Apple, New York City In Legal Dispute Over Logo

Lemmy Caution writes "Apple, Inc. has filed a suit to prevent New York City's non-profit 'GreeNYC' initiative from using a logo that incorporates an apple in its design. Commentators have noted the substantial differences between the two designs, not to mention the irony of this sort of infringement claim. The city of New York has filed to have the claim rejected, and even possibly the cancellation of Apple's logo in light of the long history of the nickname 'The Big Apple' to describe the city."

I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[Cedric Tsui (890887)]

I REALLY hope Apple wins and NYC's logo is thrown out.
There's no one better suited to start rolling back absurd property rights than a city full of pissed off politicians.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[peragrin (659227)]

actually I hope it goes the over way. Apple needs to be shown that not every apple is their's.

The two logo's don't look anything like each other. NYC's is missing the giant bite for starters.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[k2enemy (555744)]

I think you may have misunderstood the parent. Of course Apple's claim is ridiculous, but with the current state of intellectual property law, Apple has a possibility of winning. This by itself would be BAD, but it may prompt politicians to do something about reforming IP law.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[omega_dk (1090143)]

Well, that might be true... if there were a lawsuit involved at all. [engadget.com]

Hey /.! How about posting about 'filing suit' when it actually happens, and not when someone lacks basic reading comprehension? Not even in TFA does it mention a legal dispute; it says it filed a challenge to NYC's trademark application.

I believe this article needs to be tagged 'adaylateandadollarshort'

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[Lemmy Caution (8378)]

As the original submitter, I used the word "suit" when I should have used the word "claim." Otherwise, however, I think you incorrectly minimalize the effectively litigious and serious nature of a trademark opposition: [houstoninternetlaw.com]

The owner of the pending application is given a copy of the claim, termed a âoenotice of oppositionâ. The applicant is given thirty days to file an answer, If no answer is filed, the application is dismissed. Therefore receipt of an opposition notice must be taken seriously.

The opposition procedure is similar to civil litigation. There is first a discovery period. The time period for discovery is set by the TTAB. The deadlines may be extended on written request. The discovery comprises depositions, interrogatories, production of records, and request for admissions. These are the typical tools used in civil litigation.

  The TTAB has specific rules governing the conduct of an opposition, including the discovery phase. Similar to civil litigation, motions can be filed addressing alleged failure of one party or the other to comply with the TTAB rules of procedure.

  What is unlike civil litigation, is the use of testimonial depositions, which are separate from discovery depositions. The TTAB does not conduct open or oral hearings. All matters are resolved by written record.

It is somewhat misleading to think this is just a casual "business as usual" action on the part of Apple. It is as serious as a regular lawsuit, will involve similar legal mobilizations, and ultimately will determine whether or not GreeNYC can trademark (and use) their logo.

Re:

[Lemmy Caution (8378)]

It will be the "system working as intended" if they find against Apple. Likewise, if I sue you for something utterly ridiculous and it is thrown out, then the system is "working as intended."

That doesn't make the initial filing any less worthy of ridicule or critique.

I actually don't think Apple has a stake in each and every use of an apple in a logo or other iconic circumstance, any more than T-Mobile does with the color magenta or IBM with stripes.

Re:

[Lemmy Caution (8378)]

In that case, the counter-claim should be at least as effective. The city has been using apples in logos and campaigns since at least the early 1970s, and if they want to pursue technology initiatives, they may want to "keep their options open."

No, I'm sorry. This action merits all the ridicule it is receiving.

Re:

[1u3hr (530656)]

Can you really say that Apple doesn't have a stake in other companies using Apples for logos?

Yes, I can. If a company uses a common English word and an image of a real, natural object, it does not have the right to prevent anyone else using that. And they must know that going in. If you make up a word, like "Microsoft" and a unique logo, you can be a hardass. If you choose an word that is a part of the language and an image that you can find in a million works of art, than you're an idiot and a jerk if yo

Re:

[thegnu (557446)]

Can you really say that Apple doesn't have a stake in other companies using Apples for logos? Because that's what saying they shouldn't file this complaint is saying.

only if they're in the same field of business. I thought the Apple Corps. suit was borderline, but their logic was sound.

How are these fields related here? Apple makes their computers with recyclable parts? Apple makes people feel good about themselves for participating in an ad campaign? Tell me.

Re:

[discontinuity (792010)]

but it may prompt politicians to do something about reforming IP law.

Maybe that would happen if Apple had sued a federal agency or something. There's not too much NYC can do about national IP law (directly, at least).

I really like the idea of a counter suit on the basis that Apple stole the apple from NYC first.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins...

[mattgoldey (753976)]

Damn, dude. An apostrophe doesn't mean "Look out, here comes an S!"

Re:

[digitig (1056110)]

Apple needs to be shown that not every apple is their's.

Maybe there's really just one apple in this case -- and it has "Kallisti" written on it.

Re:

[sjames (1099)]

actually I hope it goes the over way. Apple needs to be shown that not every apple is their's.

Good luck with that. Apple records tried to teach them that TWICE. First, Apple chose it's name and the mark even though Apple records was hardly unknown at the time. Then after wrangling in court, the two apples agreed they would stay out of each other's markets and businesses and all would be good.

Then Apple computers started distributing music... Apple records once again tried to show them that there are l

Re:

[DECS (891519)]

I agree that there isn't a confusion between the two entities; however, the issue isn't Apple suing to stop NYC from using the idea of an apple. It's a simple one of Apple legal filing to contest a logo that has more than a little similarity to its own. It's not close to being exactly the same, but if Apple hadn't taken any action, it would not have much to stand on when a third party in the PC/MP3/smartphone/software business began using something just as similar.

Apple Corps sued Apple over its name in 197

Re:

[tomhudson (43916)]

It's been said that the bite is a tribute to Alan Turing (who died from eating a poisioned apple),

So *that's* where the whole "Apple is teh gay" thing got started ...

The treatment of Turing is a shame - he arguably saved more lives than anyone else in WW2.

Re:

[TapeCutter (624760)]

"The treatment of Turing is a shame - he arguably saved more lives than anyone else in WW2."

I agree, the Betchley park guys kept the Atlantic open, and their US franchise shortend the Pacific war using the same techniques. The Manhattan project 'got all the attention' because it signaled the end of WW2 and the start of the cold war. Turing's woefull treament by the authorities means he will eventually take his place as the 20th century's version of Gallelieo.

On the other hand...

[weston (16146)]

the other extreme outcome (Apple's trademark rights eroded) might also cause some positive reactions and make potential future actors more cautious.

So I think it's likely we'll see an alloyed settlement. That's what's likely to benefit the lawyers, anway (and both parties, I suppose).

Re:

[tubapro12 (896596)]

I call no ability for IP on the apple design, prior art by ID designer.</sarcasm>

Re:

[Aglassis (10161)]

Does anybody know why the *GREEN* NYC logo is not... err... green?

So it will go with the black background on the web site. Though technically, due to the infinity symbol, it should be blue [google.com].

Re:Apple may actually have a case

[Kalriath (849904)]

What the hell is that designer on? The curve of the Apple logo isn't even close to the curve of the NYC apple!

If you were to remove the Apple logo, I wouldn't even see the resemblence (because there isn't one). I hope Apple gets crushed in court.

Re:Apple may actually have a case

[Blakey Rat (99501)]

Look at this example, too:

http://rgov.org/college-media-advisers-08 [rgov.org]

Re:Apple may actually have a case

[by Anonymous Coward]

Uh, did you look at the image that you actually link to? The right side of the logo is much further out than the Apple logo, even ignoring the bite that would still be there if the explanation were true. The leaf is a completely different shape and relative size, so even the cut and paste claim there doesn't hold water.

The very example that is supposed to prove it shows it isn't true.

Re:

[Destined Soul (1240672)]

Is it just me, or am I the only one who thought the overlayed images would have matched much better in terms of the curvature? After looking closely at the edges and how the edges of each of the apples curve, particularly noticeable near the "bite mark" where Apple's bite curves in "substantially" more than NYC's version.

Re:Apple may actually have a case

[Nightspirit (846159)]

Those look totally different, it doesn't match the shape on the bottom left, the indentation on the bottom, and most of the right side. The only place it appears to somewhat match are the top left curve, and there are only so many ways you can draw an apple.

Re:Apple may actually have a case

[inflex (123318)]

Only reason they appear 'close' according to that 'designer' is because of the limited resolution and a big slice of wishful thinking. There's a lot of differences in the curve outline between the two;

* the right hand bottom/mid side where the infinity symbol bulges out
* the right hand top side the infinity logo again is on the inside of the apple logo
* the left hand side the curve infinity symbol is on the -inside- of the apple logo
* the bottom bumps of the infinity curve have a lesser curvature

Sorry, but that guys reasoning of similarities is about as useful as saying "If you squint, then this Ford car looks clearly like this Chevy, see, it even has 4 wheels!".

Re:NYC may have same case as Beatles?

[lpq (583377)]

Wasn't there a dispute about Apple's logo vs. the apple logo used by the Beatles?

Would New York's logo possibly be closer to the Beatle's logo?

Wasn't the eventual outcome that there was no trademark confusion between Apple and Beatles's apple use because they were in different fields at the time (computers vs. music). Of course with the iTunes store, that issue has come up again...

But for NYC vs. Apple, wouldn't similar principles apply -- i.e. they are separate entities that are not likely to be confused

In other news

[shadowofwind (1209890)]

Hasbro sues Idaho over infrignement on Mr. Potato Head brand

Re:In other news

[thegnu (557446)]

It took me 15 seconds to realize that this wasn't portuguese.

apple

[by Anonymous Coward]

god should sue them, after all they copied his design.

Re:apple

[Frankie70 (803801)]

god should sue them, after all they copied his design.

Yes, but why would Steve Jobs sue Apple.

Apple's REAL Complaint

[Bieeanda (961632)]

The Apple logo encourages people to drop hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars on electronic gadgets they may or may not need (more energy consumption). GreeNYC apple will be used to encourage people to walk, bike and unplug appliances when not in use (less energy consumption).

Green is bad for business.

Rainbow and Silver

[retech (1228598)]

Next up: Apple sues every gay pride organization and person wearing a rainbow for their old (shitty) logo infringement.

After that: Apple will sue the Universe for Mercury, Silver, Nickel, Tin, Aluminum and Lead all using the colour silver, an obvious infringement upon their new logo.

I suppose Jobs will start suing anyone who wears a turtleneck while giving Keynote presentations.

Please someone (namely the judges), stop the madness.

NYC & Company, Inc.

[Animats (122034)]

NYC and Company(tm), Inc. [nycvisit.com], the marketing arm of NYC(tm) has been very aggressive in trademarking. Just ask the locals. (tm).

Apple isn't going to win this one.

In Other News

[Enderandrew (866215)]

A twelve-year old boy posted on his blog that he really wants an iPod for his birthday, but is considering holding out for Christmas, hoping that the next iteration of the iPod will be out by then. Apple assumes someone broke an NDA on the release date of the next iPod, and they are suing the poor boy, and everyone he has friended on MySpace. Tom was not available for comment.

Re:

[thegrassyknowl (762218)]

It all sounds like a case of:

Apple: Hey you fuckpig lawyers, why do we pay you so much

Fuckpigs: Because we sue people and make you money

Apple: So fuck off and sue someone then

Fuckpigs: Who?

Apple: Do we look like we really give a shit?

Fuckpigs: Ok, how about a city that's been calling itself an apple since before computers were invented or a 12 year old?

Apple: Somebody will think of the children, sue the city.

C'mon, Apple!

[christurkel (520220)]

I am die hard Mac fan and the two are even close to the same. Actually, NYC's looks like a heart to me.

Argumentation

[DSVaughan (1007255)]

Sounds to me like people with way too much money are arguing with other people with way too much money. If there is a definitive difference in logos, then there is no problem (legally).

Apple' opening a can of worms...

[analog_line (465182)]

...and I hope they get the daylights scared out of them by the judge in the case. This lawsuit is ridiculous on its face. I'd be shocked to see this thrown back at them and have their own trademark actually canceled, but if it did happen it would be well deserved.

I'm really surprised at a lot of Apple's moves lately. Pushing new Safari installs as an "update", and this idiotic lawsuit make it sound like there was some turnover in Apple's legal department. They've certainly always been bareknuckled, and

bah

[wizardforce (1005805)]

I always thought that you'd need to show that your trademarked image was reasonably similar which this is nothing of the sort. *or* that one could reasonably associate one brand with another effectively allowing the infringing brand to piggy back on the infringed trademark's notoriety. this isn't the case here either, no one's stupid enough to confuse greeNYC with Macs or any of Apple's products.

You guys (supporting Apple) are nuts

[Man in Spandex (775950)]

What shape do you want an Apple to have? a fucking Banana?

I bet if you replace Apple by Microsoft and the Apple logo by that wavy Windows logo, you'd have Slashdot throwing flaming paper towels at Microsoft for suing.

Re:

[Koiu Lpoi (632570)]

Well, if Green(RandomCityHere) had a logo that was the MS Windows logo, traced, pallete swapped, and a window filled in, wouldn't we be support MS here, at least a little bit? People here on Slashdot are biased in one direction, yes, but we're not stupid. We can see when things are right and when they're not. Look at the posts above yours - you can find a picture of the two logos superimposed. One is clearly based on the other.

quick fanboys to the rescue!

[timmarhy (659436)]

quickly, to the imobile to defend apple against anyone who points out the companys glaring flaws or money grubbing attitude!

It says

[Dunbal (464142)]

I think I read somewhere in the fine print that Apple is also claiming that the i 3 NY logo is too similar to their "i" logos (iTunes, iPods, iMacs, etc), or are they saving this for the next bunch of law suits?

Seriously, talk about one bad Apple soiling the bunch.

"clear case of trademark infringement"?

[sed quid in infernos (1167989)]

TFA is mistaken about whether the use of Apple's old logo on busses and vans is a "clear case of trademark infringement." The essence of trademark infringement is the likelihood of consumer confusion. It's possible to make the case that tourists in Vietnam would likely think Apple Computer (as it was called then) was running van and bus lines in Vietnam, but it's hardly "clear."

It is clearly copyright infringement. It also might be trademark dilution, but that's a far harder case to make than trademark in

I assumed

[Paktu (1103861)]

that the article was referring to Apple Records.

Fucktards

[cmacb (547347)]

A rare case where no other term will quite do.

In a perfect world, not only would Apple lose, but they would also lose their right to do business in New York, their stores would be confiscated and turned over to the homeless.

To the original submitter of this article --

[Ignis Fatuusz (1084045)]

Please cite a reliable source that says Apple has 'filed suit' against anyone regarding this matter. You can't? I didn't think so. Apple has filed a formal opposition to a trademark application, which it must do in order to actively defend its trademark. Whether it's successful or not is irrelevant. Engadget explains the issue in detail here: http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/03/apple-vs-nyc-whats-really-going-on/ [engadget.com] I'm not sure what disappoints me more - the sensationalist tone of the submitted piece, or the overwhelming knee-jerk reaction of folks jumping on Apple for something they didn't actually do.

Re:What graphics artists have said...

[the_humeister (922869)]

That's like saying that cars look alike because they have a hood, driver/passenger doors, trunk, and 4 doors. There are only so many ways to draw an apple before it stops looking like an apple. These logos are clearly nothing alike in the ways that matter.

The differences between the logos:

[argent (18001)]

The apple logo is a solid apple with a bite out of its side, in a variety of color schemes (rainbow (original), red (early variant), black (on white paper), white (current logo), and blue (in the OS X title bar)). It has no stem. The leaf extends to the left. The bottom is rounded, and it is noticably "chubbier" than the NYC logo.

The NYC logo is an outline of an apple, with no bite, and with the outline extended into a stylized infinity or possibly a "yin/yang" symbol, in green or white, with a stem and the leaf extending to the left. The bottom is a sharp indent, and the shape is slimmer than the Apple logo.

The "stem" is a distinctive difference, it has never appeared in any Apple logo, and it has appeared in other NYC-related "big apple" artwork (for example the "Big Apple" sculptures that decorated NYC in 2004).

Different colors, different shape, consistent with previous NYC "big Apple" icons and logos. The only difference is that the apple is more rounded and less "pear shaped", which is most likely simply due to the need to accommodate the yin/yang/infinity symbol.

Re:

[Urza9814 (883915)]

What version of firefox? Works fine for me in both 2.0.0.13 and 3.0b5