Amazon responds to Apple's trademark suit, argues 'app store' is generic
Amazon has responded in court to Apple's trademark infringement lawsuit over the use of the term "App Store," which Amazon has contended is generic and should be free to use.
Filed this week in a U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, Amazon's response asserts that the company does not need to obtain a license or authorization from Apple to use the term "app store." The company launched its own digital storefront, the Amazon Appstore for Android, last month.
"... No such license or authorization is required because 'app store' is a generic term, and Amazon's use of the term causes no likelihood of confusion, dilution, or unfair competition," the filing reads.
A day before the Amazon Appstore launched, the company was hit with a lawsuit from Apple, which asked a California court to prevent Amazon from using the App Store name. Apple alleged that Amazon has "improperly" used the "App Store" name, for which Apple filed a trademark shortly after the launch of the original iPhone App Store in July 2008.
In addition to attempting to refute Apple's claims, Amazon also offers the court a number of counterclaims in its response. It offers the definitions of the words "app" and "store," and notes that the American Dialect Society voted "app the "Word of the Year" for 2010.
Amazon joins another rival of Apple, Microsoft, in contending that the "App Store" moniker is generic. The Windows maker filed an objection to Apple's trademark filing earlier this year, contending that the term is too generic to be fairly registered.
Apple responded in court to Microsoft, asserting that the name "App Store" is no more generic than "Windows," the name of Microsoft's hugely successful PC operating system. Apple argued that the Redmond, Wash., software giant "should be well aware" that whether a term is generic depends on the significance of the language to a "substantial majority of the relevant public."
Filed this week in a U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, Amazon's response asserts that the company does not need to obtain a license or authorization from Apple to use the term "app store." The company launched its own digital storefront, the Amazon Appstore for Android, last month.
"... No such license or authorization is required because 'app store' is a generic term, and Amazon's use of the term causes no likelihood of confusion, dilution, or unfair competition," the filing reads.
A day before the Amazon Appstore launched, the company was hit with a lawsuit from Apple, which asked a California court to prevent Amazon from using the App Store name. Apple alleged that Amazon has "improperly" used the "App Store" name, for which Apple filed a trademark shortly after the launch of the original iPhone App Store in July 2008.
In addition to attempting to refute Apple's claims, Amazon also offers the court a number of counterclaims in its response. It offers the definitions of the words "app" and "store," and notes that the American Dialect Society voted "app the "Word of the Year" for 2010.
Amazon joins another rival of Apple, Microsoft, in contending that the "App Store" moniker is generic. The Windows maker filed an objection to Apple's trademark filing earlier this year, contending that the term is too generic to be fairly registered.
Apple responded in court to Microsoft, asserting that the name "App Store" is no more generic than "Windows," the name of Microsoft's hugely successful PC operating system. Apple argued that the Redmond, Wash., software giant "should be well aware" that whether a term is generic depends on the significance of the language to a "substantial majority of the relevant public."
Comments
and Kindle is not?!
It can't be mistaken for the other uses of the word. Nor can Windows. Nor Amazon. That's not the point of the argument, though.
It can't be mistaken for the other uses of the word. Nor can Windows. Nor Amazon. That's not the point of the argument, though.
Following that logic, nor can "app store"
So it pleases me that my supposedly "stupid" ideas are being run with by Amazon. As an AAPL customer and shareholder for >10 years, they need to keep their hands off the trade speech of others. Apple now has a position of power that should be used responsibly. Claiming they own "App store" is frankly ridiculous, and bleep them for saying so. It sounds like they need to leave the office and go relax.
Never mind the fact that the term "app" was never widely used before Apple started using it, and the fact that nobody had a centralized "app store" before Apple did. Other than that, it is generic.
Yes and Thog the Caveman created the term "book store" once upon a time. The term is GENERIC. Last post in thread for me.
* Apple wins the trademark and Amazon has to come up with an original name.
* Apple loses but Amazon realizes it's going to need an original name to distinguish itself.
It seems like it would just be much simpler if Amazon came up with their own product name. Or we could see how they react if Apple released a fire-starting kit called the "iKindle"
Following that logic, nor can "app store"
You seriously don't believe that "App Store" can't be confused between the dozens of application stores that have popped up? None are the same while providing the same type of content. That's the problem.
Come to think of it, both "Windows" and "Amazon" could be contested for their lack of originality...
"Apple"
Come to think of it, both "Windows" and "Amazon" could be contested for their lack of originality...
Just a few of Amazon's products:
Amazon CloudFront
Amazon SimpleDB
AWS CloudFormation
Amazon CloudWatch
Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud
Amazon Flexible Payments Service
I'm going to get into the cloud business (a service out of my home can't be any less reliable than Amazon lately) and use all those names, cuz they're all GENERIC!
The word "Kleenex" is widely used by the public to mean facial tissue but only one company is allowed to use it for their product. Examples like this are endless.
I think this summarizes it perfectly. Just because it is widely used, doesn't mean it isn't theirs. I honestly think that Apple will win this one.
Amazon's sheer arrogance and unoriginality in this case is astounding. No Amazon, you simply wish that "App Store" could be a generic term, so that you could instantly begin to capitalize on 5 years of hard work by Apple.
I've never even seen another company use the word "Applications" to describe UI programs besides Apple, until maybe the last 2 years.
and Kindle is not?!
Kindle is unique. Kindling (i.e. to start a fire) is not unique.
Kindle is unique. Kindling (i.e. to start a fire) is not unique.
To kindle a fire is not unique.
I think this summarizes it perfectly. Just because it is widely used, doesn't mean it isn't theirs. I honestly think that Apple will win this one.
Not entirely true tho. Kleenex was a completely random name that became popular after the brand became ubiquitous. A better example would be frosted flakes. Kellogs cannot trademark the name frosted flakes because they describe exactly what the product is, a frosted flake, similar to app store. The name app store describes exactly what it is, a store that sells apps. It'd be like trying to trademark the name bookstore before books became wildly popular.
Kellog's Frosted Flakes is what was trademarked, I see the same thing happening with Apples app store.
The fact is Apple has made "App Store" the generally recognized term for a centralized web-based application store for smart phones and now tablets. Given that, the rush to create competitive "App Stores" is clearly trading on public perception that "App Store" means certain things. The only reason it seems like some variant on same is the obvious or only term for such a store is simply testament to how throughly Apple has monopolized that perception.
I think Apple has a case in this instance (and cases are always decided on the particulars, not some general idea about "common names" or the like) exactly because "App Store" is such a valuable property and because there's a clear desire on the part of the competition to get some of Apple's credibility in the space to rub off via naming.
Why not Amazon Market for Applications? App Market? Amazon Apps? Android Applications by Amazon? Application Store? App Shop?
Any of those are at least as "obvious" as Amazon Appstore, but they don't make the customer think of Apple's App Store-- which is what Amazon wants and why Apple is suing.
Although the term app has been around for quite sometime, no one that I am aware of used (or cared about) the term App Store until apple's wildly successful launch.
Although I think they have a good case courts can be unpredictable.