-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Apple trademarks its...retail store design
- Thread starter GK86
- Start date
- Status
Dreams-Visions
Member
this is how I feel about the USPTO: the shit is broken, so defensively patent everything. Why? Because someone else may and then you're fucked. It's not about using these patents offensively so much as it is having to protect yourself from the seemingly inherently screwed up nature of the USPTO at present.
So to me there is no such thing as "abuse". There is only "protecting yourself as effectively as possible." I blame the USPTO for putting companies in a position to feel the need to apply, and even moreso for being stupid enough to grant. Apple isn't twisting arms or sucking dicks to get patents granted.
What the fuck? How do Sony stores even look remotely close to an Apple store? Oh right they both have tables and bright lights.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Didn't Best Buy do blue polos first?
Anticitizen One
Banned
I totally understand why. Microsoft shamelessly ripped them off with the Microsoft store like they do with everything else.
Apple employees wear t-shirts not blue polos
Apple employees wear t-shirts not blue polos
GoldenEye 007
Member
Blue tops. Close enough.
The trademark doesn't cover blue polos.
This is the description of the mark: http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=85036990&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch
The Samsung store clearly doesn't violate it. It was clear where Microsoft got their inspiration though.
krypt0nian
Banned
You're talking high energy physics to a slavering mob. They're here for Apple.
Captain N. Tenneal
Member
Apple should patent being an asshole. Then the circular suing of Apple Vs. Apple will sort all this shit out.
krypt0nian
Banned
See what I mean, Dreams?
SouthernDragon
Member
On the one hand, they do have a point. My roommate recently walked into the Microsoft store absentmindedly while talking to a friend, and was confused for a moment when he realized it wasn't the Apple store that he was looking for.
But, then again, it took him all of 2 seconds to realize where he was. He certainly didn't walk out with a Surface thinking it was an iPad.
In short, this makes sense if you don't think about it too much.
P.S. I like your post, Dreams.
But, then again, it took him all of 2 seconds to realize where he was. He certainly didn't walk out with a Surface thinking it was an iPad.
In short, this makes sense if you don't think about it too much.
P.S. I like your post, Dreams.
EightBitNate
Member
Just google "Sony stores". I'm not sure if they all look that way, but they represent the product in an eye pleasing way. It's certainly possible.
Yeah, Sony stores don't look like Apple's. It's even more proof against "there's only one way to make a
(insert Apple product)Dreams-Visions
Member
lol ice cold. I liked the one Sony store I've been too in Scottsdale Az. They had a back room with a Giant tv set up for uncharted 2 that you could play for as long you wanted, since it was pretty dead lol.
freenudemacusers
Member
Don't know how this is necessary, and I am a pretty big mac supporter.. I can pretty easily discern between an apple, Microsoft, and Samsung store. Like, the other day I went into a mall that had both an apple AND microsoft store inside to get a copy of windows 7. According to some I would probably be confused... I just looked for the empty one.
Trumpet909
Member
Why haven't grocery stores done this as well?
ITT people who don't understand the difference between patents and trademarks.
I don't have much problem with this as opposed to Apple's patents for rounded rectangles.
Getting a trademark on the design and layout of your store isn't actually new, and if I recall, it has been litigated between a taco fast food restaurant that blatantly ripped off the decor of a more established fast food chain.
Trademarks aren't granted to protect "innovation", as patents and copyrights are "supposed" to do, but it originates more in unfair competition and preventing companies from ripping off a more famous brand.
I don't have much problem with this as opposed to Apple's patents for rounded rectangles.
Getting a trademark on the design and layout of your store isn't actually new, and if I recall, it has been litigated between a taco fast food restaurant that blatantly ripped off the decor of a more established fast food chain.
Trademarks aren't granted to protect "innovation", as patents and copyrights are "supposed" to do, but it originates more in unfair competition and preventing companies from ripping off a more famous brand.
WonkyPanda
Member
I...don't get the problem. Trade dress is something that has been held as a valid component of trademark law by the SCOTUS. I mean, if a taco restaurant can get trade dress, why can't Apple?
NoLootBoxDev
Member
apple patents the sun...ohh wait.
victreeb3l
Member
because a lot of people didnt read the ruling. gigas post explains it well.
WonkyPanda
Member
This is NOT a patent, people. Patent rights and Trademark rights confer very different rights to the user. Stop conflating the two.
EightBitNate
Member
Well, to be fair, you could probably substitute "patent" for "trademark" and still fully understand what someone's saying. Not saying they're the same, but it's pretty obvious what is meant.
shit, I always get mad when I walk into a Microsoft store because I mistook it for an Apple store.
...lol this shit is stupid
You know this is a fair criticism, but I don't know how much the office itself has to do with it. The USPTO is well understaffed, but they can't do much more hiring because of budget cuts, and so the quality of both review and enforcement of rules suffers. Also, IP policy is somewhat out of their hands as they have statutes and judicial decisions to follow. The US had decided that it is a pro-IP country. In many ways this is reflected in the USPTO not the other way around.
outunderthestars
Banned
Agreed. Though I did buy my first macbook pro at a store because i wanted someone to help me learn the basics of using a mac, and the help move my files.
Just google "Sony stores". I'm not sure if they all look that way, but they represent the product in an eye pleasing way. It's certainly possible.
That is a beautiful store.
Whether or not we all have a thorough understanding of patents, trademarks, or other legal terms doesn't change our opinion that this is shallow anti-competitive drivel that shouldn't be allowed by any company anywhere.
Just imagine of Walgreens, CVS, and others make it illegal to have similar store layouts, or HEB/Kroger/Publix, or Walmart/Target, etc. It adds nothing to our economy, and takes a ton away.
Just imagine of Walgreens, CVS, and others make it illegal to have similar store layouts, or HEB/Kroger/Publix, or Walmart/Target, etc. It adds nothing to our economy, and takes a ton away.
Thug Waffle
Member
Trademark protection is to prevent customer confusion...
Before you even walk in, you can look through the windows and tell whether or not it's an Apple store... and if you can't, you're probably either slow or not paying attention.
Fucking ridiculous.
Before you even walk in, you can look through the windows and tell whether or not it's an Apple store... and if you can't, you're probably either slow or not paying attention.
Fucking ridiculous.
freenudemacusers
Member
You forgot the 3 college techy bros surrounding you poking at their iPads
WonkyPanda
Member
Doesn't that show a lack of knowledge on the matter. Why would anyone say "patent" when they mean to discuss a "trademark"? The mechanisms, rights, and establishment for both are very, very different. Simply because they fall under the umbrella of intellectual property does not mean they share so many similarities. I mean, why don't we just start calling this a copyright?
I liked the Microsoft store I went to only for the fact it let me play with a surface. That thing is very cool.Agreed. Though I did buy my first macbook pro at a store because i wanted someone to help me learn the basics of using a mac, and the help move my files.
That is a beautiful store.
That's because they use the same logos and the same product product names even though they're different companies and different products. Not because they have their stores organized the same way.
The US, on the other hand, allows companies to trademark or patent the most generic shit that you can't even AVOID violating them.
I mean, a rectangular form factor with rounded edges for a phone/tablet? Rounded-edge rectangular icons? a glass storefront with a paneled facade? A glass staircase? polyutherine used on earbud tips? A beamed note as an icon to represent music? Slide to unlock? Digital page turning?
Many people have trouble discerning between real Apple Stores and fake Apple Stores, though, and this trademark is needed for Apple to fight against fake Apple Stores. I've been in high-end malls in China where the fake Apple Store was actually labeled "Apple Store" on the store directory.
outunderthestars
Banned
I love the hardware, but was shocked at how long it took to open the mail or music app. No flagship device should take 15 seconds to open an app.
victreeb3l
Member
i keep seeing a giant robot face
EightBitNate
Member
Trust me, I'm not saying they're the same at all (even I made this mistake), but it's a pretty simple mistake to confuse trademark with patent without thinking about it first. Regardless of correct dictation, it's simple to tell someone meant "protection of IP" by saying trademark instead of patent. They are not trying to somehow say they are the same. They probably weren't thinking about it.
True, but to be fair it is kind of old by now. I'm sure the hardware could use a refresh.
It is entirely because the stores are organized the same way, using the same trademarked logos. There are resellers that don't use the same trademark features or logos and you would be less likely to confuse them for Apple Stores.
You are confusing trademark with patents, by the way. And this trademark should be reciprocally applied in China.
WonkyPanda
Member
TACO CABANA!
Love that case; made me hungry in IP.
EDIT:
In that case, I'll just give people the benefit of the doubt. Just trying to make it clear that they are very different things.
But that could be covered under existing trademarks.
WonkyPanda
Member
How? If Apple doesn't have a trade dress on its store, how can its existing trademarks protect that?
Fake Apple Store I've been to in Foshan, China:
I've also been to similar ones in Beijing, Shenzhen, Weifang, and Qingdao. I actually saw 4 in 4 different malls in Weifang, a pretty much no-name city.
I think trademark protection is entirely appropriate for this. There is consumer confusion, and it does cause worst experiences that they attribute to Apple. Overcharging, selling grey market goods that aren't covered by the China warranty, charges for "warranty service."
I've also been to similar ones in Beijing, Shenzhen, Weifang, and Qingdao. I actually saw 4 in 4 different malls in Weifang, a pretty much no-name city.
I think trademark protection is entirely appropriate for this. There is consumer confusion, and it does cause worst experiences that they attribute to Apple. Overcharging, selling grey market goods that aren't covered by the China warranty, charges for "warranty service."
QuicheFontaine
Member
It's about 1 in the morning here, and I just laughed ridiculously loud at this. Well done!
The Apple name and logo are their trademark. Any store bearing the name and the logo is therefore breaching their marks. And big lols at anyone suggesting this is going to do anything to the fake stores in China.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll