And again, where did you think Apple came up with the term ? Hint, computing has had Application for quite a long time
Think of a very basic and old concept : the API.
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.
Microsoft Hires Linguist to Oppose Apple's 'App Store' Trademark
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And again, where did you think Apple came up with the term ? Hint, computing has had Application for quite a long time
Think of a very basic and old concept : the API.
I am with Microsoft on this one. Many users refer to App Stores as the places where you can get Apps. Not just Apple Apps.
They can call it the Apple App Store, the iTunes App Store, the iOS App Store and that is defensible - but owning App Store so no one can refer to theirs as such, makes no sense to me.
They can call it the Apple App Store, the iTunes App Store, the iOS App Store and that is defensible - but owning App Store so no one can refer to theirs as such, makes no sense to me.
App Store was trademarked in 1998 and later abandonned if that is what you want :
Word Mark APPSTORE
Goods and Services (ABANDONED) IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: providing computer software application hosting services by means of a global computer information network, where such services allow multiple users to rent software applications developed by applicant or third parties
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 75542841
Filing Date August 26, 1998
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition February 29, 2000
Owner (APPLICANT) SAGE NETWORKS, INC. CORPORATION BY ASSIGNMENT DELAWARE 215 FIRST STREET CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS 02142
No users did before Apple did, not one, not anywhere. (I know you know this). A lot of people say Xerox for copy machine and Kleenex for facial tissue.
Actually, because they own the trademark/copyright for "app store" they are legally bound to defend that trademark/copyright.
Sage Networks did. End of story.
Anyway, prior art is a patent thing, it has nothing to do with Trademarks.
Question of the Day:
If Apple had unveiled the "App Shop" back in 2008, would everyone be complaining about how generic the App Shop is because it's just a shop for apps!!
Only if they tried to trademark it.
Palm and Microsoft created the market for apps for the PDA/phone device and Apple is simply riding their coattails
minus the fact that Apple App Store as not the first App Store. It was generic when App first used it. Just most other companies before hand were smart enough to not try to use a generic term. They used other names. I know there was a palm App store back in the day (Handgo or something like that never really got into it)
I am more amazed that people keep trying to defend Apple.
Apple made several critical mistakes. One it is never put any type of generic term out there.
In Apple OWN PRESS EVENTS they called other Application stores APP STORES. Hmm that goes to show that even Apple is treating it generically. That is a problem. Apple uses the term generically and they never should of. They screwed up and now they are getting hammer for it.
Tell me how will you deal with this question from a judge if you are a Apple. "How is the term App store not generic if you yourself used the term generically to describe other application stores in your own press release and press events?"
Come back to me when you can answer that question.
Again not the same thing. Not the same term or the same use. My earlier advice still stands..
He was only replying to your mistaken claim that "app" was an Apple-invented abbreviation.
I'm going to start writing apps, form a company, and call it Microsoft. After all, it's just a compound noun meaning "microcomputer software." Microsoft might sue me, but I'll countersue and take it all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary. It might cost me a lot of money, but I'll earn it all back when Brad Pitt makes a movie about my story.
If Apple spent considerable money branding something generic, well, that is Apple's problem.
I posted what I did for the "still wet behind the ears" youngsters, who are apparently unaware of the fact that "app" has been a household word since micro-computers came into existence....
(Everyone thinks history began when they were born.)
You just made up the Handago thing.. I can not find the press release you are referencing..
Let me help you guys out, Windows & Amazon, Android, Google etc. spend less time trying to debate & copying apple. Try putting your money into improving your products and creating your own ideas. We the consumers don't care who's name is on it, we just want quality products for our hard earned money. Simple as that!
You can destroy almost every trademark that way.
I see many comments saying "App Store IS generic". This "IS" isn't an argument no matter if you use capitals or not.
1. What is a "generic term"? Do we base this on the pervasiveness or the correctness of the definition or what?
a : relating to or characteristic of a whole group or class : general
b : being or having a nonproprietary name <generic drugs>
c : having no particularly distinctive quality or application <generic restaurants>
2. Let's look at pervasiveness. It doesn't matter if the term was used before Apple got it. This isn't about patents. One fact is that Apple clearly made the term popular. A problem here is that the App Store was basically the first one with such influence, so, obviously, everybody started using the term. But that doesn't make it generic in the sense it cannot be trademarked. Same like iPod.
Let's look at the definition. Is App Store the best description? Hardly. First, why would "app" be generic and not "application"? Or "program"? The easiest would be just to call it "software" and it will be the most correct definition. It was created for that purpose. What about "store"? Generally it refers quite much to a specific closed physical place. Market would be much more correct. So, "Software market" will win correctness-wise.
3. Why do you think Microsoft is doing this? Saving the language? The App Store has attributes to it - Apple made it popular, people generally expect some level of quality, range of apps and whatnot. Apple build this. It would be very easy for Microsoft to use the same term and thus make people attach to their products attributes which Apple created. Not very nice.
4. I surely am not a lawyer and I can be wrong, but the issue clearly isn't that black and white. And I side with Apple, because no matter if the term is generic or not, Microsoft's intentions are very clear.
Until I read this post I was with Apple on this one - but I think you're right. There IS a difference in quality between the two. Apple might lose this.Disclaimer: Apple fanboy here. But agree with Microsoft.
App Store is simply the description of the actual thing: An app store. It's just too simple.
Windows on the other hand is a name that wouldn't be used to describe an operating system. Windows, much like Pages, Keynote and Numbers, is a noun used creatively to create a trademark. App Store is a close second but, IMO, fails due to being the actual description of the object.
If Microsoft had called Windows simply "Operating System" and copyrighted that, THEN it'd be the same thing
All I know is that if the legitimacy of trademarks were really decided by a bunch of yahoos posting their opinions on message boards, then there would be no point in having trademarks at all.
A lot of air blowing through this thread for a subject that will simply be decided by the courts. If the results were so easy and absolute to predict, one side of the case wouldn't bother with the legal costs, so there is clearly merit on both sides. It either will stand, or it will not. Case closed as they say. It will be fascinating to see the final result and the written ruling.