Apple and Other Tech Companies Have Registered Their IP in Jamaica, Tonga, and Elsewhere For Years (qz.com) 42
Apple's product launches are notoriously secretive, but the Cupertino, California tech giant is sure to do one thing ahead of a big reveal: file trademark paperwork in Jamaica. From a Quartz report: It did this for Siri, the Apple Watch, macOS, and dozens of its major products months before the equivalent paperwork was lodged in the United States. Likewise, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft routinely file trademarks for their most important products in locales far flung from Silicon Valley and Seattle. These include Jamaica, Tonga, Iceland, South Africa, and Trinidad and Tobago -- places where trademark authorities don't maintain easily searchable databases. The tech giants are exploiting a US trademark-law provision that lets them effectively claim a trademark in secret. Under this provision, once a mark is lodged with an intellectual property office outside the US, the firm has six months to file it with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). When the firm does file in the US, it can point to its original application made abroad to show that it has a priority claim on the mark.
outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is the legal trick they use to accomplish that, then again, there is no problem.
As long as they aren't using it to push around little people, or extort others, then it's an interesting trick, but nothing to get worried about.
Re: outrage! (Score:2)
This article really is grade A non-news, a kind of preemptive non sequitur.
Re: (Score:3)
On the other hand, if you want to read things to feel outrage, then yeah, it's completely useless. Go read naturalnews.
Re: outrage! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Because if you've searched publications and patents, and found nothing, why would you be producing something without filing an application yourself?
We do first-to-file here in the US, with prior art available for publications before your filing date. If it's in an unsearchable filing cabinet in Jamaica, it's not prior art to your application. In that situation, you've just obtained a US patent by virtue of being the second guy to independently come up with that idea. How did that waste your time and mone
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting brings to mind the whole DNS saga and the limited number of possible names in any language. So you go to the cheapest possible country and trademark as many names as possible and then bring it back to the US to use it offensively and with no regard what so ever to fair competition.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Trademarks are too flexible for that too happen. For example, look up the word 'Boston' in the trademark database, several different companies have trademarked for various, non-conflicting uses. Additionally, each Trademark registration only lasts 6 months, so you'd need to re-register or something. Maybe it would work if you got a bulk deal on trademarks? But it might be hard to convince a court that your trademark is meaningful i
Re: (Score:3)
Except for the obvious fact that trademarks and patents are not the in anyway the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Alcohol and Firearms are not in anyway the same thing despite the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives existing.
Sure like trademarks and patents they go well together, but that doesn't make them the same :)
Why is this a problem? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is a worldwide company, why the US filing must be the first one?
Because Patriarchy, or White Privilege, or {insert current anti-corporation SJW jargon here}! Maybe it's because a lot of people here dislike the USPTO (myself included), but agreed. Of all of the slimy, unethical things a lot of corporations do, this isn't one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Its only a problem inasmuch as filing for the trademark in a country more likely to grant it gives them a leg up in countries that would be less likely to grant it.
Its like if I wanted a CCW permit, but my state makes it onerous to get one, whereas a nearby state just requires a fee and short test on gun safety. I go to the other state to get one, and through reciprocity agreements, I can use it in my home state. My own state's regulations are basically a dead letter.
End of the day this is not too big of
Re: (Score:2)
"Likewise, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft routinely file trademarks for their most important products in locales far flung from Silicon Valley and Seattle."
Garbage posing as news (Score:1)
Yes, and you can also file intent-to-use trademark applications in the US, giving you around four years to actually use the mark. Furthermore, because Jamaica, etc., are not Apple's actual country of origin, they have no other basis for registration in the US than actual use.
It sounds nice, but I'm at a complete loss (and the article offers no ideas) as to why this might be beneficial, since it's indistinguishable from an intent-to-use application filed six months earlier in the US. Yes, you've made it ma
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for a company like Apple, it means a delay in the release of speculation about a prod
Re: ATI used to do this in... Barbados I think (Score:1)
I think that was for tax and funky accounting purposes though, and less for weird trademark shenanigans
Was this meant to inspire outrage? (Score:5, Insightful)
If it was meant to inspire outrage it failed. this is just nonsense news. It is mildly interesting and if it had been portrayed in a "FYI This is a clever trick some big companies are using that hurts no one, if anything it creates a small amount of jobs in some poor countries, without taking anything away from the USA" it would have been a quality article
Re: (Score:1)
Apart from the fact that you're mixing up patents and trademarks, the priority period for patent applications is actually a year. And more to the point, that's perfectly in line with first-to-file: by no means did anyone intend that to mean "first to file here in the US".
Indeed, that whole change from first-to-invent was to bring us in line with the rest of the world, where they've respected original US filing dates against their first-to-file system for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
If you read the summary this seems to be more related to trademarks than it is to patents.
These seems to be mostly to do with a corps ability to plan marketing material for a product before launching it and still having it be a surprise. Seems reasonable to me, especially for things such as 'Siri' or 'Apple Watch'. Makes things a bit more concrete in a legal sense as well since you don't have some trademark argument in the event somebody tries to swoop in and take it - you haven't registered your intent m
Re: (Score:2)
Like tax, cheap workers, lack of inspections, something is attracting the big brands to invest is such methods.
A lot of smaller nations cant afford to sign up to conventions and protections.
A lab, front or other site in a nation with no or few international protections or status has a lot of value in both secrecy, lack of unexpected inspections, reporting and compliance.
For big pharma its the inspections and rules of the List of p
Re: (Score:2)
If it was meant to inspire outrage it failed.
WTF is that all you read the news for these days? If so you're part of the problem.
CPA Wife:"all companies do this" (Score:1)
Pretty much any company in america does this. The licensing allows companies to expense the licensing cost, that is how Apple pays no Federal Income tax, they have no taxable income technically.