
Apple being the second largest company on the stock market in terms of market cap, you do not have all your money in stocks. Buying ITV would only give Apple $100bn leftover.
ITV plc has a current market cap of around £3bn ($4.75bn), which is still way too much for a trademark.
I could care less, but that would require more effort
So you care and don't want to put the effort into not caring.
No, really, "I could care less" only makes sense if you're oozing the sarcasm on pretty heavily to mean "I couldn't care less".
----------
Tim Cook replaced Steve Jobs in August, which was before Steve died. The sentence is completely factual, if only written in a confusing way.
Maybe 
have a different name as they would like to differentiate themself from competitors; like iScreen or iVision; as SJ cracked TV a different name might be good.
have a different name as they would like to differentiate themself from competitors; like iScreen or iVision; as SJ cracked TV a different name might be good.What the Telegraph have said is correct, although is a little clumsy.
Tim Cook succeeded Steve Jobs in August, which was shortly before he died (which was in October, although they didn't say when he actually died).
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.
Can't see ITV having the financial clout to take on Apple in a court battle, but why don't Apple come up with a different name, I mean how hard can it be?
err..having thought about it, very since they have already used Apple TV.
I could care less, but that would require more effort
Really? $306Bn? Wow I had no idea they were worth that much.
They are currently worth around £215 million, not sure where the $306Bn figure came from.
That aside it does seem rather odd that ITV is getting this angry over a hypothetical situation. Apple also stated publicly that the iTV name was only temporary when the original Apple TV was unveiled and they would come up with a better one before launch.
I think iTV doesn't look very good. The T and V are not shapes that play with with the i and are not as clear read as tv. I doubt Apple will try for iTV again. They have already marketed tv so may as well stick to it and it looks good too. If they were to change it, I highly doubt they would use iTV. Maybe iVision.
But hey, other companies are getting away with murder in similarity vs Apple products. Perhaps Apple can just use itv instead of iTV and get away with it. Samsung got away with minimal differences after all.
But hey, other companies are getting away with murder in similarity vs Apple products. Perhaps Apple can just use itv instead of iTV and get away with it. Samsung got away with minimal differences after all.
I think Apple would be pretty pissed off if some other company referred to something by the same name as one of their products - even if it was temporary and especially if that name was being floated in the media (under their control or not) ALL the time. Also especially if they've already been warned/had a battle about it in the past.
Apple won't say anything to the media about making sure they don't use the term iTV because they don't want to "admit" they are working on anything. That's really the only "logical" reason why they don't correct the media. And if I were iTV - I would probably be pissed. Hypothetical or not.
What's in a name?
Since it's a device to be watched they could call it the iEye. Of course, then the Apple store would sound like the deck of a naval vessel....
Ok, seriously.... I'm not sure iTV is even that great a name. I'm betting Apple will come up with something more creative.
Since it's a device to be watched they could call it the iEye. Of course, then the Apple store would sound like the deck of a naval vessel....
Ok, seriously.... I'm not sure iTV is even that great a name. I'm betting Apple will come up with something more creative.
I'm pretty sure a UK household TV network that's been around for some 60 years can afford a trademark lawyer.
This one would be pretty much open and shut anyhow.
Call it iGoogleTV and say they thought of Google word because of a fish viewing a TV with googley eyes. Laws are screwed so why not try that
It's an open and shut case though - ITV own the trademark and Apple can't use it in the territories where they hold it.
I'm pretty sure a UK household TV network that's been around for some 60 years can afford a trademark lawyer.
This one would be pretty much open and shut anyhow.
Don't you know? Good lawyers cost $1Mill a day and can only be obtained by Apple's sales.
aTV sounds fine to me. Or they could ditch the TV and keep the 'i'. Maybe iScreen or something similar. Though iScreen is already used (but purchasable at least I'm sure).
Remember how terrible everyone thought iPad sounded pre-release... now it's used so commonly it's sanitary connotation is largely out of mind. They could come up with something new for 'TV' and over time it'd be accepted.
Remember how terrible everyone thought iPad sounded pre-release... now it's used so commonly it's sanitary connotation is largely out of mind. They could come up with something new for 'TV' and over time it'd be accepted.
Although I dislike ITV as a broadcaster, I can see why they're preparing for a battle. Apple would not want to rename the product for one country (increase manufacturing, marketing costs etc) only over a naming issue.
ITV is a household name over here. To be honest, they should be discussing some licensing/exclusivity deal to get one over the BBC whilst they have a chance if Apple want to go down this route.
I mean, if they use the "i" name, all other suggestions such as iTube, iTelly, iVision all sound silly IMO.
As was mentioned above, though, it's enterprise value you need to take account of when determining takeover viability. And that's an awful lot larger than ITV's market capitalisation. ($306billion!)
ETA: I really shouldn't type on my lunchbreak.
I *meant* to say:
As was mentioned above, though, it's enterprise value you need to take account of when determining takeover viability. And that's an awful lot less than ITV's market capitalisation. (circa £1billion!)
I have no idea how my head got so muddled up.
Last edited:
It will be one of these -
iTube
or
iPanel.
You heard it here first!!
iTube is too close to YouTube; too Googlish.
iPanel might be a good and consistent usage: iPod, iPhone, iPad, iPanel
A note so we don't have to have a hundred posts about it (again):
The British saying "I couldn't care less" began to be popular in the 1940s.
The American idiom version, "I could care less", dates from the 1960s, and is extremely common here.
It has the same sarcastic origins as other purposely opposite-meaning coments like:
Let's not waste more space on it. It's just one of those cultural things like the way UK speakers use plural verbs with corporations ("Apple are making a lot of money") and Americans use singular.
Cheers!
The British saying "I couldn't care less" began to be popular in the 1940s.
The American idiom version, "I could care less", dates from the 1960s, and is extremely common here.
It has the same sarcastic origins as other purposely opposite-meaning coments like:
- "Yeah, right" (when you actually don't agree)
- "Sure, I'd be happy to do that." (when asked to do something you don't want to)
- "What a nice day" (when it's raining)
Let's not waste more space on it. It's just one of those cultural things like the way UK speakers use plural verbs with corporations ("Apple are making a lot of money") and Americans use singular.
Cheers!