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
Are you selling burgers?
Give me a break.
Better not start looking up other copyrighted terms. "THE COMPUTER STORE" will drive you mad.
Last edited:
Yes this is the crux of the argument exactly. No one was using the word until the store was created for the iPhone after it came out in 2007. No other company even thought about using it until Apple made it an overnight success. Microsoft can argue all they want, but it was Apple that started the first viable ecosystem in the first place, and therefore has every right to retain the trademark.
I don't support microsoft on this one, guys.
You obviously don't understand what a trademark is.
What is an app store? It's a store where apps are sold - has the compound word app been used before to describe applications? Yes. Has the word application been used to describe products of other companies? Yes. Does the term "app store" describe exactly what it is? Yes. Are there other app stores out there? Yes. Have any of them been open before Apples? Yes.
Windows marketplace for example is an app store and it was open years before "AppStore."
Steam is an app store and it's been open since like 2003... And those are some of the newer entrants.
Microsoft (and many other companies) used the terms Applications, Apps for over 20 years... There are references to both all the way back to DOS
By having the mark AppStore and always referring to it as "The AppStore" is trying to unlawfully describe it as the only store to buy apps... Which is completely false. It is exactly like someone trademarking Grocery Store and then suing every other grocery store who referred to itself exactly what it was
It's BS and shouldn't be/isn't allowed... And Apple will most likely lose the mark just because the terms have been general use for decades
McDonald's tried stopping companies in UK ( especially Scottish) from using the name Mc! LOL!
http://www.mccurryrecipe.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=100&Itemid=204
4, 5 & 6. McDonald’s v. McEverybody ( search for text )
http://www.worldsstrangest.com/mental-floss/6-david-goliath-trademark-disputes/
List of other legal cases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik i/McDonald's_legal_cases#McLibel_.28UK.29
Last edited:
Yes this is the crux of the argument exactly. No one was using the word until the store was created for the iPhone after it came out in 2007. No other company even thought about using it until Apple made it an overnight success. Microsoft can argue all they want, but it was Apple that started the first viable ecosystem in the first place, and therefore has every right to retain the trademark.
I don't support microsoft on this one, guys.
Once again, Microsoft referenced applications as "Apps" as far back as windows 3.1 - a 5 second search lead me to a help file "apps.hlp" describing difficulties or workarounds for applications when upgrading from windows 3.0
But whatever.
Why Microsoft?
Please excuse my ignorance of the law in this position, but why is it Microsoft bringing this fight? I understand both sides of the argument, but it does not seem like Microsoft has a real vested intrest in this. They are the latest by far to the world of modern smart phone operating systems and were not even working on Windows Phone 7 when the App Store opened. They don't use the word App in their advertising or their store name. I would understand this fight being brought by Google, or any of the phone manufactures that are building phones running Android, or even a third party trying to build their own App store despite having no real reason to be in the industry (read Amazon).
Please excuse my ignorance of the law in this position, but why is it Microsoft bringing this fight? I understand both sides of the argument, but it does not seem like Microsoft has a real vested intrest in this. They are the latest by far to the world of modern smart phone operating systems and were not even working on Windows Phone 7 when the App Store opened. They don't use the word App in their advertising or their store name. I would understand this fight being brought by Google, or any of the phone manufactures that are building phones running Android, or even a third party trying to build their own App store despite having no real reason to be in the industry (read Amazon).
Last edited:
time to L O L - Apple could lose this due to 8.3 naming conventions!
I literally laughed at this one - "applications" is twelve letters long, so it had to be shortened for FAT(16) filesystems with the 8.3 naming convention.
I literally laughed at this one - "applications" is twelve letters long, so it had to be shortened for FAT(16) filesystems with the 8.3 naming convention.
Doesn't matter how or why it happened... It was described as such.
Do you remember the old warez scene? Appz, Gamez, etc in the 90s? Sure bad example but a lot of people should remember applications referred to that alone. Its been short formed for as long as I can remember and been at least the preferred way of saying it since at least windows 95... Applications as a reference
I googled news reports dating back 20 years and came across this: if you were to buy it... You can read there that they describe apps as a short form of the word applications:
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washing...+Novice's+Guide+to+Computerspeak&pqatl=google
That was typing in DOS apps and setting my search window from 1980 to 1990- you can see the brief excerpt of it in the search results.
Try it for yourself
"From RAM to ROM, AT to OS2: A Novice's Guide to Computerspea...
Pay-Per-View - Washington Post - Feb 19, 1990
It has shortened it to "apps." Is it any wonder that a normal human being, ... DOS. An acronym for disk operating system. This is the basic software that ..."
Hmmm I wonder what they're referring to by apps in a 20 year old glossary of computerspeak...
Yes this is the crux of the argument exactly. No one was using the word until the store was created for the iPhone after it came out in 2007. No other company even thought about using it until Apple made it an overnight success. Microsoft can argue all they want, but it was Apple that started the first viable ecosystem in the first place, and therefore has every right to retain the trademark.
I don't support microsoft on this one, guys.
Wow! Nice job reading the thread and the countless examples of the term "apps" being used over the last 20 years. It turns out even MS DOS was referring to programs as "applications". PC Magazine was talking about "killer apps" a decade ago. And BlackBerry discussed the state of apps for their platform in 2005.
But since you believe this is the "crux of the matter", you should call Steve and tell him to abandon the trademark immediately because it looks like the case is now officially closed. Good job!
Actually... To add to that... My reference above after some nifty remingling of words in my search terms popped out this:
From RAM to ROM, AT to OS2: A Novice's Guide to Computerspea...
Pay-Per-View - Washington Post - Feb 19, 1990
PC Magazine recently decided that the word "application" is too unwieldy. It has shortened it to "apps." Is it any wonder that a normal human being, ...
PC magazine is the one that coined Apps after all... Wow. Not just killer apps but just apps.
Microsoft has a store for apps. See http://www.microsoft.com/windowsphone/en-us/apps/default.aspx
This store for apps is called Marketplace. Now Microsoft would like to inform people that may not know about it (for example you) that Marketplace is an app store.
But if "app store" is trademarked, Microsoft can no longer describe it as an app store even though it is exactly that - a place to buy apps.
See... this is the problem with allowing trademarks of generic terms that describe generically what the thing actually is.
Folks - big difference between "generic" and "descriptive" in patent law. Descriptive terms can still be trademarked under certain conditions, which Apple might meet.
None your examples are descriptive like App Store is, you even admit as such. Are you agreeing with me ? Then why post as if you disagree ?
My point (which I guess you missed) was that combining simple words to make a brand isn't new, nor is it wrong. (which is why I replied to the OP of this idea -- which even had Lady Gaga -- adding my own offerings.)
The examples (I hope you didn't take all of them seriously) were just a way to show how so many other people who might have a similar product could have a problem with the prior licensed brands.
So, now ANYONE who thought of making an app for sketching would have to come up with a title other than Sketchbook, anyone who is proud of their Kentucky heritage as well as their fried chicken are out of luck, and anyone making a tablet (which people call "pad" because of the iPad) with a touch screen can't coin the term "TouchPad" anymore.
I think the App Store is fine because it's no different from brands like TouchPad, KFC, and Sketchbook. (and countless other examples which were not considered because some were mentioned in the thread, and .. well... my posting started with Lady + Gaga, hahahaha)
So in case you were confused, yes, I disagree with your opinion that the App Store is too descriptive and generic for a trademark. I think it's a title that, although controversial, could be granted a trademark license.
Last edited:
Hey, wait a second, someone like you who might actually know something about this aspect of the law has no place on this thread of self-appointed legal experts!
And Digital Equipment Corporation sold digital equipment. Trademarks may be descriptive if they acquire secondary meaning.
Can you explain how Edible Arrangements has a secondary meaning? Honest question as I'm no lawyer or even a law student. I find this topic pretty interesting but if you know more about it than me I would open to your explanation.
Essentially "secondary meaning" refers to the idea that the general public associates the mark with the holder of the mark - in other words, people know that "edible arrangements" refers to a particular company that sells ... decorative fruit baskets. The idea is that when the public hears the term, they think of the source of the product, and not the just the product. If people think "Apple" when they hear "app store," then it may have the appropriate secondary meaning.
Thanks. I do believe most people think of Apple when they hear the term App Store.
windows....
.....had to bring it up.
It's a pity you are 434 posts too late...
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/12291537/
Short sighted
What about App Shop?
App Market?
App Office?
Soft Store?
Soft Market
Soft Shop
AppCart
App Repository
App Repo
App Warehouse
Soft Warehouse
Toolshed
ToolShop
Tool Market
AppHungry
AppCo
AppMart
Microsoft Shop
Microsoft Market
Microsoft Office
Microsoft Store
Bill's Warehouse
Bill's Market
Bill's Shop
Monkeyboy Tools
Monkeyboy's Shop
Monkeyboy's Market
MShop
...
Seriously...
What about App Shop?
App Market?
App Office?
Soft Store?
Soft Market
Soft Shop
AppCart
App Repository
App Repo
App Warehouse
Soft Warehouse
Toolshed
ToolShop
Tool Market
AppHungry
AppCo
AppMart
Microsoft Shop
Microsoft Market
Microsoft Office
Microsoft Store
Bill's Warehouse
Bill's Market
Bill's Shop
Monkeyboy Tools
Monkeyboy's Shop
Monkeyboy's Market
MShop
...
Seriously...