Support NeoGAF

[Kaako]

I seriously hope Apple as a company loses tons of money and business because of shit like this.

 

[Medalion]

McDonalds is next, cuz it's too similar to MAC

 

[lastplayed]

They sued Woolworths in Australia for this logo...

And what was the outcome? Countdown NZ still uses that logo.

 

[Zaptruder]

And what was the outcome? Countdown NZ still uses that logo.

They lost. Woolworths have had apples in their logos in the past.

My personal litigation wet dream would be to have Apple sue so many apple themed companies so frequently and so abusively that the court systems basically get fed up with them and simply deny their Apple logo trademark.

Not that it'll ever happen, but that'd be great.

"Hey dipshits, gtfo and stop wasting our time."

 

[Mohonky]

I thought it was an Onion article.

I was actually hoping it was.

This was tiresome a while ago, now it's beyond ridiculous, especially after that win against Samsung. Way to set the precedent.

 

[ntropy]

What could they possibly hope to gain from this?

Oh yes, publicity. That is what they gain from this.

yea, publicity. that's exactly what Apple is missing! ...

 

[KHarvey16]

And what was the outcome? Countdown NZ still uses that logo.

Apple objected to the application for copyright on the basis of its scope including the ability to brand electronics equipment with the apple logo. The case never went to trial and we don't know if Apple dropped it or they settled. It seems likely Woolworths simply limited the scope of their copyright request.

 

[Lebron]

Soon. Gonna pay what you owe.

 

[alr1ght]

So do you think their team of lawyers makes 5000x the money that their factory workers make?

 

[Vicetrailia]

Seems like attacking this company will bring even more risk to them than without.

Let these giant companies get too comfy and they start acting like bitches trying to control everything.

 

[whatsinaname]

I honestly wouldn't have one now, for a number of reasons:

1. They are ludicrously expensive. My Note will cost me £180 throughout the course of the contract. An iPhone? £1000, at least. Fuck that noise.

What are you talking about?

I am looking at buying a Galaxy Note 2 (I use an iPhone 4 right now). Expected price is about $750 - $800. iPhone 4S sells for about $650 unlocked.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

A.pl is pretty brilliant. Props.

 

[Unicorn]

Apple sues everyone these days, even a grocery shop :/

Here

Went for the article, stayed for the robotic dogs:

http://www.reuters.com/video/2012/0...lkies-in-the?videoId=237657751&videoChannel=6

 

[Protein]

More like

 

[inner-G]

lol!

 

[Duke Togo]

lol, well played!

 

[Zombie James]

nvm, beaten badly.

 

[dallow_bg]

This could be a could outlet for people

Yeah, this thread needs to stay alive through tomorrows presentation at least.
Hopefully all the venting can stay concentrated here.

 

[Heel]

This reminds me, I've driven by a shopping center for years that has a sign for a nail shop called Coogle. I'll let you guess what their logo looks like lol.

 

[Protein]

Meanwhile in Samsung Land:

then...

Dawww how sweet of them. And what a cute dragon. I'd literally shoot through the roof if a company did something like this for me.

 

[Dead Man]

So seriously, how was a trademark granted on such a generic name in the first place?

 

[anonymous_abc]

So seriously, how was a trademark granted on such a generic name in the first place?

imho that is the main point at hand.
and to be blamed for all the grief that came afterwards.

 

[travisbickle]

So seriously, how was a trademark granted on such a generic name in the first place?

It's recognised as a brand name, it doesn't matter if it is a generic word in the English language, it has brand equity for Apple. Well over half the world do not use the word apple to describe a piece of fruit, but all the world use Apple to describe the company.

As for copyrighting a logo, my personal beliefs would be for all companies to die in a fire, but currently in a capitalist, consumerist society not being able to copyright your brand would be crazy!!

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

It definitely does in Germany if the trademark in question is especially famous. (Apple undoubtedly qualifies in that respect.)
You don't trademark a name of logo for a specific business area, or if you do it would be very silly because it weakens your Claim.



I never said it was necessary, but it's legally valid for them to do so.


And once more, patent and trademark laws a seriously fracked up and need reforming.
I don't want to defend them, I'm just trying to state what they currently are.
Everything I say might well only be valid for Germany but that is the way it is here.

Of course, it's legal to sue for a lot of things, it doesn't mean you'll win obviously. I'm just stating that there's tons of people always in these threads saying it's necessary to defend the trademark or it will be considered abandoned for future cases. This is true, but this is not necessary to prove you are defending your trademark which most people don't understand.

 

[TheContact]

You know what I think apples should sue Apple for ruining the good name of a fruit

 

[gconsole]

Wait till they sue themself.

 

[anonymous_abc]

Wait till they sue themself.

i believe this has happened before, cant remember what company, but some department sued a different one "by mistake"...

 

[Slavik81]

Happened before. Well, Apple was sued first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

Which includes this gem:
As a condition of the settlement, Apple Computer agreed not to enter the music business, and Apple Corps agreed not to enter the computer business.

Except in the case of the digital distribution of music: the great mistake of an exception that made half of Apple Computer's modern business possible.