Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You can add the word "store" to pretty much anything that is sellable. That doesn't give you the right to trademark it. If I start selling empty milk cartons, and name my company/website/shop "Empty Milk Cartons Store" and then other companies realize they could also sell empty milk cartons because it's profitable nowadays, I can't just trademark "Empty Milk Cartons Store" because I was first to put those words together.

P.S. I love ridiculous examples :rolleyes:

I think he is almost a troll at this point. I also willing to bet it is another longer term member hiding under that name incase it gets banned or something.
I base this on the fact the account is 3 years old,still a newbie and all his other post seem to be in threads that turn into pointless arguments of people who understand and those who have very little clue.

He already tried the prior art argument which is irrelevant for trademarks.
If the public starts calling all other app stores app stores to describe then then apple loses that part of the trade mark.

Apple can be the only one who lets say has their App Store call App Store for its offical name but they can not stop others from using lets say
Mircrosoft App Store as a name and it from being in the stores description.


Look at Duct Tape. Any tape like it is call Duct Tape and sold as such.

There is Duct Tape brand Duct Tape but all the other brands just call the product duct tape. Very legal.
 
I was responding to someone.

I know. :)

Look at Duct Tape. Any tape like it is call Duct Tape and sold as such.

There is Duct Tape brand Duct Tape but all the other brands just call the product duct tape. Very legal.

That is a good example - but there are others like it where the decisions went opposite to that.

So it is less than clear what will happen and Apple does stand a good shot at winning.

Oh dear I promised myself to go to lunch. :mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, stop with the color. Highly annoying.



Live doesn't mean it's granted. It just means it isn't dead. Which would be weird if it was dead before the mark was either granted or denied. The USPTO is in the opposite phase of the grant process right now, which is why Microsoft filed their opposition paper. When it all gets reviewed, Apple will either get their claim for the mark denied or granted based on the USPTO's decision.

No one is trying to reverse anything.



What about it ?

Jeez, please relax man (woman, person, whichever). The dark red really isn't hard on the eyes or annoying. Your vibrant green and dictating to members how to post is (at least for me). The colors are permissible for posting (including your choice), thus their presence. Certainly, reasonable taste and discretion would be advised, but I doubt many members would find he is crossing some grievous line with that particular shade. Your barking directives on the other hand, is more easily debatable.
 
I think he is almost a troll at this point. I also willing to bet it is another longer term member hiding under that name incase it gets banned or something.
I base this on the fact the account is 3 years old,still a newbie and all his other post seem to be in threads that turn into pointless arguments of people who understand and those who have very little clue.

He already tried the prior art argument which is irrelevant for trademarks.
If the public starts calling all other app stores app stores to describe then then apple loses that part of the trade mark.

Apple can be the only one who lets say has their App Store call App Store for its offical name but they can not stop others from using lets say
Mircrosoft App Store as a name and it from being in the stores description.


Look at Duct Tape. Any tape like it is call Duct Tape and sold as such.

There is Duct Tape brand Duct Tape but all the other brands just call the product duct tape. Very legal.

Yeah, probably.

Regarding using App Store in combination with something else, there are even a few other registrations: USPTO search result for "app store"
 
That is a good example - but there are others like it where the decisions went opposite to that.

So it is less than clear what will happen and Apple does stand a good shot at winning.

Oh dear I promised myself to go to lunch. :mad:

Haha, and I promised I would go to bed, but here I am. I can't believe I've been here for hours arguing for something that really doesn't affect me at all and that I can't change or influence :p it sure was fun though! Good night everyone!
 
You know what? Microsoft are probably right. But hard as I try, I can't bring myself to give a crap.

Particularly considering their insistence on calling bookmarks "Favorites" and using "Recycle Bin" for the "Trash". The horse has already bolted, and Microsoft opened the gate.
 
App store is very generic however it does not block competitors from describing their services. Because "Application Store" is more accurate than "App Store"
 
I agree with Microsoft. Maybe instead of trademarking "App Store", Apple could trademark, "The App Store".
 
It's a rubbish point. Windows is not as used in the computer industry as 'App'

What are you smoking? Millions of PC users think the brand of their computer is a "Windows". But I see where you're coming from: The term "app" is gaining popularity, but I assure you, IT'S NO THANKS TO MICROSOFT!@


Nobody ever marketed their Application Distribution process an App Store before Apple.

True. Apple pioneered "Apps" as we know it. If it weren't for iPhone and Mac, we'd still be calling them "programs".

Microsoft and the like had 35 years to launch their own online "software shop".

Yeah, Microsoft who trademarked Windows, Word, and other things is complaining against Apple for trademarking a word (not the trademarked version) that Apple essentially created.

Another excellent point. Microsoft essentially founded their entire company off BITING THE APPLE. Those of you cheering Microsoft on, you need a history lesson. Microsoft does not deserve this win. They should have NEVER existed. WHY are you people even defending them? Are you shills?

I like Microsoft's description "virtual store for apps". They crack me up. I hope everyone can just call it "app store". Everyone knows Apple made it famous.
If those boneheads had a single ounce of creativity, they would have come up with App Shop, App Center or Software Store or Program Palace.

What's Microsoft's obsession with the term "App Store"? Home Depot doesn't need to call themselves "Home Store".

Think about it and it all comes together: They're envious because they didn't come up with a catchy name like Apple or a memorable logo like this .
 
Last edited:
Nope, Handmark has the "Handmark App Store".

And the Indians were here on America before 1492.

Hallmark didn't pioneer anything, buddy. Nobody knows/ even cares who this Handbrake is.
Elvis didn't invent rock n roll, but he pioneered the sh** out of it.
Trent Reznor didn't found goth music or whatever, but he brought it to the masses
Without Apple, there wouldn't be a Handjob store or a Wikipedia to post THIS:
 
Last edited:
They didn't pioneer anything, dude. Nobody know/cares who Handmark is.

It doesn't matter if you care. The point is that the idea of a mobile app store is not new, it wasn't pioneered by Apple and even the use of the name is nothing new.

Apple didn't even pioneer the smartphone. They took a bunch of great features of functions of other devices/phones and put them in a very well engineered and well packaged product.

Sometimes you guys gotta stop drinking the kool-aid.

Edit: your examples are awful.
 
Have people here never used windows?

The term App always makes me think of .app on OS X.
I can see where MS is coming from though.

On Windows it's .exe, or a Program file, not an application.

In Windows the file type for executable files is application not program. Shared libraries (dlls) are application extensions iirc.
 
It doesn't matter if you care. The point is that the idea of a mobile app store is not new, it wasn't pioneered by Apple and blah blah blah...

Even after all that, you still don't know what "PIONEER" means. Dude...


pioneer
noun

1: someone who helps to open up a new line of research or technology or art [syn: innovator, trailblazer, groundbreaker]


verb

1: open up an area or prepare a way; "She pioneered a graduate program for women students" [syn: open up]
2: take the lead or initiative in; participate in the development of; "This South African surgeon pioneered heart transplants" [syn: initiate]
3: open up and explore a new area; "pioneer space" Source: WordNet (r) 2.0

Pioneer \Pi`o*neer"\, n. [F. pionier, orig., a foot soldier, OF. peonier, fr. OF. peon a foot soldier, F. pion. See Pawn in chess.]

2. One who goes before, as into the wilderness, preparing the way for others to follow; as, pioneers of civilization; pioneers of reform.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.