Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

androidauthority.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 187 posts

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#21

Post by fredoralive »

hnbad wrote: post #7
xslvrxslwt wrote: post #2

How the heck does one copyright a whole-ass image of an apple, wtf?

Trademark, not copyright. The weird thing is the expectation that trademarking an apple could be done in a way that is broad enough to cover all apple-based logos across all industries. I'm not sure how accurate this portrayal is given that Apple does indeed not sell fruit and the logo in question is likely pre-existing and does not actually resemble anything Apple has likely tried to file. Trade dress or so-called "…

It's the logo for The Beatles' Apple Corps (whose trademarks now belong to Apple Inc as part of the settlement of the whole Apple v Apple thing about 15 years ago), so the fields it makes claims on[1] are mostly related to things like records and DVDs, so it seems odd if Apple Inc really are trying to use it to sue this association (are they actually suing?).

[1] https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?ID=ROM....

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#22

Post by DrScientist »

world-set-free wrote: post #3
xslvrxslwt wrote: post #2

How the heck does one copyright a whole-ass image of an apple, wtf?

It is suprising what you can do with hundreds of lawyers and several congressmen.

You are being slightly US centric there - while what you say may be true in the US - I don't think congressmen have much influence in the Swiss Courts.

Lawyer point still stands of course.

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#24

Post by fredoralive »

soneil wrote: post #23

Has anyone been able to find any original sources on this? I'm curious to see the scope of the actual trademark. All the reporting looks like a game of "chinese whispers".

The Wired article links to this https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?ID=ROM.... which is the logo of The Beatles' Apple Corps, that is now owned by Apple Inc as part of the settlement of the disagreements between the two Apples.

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#26

Post by Retric »

amarant wrote: post #13
hnbad wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trademark, not copyright. The weird thing is the expectation that trademarking an apple could be done in a way that is broad enough to cover all apple-based logos across all industries. I'm not sure how accurate this portrayal is given that Apple does indeed not sell fruit and the logo in question is likely pre-existing and does not actually resemble anything Apple has likely tried to file. Trade dress or so-called "…

The "infringing party" has existed and used this logo since a good 50 years before Apple Inc was founded. I kinda hope the Swiss Apple company turns this around and sues Apple for trademark infringement, since they can prove using it for longer, and according to Apples own argument, the fact that they're in completely different industries apparently doesn't matter. Would be fun to see Tim Cook announce the new "Banan…

First their isn’t a lawsuit, just someone concerned about hypotheticals.

Neither party is infringing until Apple sells actual fruit or the fruit company starts making tablets etc. The only point of contention is likely Apple making Movies and other entertainment which could create conflict if the fruit company wants to make a documentary at some point in the future.

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#27

Post by ta1243 »

amarant wrote: post #13
hnbad wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trademark, not copyright. The weird thing is the expectation that trademarking an apple could be done in a way that is broad enough to cover all apple-based logos across all industries. I'm not sure how accurate this portrayal is given that Apple does indeed not sell fruit and the logo in question is likely pre-existing and does not actually resemble anything Apple has likely tried to file. Trade dress or so-called "…

The "infringing party" has existed and used this logo since a good 50 years before Apple Inc was founded. I kinda hope the Swiss Apple company turns this around and sues Apple for trademark infringement, since they can prove using it for longer, and according to Apples own argument, the fact that they're in completely different industries apparently doesn't matter. Would be fun to see Tim Cook announce the new "Banan…

It's a phone with appeal!

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#28

Post by hnbad »

fredoralive wrote: post #21
hnbad wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trademark, not copyright. The weird thing is the expectation that trademarking an apple could be done in a way that is broad enough to cover all apple-based logos across all industries. I'm not sure how accurate this portrayal is given that Apple does indeed not sell fruit and the logo in question is likely pre-existing and does not actually resemble anything Apple has likely tried to file. Trade dress or so-called "…

It's the logo for The Beatles' Apple Corps (whose trademarks now belong to Apple Inc as part of the settlement of the whole Apple v Apple thing about 15 years ago), so the fields it makes claims on[1] are mostly related to things like records and DVDs, so it seems odd if Apple Inc really are trying to use it to sue this association (are they actually suing?). [1] https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?I…

I seem to have misread this part of the article:

> Wired notes that Apple first tried to secure the fruit trademark in Switzerland in 2017, when it filed an application for a black-and-white depiction of a Granny Smith apple. Indeed, it applied for an image of a whole apple rather than its trademark apple with a bite.

This seems to me like a (intentional?) misunderstanding of trademark law as having a trademark for the grayscale picture of an apple would merely entail that grayscale picture of an apple, not all other apples, nor even necessarily another grayscale picture of a different apple from a different perspective.

What I read into it is that Apple filed for a generic apple trademark rather than either of the pre-existing logos it already owned the trademarks for in other markets.

Given the source's likely bias, I'm inclined to believe the article is written in bad faith and there is no realistic threat to the actual fruit company.

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#29

Post by JW_00000 »

The title is quite deceptive. Reading the Wired article, Apple seems to be pursuing a trademark in Switzerland on a depiction of an apple (without bite mark, and in black-and-white). The Swiss authorities granted this but only on limited product categories. Apple filed an appeal about this, which is ongoing.

Now, the Fruit Union is fear-mongering / spreading the message that, if this appeal is granted, they would be forced to change their logo. However, it seems there is no direct threat from Apple to the Fruit Union. Also, it seems unlikely Apple's appeal will actually be granted, as there is "a legal principle that declares generic pictures of common goods to be in the public domain".

Re: Apple could force a 111-year-old fruit company to change its Apple logo

#30

Post by magnat »

expertentipp wrote: post #11

You are going at war with Poland, Sir. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_apple_pro...

They already did in 2015, when they (unsuccessfully) sued a.pl (polish online grocery store) for their domain name.
Post reply on HN