The Apple Name Game

Apple Core sent a link to an article running in Australia about Apple fighting for their name with some little telco called Apple Communications. Well, they were called that. Now they are Green.

Well...

[Lshmael]

I know at least one person is going to bash me for this, but if you were founding a company, wouldn't you try to come up with an original name? I mean, there are a telecommunications company, so it is possible that they could be mistaken for Apple.

Re:sheesh...

[thegrommit]

What's funny is that Apple Computer had to cut a deal with the Beatles record (called Apple) to keep their name.

Re:is it just me...

[NineNine]

MS is trying to get software manufacturers to stop using "Windows". Apple is going after completely unrelated businesses. Big difference.

Please

[Frederique Coq-Bloqu]

capitalize the words 'Australia' and 'Apple' when posting a story to the front page. Thank you.

so what?

[Shymon]

Apple finds a company riping off it's name. The offending company changes it's name. this happens all the time in the buisness world, just look at all the name changes power companies with Edison in their name make to avoid copying someone elses name.

Love/Hate... screw it, I love my Powerbook.

[TellarHK]

We love Apple, we hate Apple... Argh, why must this company be so fucking schizophrenic in how it treats people? C'mon, Apple! Make up your mind, are you an asshole megacorp-wannabe or a company that tries to do What's Right(tm) by people? I just... don't... get it.

Steve. Seriously. Are you a real prick or do you just play one in the courtroom?

Re:Well...

[uberdood]

Did you read the article? Did your moderator read the article?

Originally from Hong Kong, he started Apple three years ago to challenge mobile phone company Orange.

Of course, the amusing thing about this is there used to be an Apple ][ clone called "Orange".

WHY so much of this lately?

[dpbsmith]

This sort of thing seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon--particularly cases in which big corporations go after small local companies in totally different businesses.

What has changed that suddenly makes it important for big companies to go around breaking butterflies on the wheel?

Is it just that the Internet makes it easier for big companies to search for and locate small companies with similar names?

(Anyone remember Infocom having to change the name of their game newsletter, "The New Zork Times" because the New York Times' lawyers said people could confuse the two?)

I am not a lawyer but

[sg3000]

Apple is only obligated to go after trademark infringements by companies that are in similar industries. So, of course, they're not going to go after your local grocery store, carpet cleaning services, towing companies, maid services, or whatever else stuck "Apple" in their name so they'd be in the front of the phone book.

But a telecommunications company is fair game since Apple does telecommunications. With the convergence of computers and traditional telephony (e.g. VoIP, modems, 2.4 GHz wireless, DSL), the two industries are becoming basically the same thing these days.

Remember that Apple has one of the top 10 most recognized trademarks, and there are a lot of companies that wish to make some money (through name recognition) off that trademark. At the same time, they hope to mount a sympathy defense by citing how small they are.

I think he certainly knew what what he was doing when he named his company. I wouldn't be surprised if he hoped that Apple would buy him out to settle the naming rights in Australia (much the same way Microsoft did with "Internet Explorer), but they already had the global naming rights. After that didn't happen, he probably figured a $100,000 settlement is pretty cheap to get nationwide publicity for his company. He gets a newspaper article about him, and the sympathy of misguided trademark-haters around the world.

Re:is it just me...

[rikkards]

From what I gather if you have a trademark and don't fight infringements you lose the trademark. I can understand why companies do sue over trademark infringements especially if they have put a lot of money into it.

Re:Wow... worse than MS

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they are trying to stop other IT companies from using the name Apple. You don't see them suing Apple Grocer or anything like that.

Re:WHY so much of this lately?

[sebmol]

There is a fairly easy explanation for this. In the soaring 90's, these companies made more revenue than they could ever imagine because people bought each and every product from them.

Now that the computer market has become highly saturated and the economy in a recession, companies will try to offset their losses by exploring new ways to make some money. When Apple or Microsoft go after these people, they hope they will fight against it and make way for a settlement. The company pays Microsoft (or Apple resp.) an undisclosed amount of money and in return Microsoft (or Apple) promises not to sue them.

The point of these cease-and-desist letters, trademark and patent lawsuits, etc. is not necessarily to stop other companies but to extort as much cash as possible. Makes perfect business sense to me.

Re:Hmm...

[IamTheRealMike]

Actually the connection is both are in the IT industry

I think most people would regard the telecoms industry as separate to the IT hardware industry actually.

Not to mention that the telecom would indirectly benefit from Apple Inc's advertising...etc.

Er, how? Apples advertising is almost all designed to try and sell a very particular type of hardware. That has absolutely no repercussions on sales of bandwidth whatsoever, and assuming that 99% of people can tell the difference between their local bits'n'pieces store and their telephone company, they should also be able to tell the difference between a computer hardware company and a telephone company.

Re:I am not a lawyer but

[MacAndrew]

You never heard all the proposals for an Apple branded ISP? (I don't remember where that went; maybe they realized they didn't want to be AOL.) .Mac has all the features of a typicals ISP account except the connectivity. And, there's always future expansion to protect.

Re:WHY so much of this lately?

[LostCluster]

The growth of the Internet also makes it possible to hear about stories that otherwise might not have been reported stateside. I mean, this was a rather minor case that happened half the world away from the USA, yet it's being reported on a USA-centric site. Just like other news events, we seem to think that the frequency an event happening is the same as the frequency of the media reporting the event. Last year's "increase" in child abductions was such a case, actual cases did not increase, but the rollout of the Amber Alert system in many states gave police a process that notifed all of the local news outlets. Suddenly, child abductions went from a story in segment B of the newscast to a breaking story that disrupted programming. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all have deals with groups of local stations take from their coverage, so a local special report can quickly go national on a slow news day. The public sees several reports on child abductions in a short time frame and thinks there's a crisis going on, when really the risk of the tradegy hasn't changed or is being driven down because a once ignored problem is getting so much attention.

Re:Apple loves your money, too...

[archen]

Woz was SORT of okay? I mean the guy is brilliant, yet very humble. If it weren't for him, there would be no Apple today, yet he still gets paid around $50k a year. If you read about things that Woz has done, like giving his stocks away to other apple empoyees who missed out on the IPO, and teaching computer classes for poor kids you start to realize that Woz is probably a much better guy than most of us (no "sort of" about it).

I don't blame Apple...

[benny_lama]

How can you blame Apple for fighting this company? Apple has spent large amounts of money to promote their name, logo, trademarks, etc. Most people do not see a difference between computers and telecommunications. You can't tell me that Apple Communications wasn't hoping to gain some quick name recognition by using "Apple" in their name. I can see it now..."Gee, it says Apple so it must be real easy to use, I know I saw that on TV yesterday."

Besides doesn't trademark law say that if you don't actively protect your trademarks then you can't complain when someone starts using them? Purely from a legal standpoint I'm sure a lot of this has to do with setting precedent for future trademark infringement cases.

Re:Love/Hate... screw it, I love my Powerbook.

[Anonymous Coward]

What everyone here seems to lose sight of, or simply is ignorant of is that once you have a trademark, you are obliged to follow up every possible violation of that trademark no matter how small. Owning a trademark myself, I know this. It is a frustrating battle, especially when everyone thinks that by doing very necessary things to protect your investment in a trademark (Apples is, of course, much more heavily invested in theirs than I am to mine) you are being unreasonable and anal.

If Apple doesn't do this, the set precedence by their inaction which allows other companies to more agressively exploit their brand. If Apple waivers in this, they could lose their brand identity, not to Apple Communications, but to the other companies that take advantage of any leniency Apple shows here.

I seriously don't believe Jobs, or Gates even notices when these things happen. They look out for their bottom line and let their legal divisions take the necessary steps to protect their brand identity. Just because you don't see Apple Communications as a threat doesn't mean that it isn't....it's a precedent that if overlooked begins the erosion of Apple's property.

Re:I am not a lawyer but

[LostCluster]

However, if they are in an adjacent industry, it becomes possible that the public might think that the Apple ISP is the same company that makes Apple Computers. The computer company doesn't need to ever intend to offer ISP services, they just need to be in a position where the public would believe that anybody who offered an Apple-branded ISP to be them. That's the whole point of trademark protection, that another entity cannot confuse the public into thinking that they are you.

Apple Auto Glass

[Titusdot Groan]

Apple is well within their rights, both legally and morally to pursue this company -- c'mon they are both in the IT industry!

Interesting to note that Apple leaves alone people like Apple Auto Glass [tcgi.com] here in Canada -- different industry!

We should be more concerned with the ownership of generic words at the DNS level [templetons.com] which is the real trademark travesty these days.

Re:The original Apple

[Lemmy Caution]

Funny how they can be so cute and flip when they flaunt convention and IP law, but such assholes when they are on the other side of the bar.

Apple had to do it.

[litewoheat]

The thing about trademarks are you MUST defend them or you will lose them. One instance where you could have reasonably known of the existance of trademark ingringement where you don't defend will strip you of your trademark. Its that simple.

Re:The original Apple

[drinkypoo]

When they flaunted convention and IP law they were an underdog. Now they're the 800 pound gorilla.

If you really want to fear, consider what this tells us about what Apple would be like if they had Microsoft's market share. Kind of makes you want to go shake billyG's hand for being the lesser of evils.

before naming a business, check

[alizard]

Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: computer consultation, design, testing, research and advisory services; research and development of computer hardware and From the USPTO trademark database [uspto.gov]. Sorry, couldn't give a direct URL for this page, you have to access it via trademark search under apple.

Word Mark
APPLE
software; maintenance and repair of computer software applications; updating of computer software; computer programming services; computer services dealing with providing access to multimedia and interactive computer products; provision of computer databases and on-line information; services relating to downloading of information and data from the Internet; leasing of computers, computer peripherals and computer software. FIRST USE: 19800900. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19800900

"services relating to downloading..." sounds a lot like telecom to me. However, it would require remarkable prescience to include the word Internet in a trademark app filed in 1980, so I checked the filing date. The filing date on that trademark application is 0ctober 2,2002.

I wonder when the former Apple Telecommunications company was founded, and if Apple Computer actually had a trademark covering telecommunications before the October 2,2002 filing date. Or at any rate, before Apple Telecom was founded.

The question here is if a large company can add items to its trademark coverage specifically so they can sue companies they suddenly discover have a similar name that are working in areas they might want to work in someday.

It was a good decision

[Now15]

I run a discussion forum which focusses on broadband internet access in Australia.

The previously named Apple Communications has some really competitive broadband plans, and they are discussed often. However, I have often seen people casually confusing the huge computer company and the micro-Telco.

This was not a paranoia strike or an over-reaching hand by Apple Computer -- they were being confused. This wasn't apples and oranges, it was apples and apples. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for the previously named Apple Communications.

Simon Wright
http://whirlpool.net.au

Not a Glass Pane, But a Window

[tres]

Window is generic with respect to transparent glass, but not with respect to operating systems.

From WordNet

Window

7.(computer science) a rectangular part of a computer screen that contains a display different from the rest of the screen

Sorry, a window has an intrinsic meaning to every modern GUI. The generic term that Microsoft uses has nothing to do with glass panes.

The post you respond to makes a valid point.

Re:Legitimate dilution

[Theaetetus]

almost all of the people I know, know enough about computers to at least install their own OS's and most definitely would know the difference between Apple Computers and Apple Communications. I dare to say that 90% of the population of North America has installed RAM, soundcards, CD drives, etc in their own systems before, and that all of them have had experience installing at least Windows, if not some Unix variant. Most 5 year olds I know understand how to hookup audio and video equipment, and have at least poked around the inside of their own computers (if their parents let them).

Then you're either smoking crack, or you're in a very lucky portion of the population.

I work in an office of 180 people, with an IT/engineer department of 7. Of the other 173, maybe 15 know enough about computers to install their own RAM, much less their own OS.

I also do consulting for 10 different small businesses (about 30 people), none of whom could install their own OS (including one who thought "Macintosh" was a separate company from "Apple").

If 90% of the population can do their own upgrades, then why are _any_ IT people making money?

Look around. Do 9 of 10 people you know do computer upgrades? Not just your friends... include your parents, your parents' friends, your grandparents, their friends, your mailman, your garbageman, the guy at the Dairy Queen, etc. Don't forget, you're in a very segmented portion of the population.

-T