Microsoft Objects to Apple's 'App Store' Trademark Application

[neuropsychguy]

NEVER??? Windows 3.1 Program Manager Help:

That is a good find. The widely used word was still Program (which is why that window is called "Program Manager Help". Application was not widely used before OS X. It was around, obviously, but not used much.

 

[2499723]

Before the unveiling of the Apple App Store, I had never heard the term 'app' before. Personally, I kinda dislike how cutesy it is; it seems a bit childish. BUT, for the simple reason that Apple really coined the phrase 'App Store', I can see no reason why they shouldn't be able to trademark it. My computer never had 'Apps' before. They were called 'applications'. Hence the 'Applications' folder that has been on my Macs since my first in 1991.

 

[tom613]

If electrical outlets were ever referred to as "powerpoints" it's looong gone out of usage. Same goes for any other usage besides for the software.

sorry, I'm kind of not getting this one...

 

[TheRealTVGuy]

They're just pissed that they're late to the party once again.

But this time, unlike Microsoft's "borrowing" from Xerox, the whole world knows their game and keeps its eyes on them.

Sorry m.s., YOU LOSE !!!!!

 

[Mr. Gates]

Perhaps Microsoft would like to relinquish the "Windows" trademark as well, seeing how many people just call any operating system windows. (since they all have little windows in them).

can you put windows on my computer? Which one Microsoft? No no! the one with the apple logo on it? Nah can't do it. it's copyright and it won't run on your crappy old laptop.

Ridiculous !

You can't be serious.

Every single thing you said is just plain Incorrect.

*** (BTW, gimme just about any "crappy old laptop" and I bet you I can Hackintosh it) ***

 

[cohibadad]

I kind of agree with M$ here. App Store is very generic.

have to agree with Microsoft on this one

 

[Geckotek]

Nope, because Microsoft Windows call them "PROGRAMS"

See some posts above yours. They also called them applications.

Their lawyers and numerous existing trademarks disagree with you.
'App Store' is quite trademarkable, but Microsoft has a good opportunity to object.

The lawyers will say whatever they are paid to. They will present what they are told to present and see if if flies.

 

[scott523]

I think Microsoft may have a point in this case. However, the term App Store never came to be a significant term until Apple brought it up. So if Microsoft is denied of its objection, it would be a big victory on Apple's part.

 

[Richard1028]

Yet another reason why we should've listened to our seemingly stupid and "out of touch" parents when they told us to become lawyers.

Note: All users here with the name Richard, cease and desist immediately.

 

[axual]

Then ...

Perhaps Microsoft wouldn't mind giving up the 'Windows' trademark then based on their logic.

 

[neuropsychguy]

That's the problem, if they didn't create the term or the usage of the term in this manner, then there is no grounds for a trademark.

The trademark isn't on "app" it's on "App Store". There is a difference. Trademarking "App Store" isn't any different than trademarking "Best Buy" or "Target" or any other store name. Should we object to those stores in their trademarking of those terms?

 

[Mr. Gates]

Can I patent the term "Shoe Store" ???

Hmmmm.....

 

[scoobydoo99]

Which came first?

A proprietary word moving into mainstream lexicon does not justify denying the trademark. "App Store" did not exist before Apple. The fact that its popularity has made it a "household" term does not support Microsoft's position. Many trademarks become "generic" references to broad categories of products/services. e.g.- To "Tivo" a show is to record it on a DVR, regardless of brand; kids draw with "Crayolas", even when they're generic brands, etc.

The question is, what came first - Apple's use of "App Store" to define an online marketplace for purchasing software for mobile devices, or the generic use? I think we know the answer.

 

[Geckotek]

The trademark isn't on "app" it's on "App Store". There is a difference. Trademarking "App Store" isn't any different than trademarking "Best Buy" or "Target" or any other store name. Should we object to those stores in their trademarking of those terms?

It's completely different. How can you even compare? Best Buy isn't called "Electronics Store".

And I realize it's not on the word "App" but adding "Store" to it does not differentiate it in any way.

 

[talmy]

Elevator? Really?

"Escalator" yes, but "elevator" no. Also Linoleum, Asperin, Bandaid, Freon.

With all the complaints about "Windows" and "Word", we shouldn't forget "Aperture", "Logic", "Pages", "Numbers", and "Keynote".

 

[Lone Deranger]

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. Almost no one was using app with regularity before Apple used it (Apple started in OS X with their .app packages). Besides, app could be short for Apple and not application. If anyone has claim over it, Apple does.

Quoted for agreement.

 

[4look4rd]

I personally like Prog Store (as in Program Store) much better than App Store

 

[bmturney]

Cry babies...

Microsoft is just mad because they are behind the curve... AGAIN... their just crying foul because they weren't the first to market with something... which is no surprise... those cats haven't been first to market on ANYTHING in the last 15 years...

 

[gnasher729]

The purpose of a trademark is to protect the trademark holder from others profitting from their good name. That's why I cannot write for example some Blackjack software and call it "Microsoft Blackjack", because people would believe that it is a high quality product written by the excellent programmers at Microsoft with their excellent quality control, and not by me in my spare time.

Now why would Microsoft want to prevent Apple from getting a trademark on "App Store"? Because they want to use _that_ name. But if we all together think about it for an hour or so we should be able to create a list of fifty good names for an online software distribution website easily. The only thing that wouldn't be good about these names would be that they don't make people think of Apple's iTunes App Store and Apple's Mac App Store. Only the name "App Store" would allow Microsoft to benefit from Apple's good name. Which is _exactly_ what trademarks are there to prevent.

 

[0815]

I kind of agree with M$ here. App Store is very generic.

Sort of agree - but only if all generic words are getting removed from the Trademark database.

M$ has also a couple of very generic trademarks like explorer or windows ... should should give them up too.

 

[happyduck42]

Yeah, Microsoft who trademarked Windows, Word....

M$ trademarked Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Word; it's the press and general public that just call it Windows and Word.

 

[kirky29]

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.

 

[jonnymo5]

People use App Store as the generic term because Apple was first. That is something Microsoft wouldn't know anything about.

It is the same reason I hear people call the Zune an iPod. When Microsoft creates something new then they can name it and TM the name.

 

[el-John-o]

Well, when MS can trademark "Windows" and "Word", why not Apple and App Store?

Read up. Microsoft does NOT. I repeat, does NOT have a trademark on Windows OR Word.

Why don't we all just call it what it is and always has been, that Linux has been using for years and years, a "Software Repository", sure it's not nifty sounding, but hey, then nobody can whine about who gets to name it!

I would prefer them NOT to get the trademark on "App Store", as others had mentioned, it would be so much easier if they all just said "App Store" unless they chose to do something else (Android Marketplace still sounds kinda catchy, but App World, c'mon, you can do better.)

To repeat, again, since this KEEPS coming up (folks should READ a thread before they post in it). Microsoft's products named Word, Office and Windows are NOT copyrighted, and have not been for almost 10 years now.

Windows, Word and Office are not copyrighted. As in not. What Microsoft DOES do, is Trademark a PARTICULAR type face of the word "Windows" and uses it as a Logo, they also have "Windows 7" "Windows Vista" etc. trademarked, but someone who uses the term "Windows" is within their rights, as long as they use a different font for their product. This was proven when Microsoft sued the folks who made Lindows some years back, determining that they had no grounds to do so.

They're just pissed that they're late to the party once again.

But this time, unlike Microsoft's "borrowing" from Xerox, the whole world knows their game and keeps its eyes on them.

Sorry m.s., YOU LOSE !!!!!

Hate to burst your bubble too but Microsoft was not invited to see Xerox' machine, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were. When Lisa/Mac came out Microsoft was still licensing DOS. It was Apple who stole from Xerox, and then Microsoft consequently ripped off the idea from Apple, but what followed was a standard in computing so nobody could really "patent" it (it'd be like trying to patent the wheel)

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.

But Microsoft does not and never has tried to trademark the term "Executable", which is what .exe stands for.

People use App Store as the generic term because Apple was first. That is something Microsoft wouldn't know anything about.

It is the same reason I hear people call the Zune an iPod. When Microsoft creates something new then they can name it and TM the name.

Apple LOVES that. iPod is a household name, they call EVERYTHING that plays media in a portable format, an iPod, just like walkman used to be. Apple DOES have that trademarked, so a company can't use it as the name of their product, but it's free advertising! If everyone calls it an iPod no matter what brand you buy, what, in the back of your mind, stands out as the best product? Until recently it SHOULDN'T have been the iPod, poorer features, higher price, less performance, but everyone called everything an iPod, it MUST be better!


-John

 

[logandzwon]

When you hear, "There's an App for that", who do you think of? I've always associated "app" with the file extension .app. But I also think that "app" has become pretty ubiquitous in the realm of consumers. I'm not so sure Apple will win this one.

This single post was what started the sway in my opinion. At first I was in agreement with MS. But then I thought about it. I've never heard of the term "app" before OS X's Mail.app. Then I heard it in reference to other runnable packages in OS X. The app store seems like a play on App[le] and App[lication]. The Apple Application Store. I think anyone else trying to use this mark is trying to say that their store is just like Apple's Application stores. Therefore I now agree totally with Apple on this issue.

Just because a term become synonymous with the public for a class of product, Hover, Chorox, Hersey, etc, doesn't mean the trademark holder losses right to his trademark.