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

171–180 of 187 posts

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

#171

Post by EnergyAmy »

raldi wrote: post #166
EnergyAmy wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"clearly based on" is doing a whole lot of work in your comment. I would never confuse the two.

I said nothing about confusion. I said that in 2011, when they changed their old logo: https://photos5.appleinsider.com/gallery/54990-111552-001-pr... to this new one: https://photos5.appleinsider.com/gallery/54990-111553-000-le... it seems to me that they were clearly using the Apple logo as their inspiration.

I think it's pretty clear that they were using... apples as their inspiration for the new logo. That thing that they sell.

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

#172

Post by paxys »

raldi wrote: post #170
paxys wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe that regardless of the existence of Apple a company that sells apples could want to use a generic picture of an apple as their logo?

Yes. Now would you be willing to answer my question? I'm trying to figure out whether we disagree over a matter of where precisely to draw a line, or if the very idea of the line is antithetical.

So yes, the difference is that you think that the fruit company logo was copied from Apple whereas I don't.

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

#173

Post by mattmaroon »

underdeserver wrote: post #163
mattmaroon wrote: post #113

This title is clickbait. If you read the article, it’s pretty clear that Apple has taken no action against the fruit company and there’s no reason to think they will, or that they’d even be able to if granted the trademarks requested. It also seems as if they’re trying to retain rights to use the whole apple for specific products. From the source: “ Apple's attempts to secure the trademark in Switzerland go as far ba…

Yep. I also want to trust the Swiss courts, much more than I'd trust the American courts, to no accept any Apple claim against the Swiss company.

American courts definitely would not. Apple itself got away with being named after Apple Corps (the Beatles’ licensing arm) until they got into music.

Also in the US we have first use, which is similar to how prior art works in patents. If Apple started selling apples, they’d be the ones at risk of losing a lawsuit.

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

#174

Post by mattmaroon »

Varqu wrote: post #138
mattmaroon wrote: post #113

This title is clickbait. If you read the article, it’s pretty clear that Apple has taken no action against the fruit company and there’s no reason to think they will, or that they’d even be able to if granted the trademarks requested. It also seems as if they’re trying to retain rights to use the whole apple for specific products. From the source: “ Apple's attempts to secure the trademark in Switzerland go as far ba…

There should be a penalty for such bogus trademark claims, best as % of the global revenue. Then, maybe, they would learn that a corporation cannot bully others only because it has unlimited legal resources.

There is a penalty! If someone else were using it first, they could sue Apple, and that is in fact exactly what happened.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

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

#175

Post by lost_tourist »

pdpi wrote: post #153
HWR_14 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Took the name from the Beatles [edited thanks to pdpi] corporation, with its own trademarks.

Beatles, not Beetles. It's a dumb pun on "beat".

It's a band name, not a scholarly article title

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

#176

Post by lost_tourist »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #131
cjs_ac wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is, thank you! I always get those two mixed up.

Providence is like providing something (provide ence) and Provenance is like it stems from something like a vine (pro vine ance).

What about Divine Provenance?

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

#178

Post by stjohnswarts »

Apple will lose this one for sure. There is no way a European court will decide for an American 800lb gorilla company bullying a swiss company that has been around for over a century. Good for them that they can't be bought as easily as American courts.

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

#179

Post by AlecSchueler »

aubanel wrote: post #159
AlecSchueler wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providence is like providing something (provide ence) and Provenance is like it stems from something like a vine (pro vine ance).

Wait, that's completely false ! Provenance comes from the Latin "pro" (from) and "venire" (come), so that's where an item comes from, while Providence (capital P) is "the care and control of God or of a force that is not human in origin" according to Cambridge dictionary.

Apologies I didn't mean to suggest I was sharing the actual etymologies, it was only intended as an mnemonic for the commenter above! Thanks for sharing the actual roots though, no pun intended ;)

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

#180

Post by mattmaroon »

shp0ngle wrote: post #127
mattmaroon wrote: post #113

This title is clickbait. If you read the article, it’s pretty clear that Apple has taken no action against the fruit company and there’s no reason to think they will, or that they’d even be able to if granted the trademarks requested. It also seems as if they’re trying to retain rights to use the whole apple for specific products. From the source: “ Apple's attempts to secure the trademark in Switzerland go as far ba…

On one hand yeah this makes sense and is editorialised. On the other hand… Apple is now a behemoth that does fitness programs, have their TV service, now enter into banking. What if there is a TV program about apples? What if the fruit union ventures into financing? But yeah that’s all a different problem than “Apple is forcing a fruit company to change its logo”

If anything doing so would be a risk to Apple in most countries since the others were doing it first.
Post reply on HN