111–120 of 187 posts
Trademark protection should only apply where it prevents customer confusion. A consumer electronics company has no business in preventing anyone from using a similar logo for selling fruit .
I think any kind of confusion is what raise the question of if it should be ok or not. But here the logos don’t even match…
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…
Surely a blog post from Android Authority, a site dedicated to Apple's biggest competitor for mobile ecosystems, wouldn't sensationalize an article for the purposes of clicks.
From the source:
“ Apple's attempts to secure the trademark in Switzerland go as far back as 2017, when the Cupertino, California–based giant submitted an application to the Swiss Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) requesting the IP rights for a realistic, black-and-white depiction of an apple variety known as the Granny Smith—the generic green apple. The request covered an extensive list of potential uses—mostly on electronic, digital, and audiovisual consumer goods and hardware. Following a protracted back-and-forth between both parties, the IPI partially granted Apple’s request last fall, saying that Apple could have rights relating to only some of the goods it wanted, citing a legal principle that considers generic images of common goods—like apples—to be in the public domain. In the spring, Apple launched an appeal.”
So what’s really happening: Apple is trying to prevent others from using apples, including ones that don’t look particularly like Apple’s apple (2d, monochrome, bite out of it) from being used to compete with them. You couldn’t start “granny smith’s headphones and use an apple as your logo.
You can debate if this is good or bad but any mention of the fruit company is meritless sensationalism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed 100%. The logos are not even vaguely similar, either! Besides, didn't we already go through this decades ago with Apple Records? ¯\\\_ (ツ)_/¯ Probably a case of "lawyers gonna lawyer," because US trademark law demands that one vigorously defend their trademark, lest they lose it. SMH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
>>trademark law demands that one vigorously defend their trademark, lest they lose it. This myth, and "cant yell fire" are two of the most pervasive false legal statements on the internet. "Quite simply, the view that a trademark holder must trawl the internet and respond to every unauthorized use (or even every infringing use) is a myth. It’s great for lawyers, but irritating and expensive for everyone else. And whe…
Trademark protection should only apply where it prevents customer confusion. A consumer electronics company has no business in preventing anyone from using a similar logo for selling fruit .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Limits_and_defenses_...
If Apple want to argue that the logos are confusingly similar, well OK then: the newer company should be obliged to change their logo.
If Apple want to argue that the logos are confusingly similar, well OK then: the newer company should be obliged to change their logo.
Trademark protection should only apply where it prevents customer confusion. A consumer electronics company has no business in preventing anyone from using a similar logo for selling fruit .
Agreed 100%. The logos are not even vaguely similar, either! Besides, didn't we already go through this decades ago with Apple Records? ¯\\\_ (ツ)_/¯ Probably a case of "lawyers gonna lawyer," because US trademark law demands that one vigorously defend their trademark, lest they lose it. SMH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
An investigation in 2022 by the Tech Transparency Project, a nonprofit that researches Big Tech, found that between 2019 and 2021, Apple filed more trademark oppositions—attempts to enforce its IP over other companies—than Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and Google combined. Those companies also have trademarked common terms such as “Windows” or “Prime.”
https://www.wired.com/story/apple-vs-apples-trademark-battle...