Apple Sued Over Use of iCloud Name 394
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the the-i's-have-it dept.
from the the-i's-have-it dept.
tekgoblin writes "iCloud Communications is suing Apple for the use of the iCloud name which they have the rights to. According to the lawsuit: 'The goods and services with which Apple intends to use the “iCloud” mark are identical to or closely related to the goods and services that have been offered by iCloud Communications under the iCloud Marks since its formation in 2005. However, due to the worldwide media coverage given to and generated by Apple’s announcement of its “iCloud” services and the ensuing saturation advertising campaign pursued by Apple, the media and the general public have quickly come to associate the mark “iCloud” with Apple, rather than iCloud Communications.'"
Re:Happened before? (Score:5, Informative)
But do they have a case ? (Score:5, Informative)
And maybe it's just my innate cynicism showing through, but when anyone introduces criticism of anything by saying "I can honestly say...", it leads me to believe they are inherently biased against the thing they're complaining about, and whatever they say ought to be treated appropriately. What they're really saying is "even though I in fact loath the thought of (insert XXX), I would still be criticizing them if I were neutral on the matter". Bias, like truth, will out.
Simon
Identical or near-identical goods and services? (Score:5, Informative)
Just checked out iCloud Communications' website (http://geticloud.com/)... From the looks of the front page, at least, they're in the VoIP market. How is that related to Apple's iCloud? (I would actually be happy if Apple had to ditch the iCloud name, but it won't happen. It would be nice to see them move away from iWhatever; it was annoying when they introduced the first iMac, and it's annoying now.)
Re:Trademark... (Score:5, Informative)
Then why didn't they apply for a trademark?
Because they're not just 'iCloud' - they're 'iCloud Communications'. They think the name Apple picked is too close to their own name. Kind of like 'Apple Computer' is similar to 'Apple Music' and one might think they are two subsidiaries of the same company, like 'Sony Computer' and 'Sony Music'.
Re:Trademark... (Score:4, Informative)
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
That said, there is an argument to be made that iAnything means Apple. Legally, it would be impossible to enforce, but culturally, it's very much the case.
USPTO (Score:4, Informative)
I guess iCloud Communications should be introduced to the USPTO. I did a quick search on the trademark iCloud and came up with 12 filed by Apple and one owned by Xcerion AB CORPORATION SWEDEN (registered in 2010). If you want to protect a trademark then register it.
Re:Trademark... (Score:4, Informative)
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
Apple bought the trademarks for iCloud from Xcerion, which owned them for almost two years. iCloud Communications had lots and lots of time to do something about Xcerion and didn't. Now that Xcerion got 4.5 million dollars for the trademark they want to get in on the deal. It's too late.
Re:USPTO (Score:3, Informative)
I guess iCloud Communications should be introduced to the USPTO. I did a quick search on the trademark iCloud and came up with 12 filed by Apple and one owned by Xcerion AB CORPORATION SWEDEN (registered in 2010). If you want to protect a trademark then register it.
You don't have to trademark it, you just have to prove you used it first. It's the same thing with copyrights.
Re:Trademark... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Apple bought trademark from Xcerion (Score:4, Informative)
How trademark law is actually defined is:
If you use a mark in trade, you have the trademark right.
Then there are a bunch of criteria about whether the type of trade is sufficiently similar to cause confusion in the buying public.
So iCloud Rainmakers Inc. would be ok because not a computer or internet related business.
Re:The fools... (Score:2, Informative)
What I don't get is the fact that Apple currently owns the iCloud trademark. iCloud Communications does not have any filed trademark. Maybe I just am not getting it, but if someone is claiming Trademark infringement, don't they actually need to have *a* trademark?
Re:Recognized or not... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Identical or near-identical goods and services? (Score:4, Informative)
From the looks of the front page, at least, they're in the VoIP market. How is that related to Apple's iCloud?
Because if you click on the link in the upper right-hand corner labeled "Data Center Web Site" you discover they offer a whole lot more than VoIP. From within that area:
"Founded in 1985, iCloud Communications is an established business run by a seasoned management team. We've built a distinguished track record in network technologies and infrastructure operations. Our data center solutions provide a range of colocation, hosting and technical support services to telephony service provider and small-to-mid-sized enterprise customers."
Re:Before you answer (Score:4, Informative)
That's how you get a registered trademark. You get an unregistered trademark by simply using it in commerce.
Re:Expected topics ITT (Score:4, Informative)
OS9 vice MacOS9 (OS9 is a trademark of microware for a TRS-80C operating system, built for the 6809 chipset),
You didn't mention that Apple won that case in court as separate trademarks can exist for unrelated applications of the same mark.
I suspect they didn't do due diligence at all, just because it seems that they never have before.
On April 28, 2011, Apple bought the iCloud.com domain from Xcerion. That company was the only company to hold the "iCloud" trademark at the time. There were older trademarks containing compound words like "iCloudFusion" and "iCloudWalkers.com" It is assumed that Apple purchased the trademark at the same time. Apple later registered 11 of their own marks. iCloud Communications did not register for any marks for "iCloud" including their own company's name "iCloud Communications, Inc." It is clear to me that Apple did the due diligence.
Re:The fools... (Score:4, Informative)
The courts already declared years ago that nobody can own a letter or even a prefix. The only reason why McDonalds gets away with suing people over the Mc prefix is because nobody that has tried to use the Mc prefix so far has enough money to outlast the McLawyers long enough for the final verdict to get in.
Well, perhaps nobody in the USA were willing to take the court fight all the way, but here in Denmark someone actually defended himself all the way to the supreme court and won.
Quoted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald's_legal_cases [wikipedia.org] :
"McAllan (Denmark)
In 1996, McDonald's lost a legal battle at the Danish Supreme Court to force Allan Pedersen, a hotdog vendor, to drop his shop name McAllan.[10] Pedersen had previously visited Scotland on whisky-tasting tours. He named his business after his favorite brand of whisky, MacAllan's, after contacting the distillery to see if they would object. They did not, but McDonald's did. However, the court ruled customers could tell the difference between a one-man vendor and a multi-national chain and ordered McDonald's to pay 40,000 kroner ($6,900) in court costs. The verdict cannot be appealed."