I don't think so since we'd only be talking about the shortening of application(s) to app(s), which is pretty natural in language. The real question is about the specific use of App Store and its variants.
As previously stated, SalesForce had AppStore before the iPhone was even announced, much less before the iOS App Store was announced.
All that said, this isn't a patent, but a trademark, so prior art isn't an issue, but the defense of your trademark is and as far as I know SalesForce has never tried to defense AppStore in any way, shape or form. In that sense Apple does have a case and it makes sense they are defending it, but giving the way Amazon is presenting their Amazon AppStore for Android I think Amazon has a stronger case that prevents any confusion over trademark branding.
Apple should sue over the false advertising of the Kindle Fire too. Amazon misleads customers telling the display is the "...same as an iPad" on their site when it clearly does not even measure the same size.
They are both IPS displays. I think that counts. I don't think they imply it's the same size or resolution, although it's pretty close for being about half the display size.
Do they state in what why it's the same or append that after saying it's IPS?
If I were Apple I wouldn't complain with that free advertising that is clearly showing the iPad as being the ideal when it comes to tablets (or tablet-esque) devices.
edit: Here are the two statements from the Amazon Kindle Fire page:
Quote:
Kindle Fire uses IPS (in-plane switching) technology - similar technology to that used on the iPad - for an extra-wide viewing angle, perfect for sharing your screen with others.
Quote:
Vibrant color touchscreen with extra-wide viewing angle - same as an iPad
Those are truthful. That second quote is referencing the viewing angle; both displays are 178°.
Apple just needs to give this one up... App Store is a generic name that doesn't apply only to them. Trademark "Apple App Store" and be done with it and save some cash as anyone with a iOS device knows they can only get apps from Apple's app store without jailbreaking....
Yeah, because no one would trademark a generic term, like say, Windows?. See I even had to put TM next to Windows?, so I won't get sued.
Do they say, "You can download apps from the App Store" or do they say "from the Amazon App Store?"
Because the former's obviously infringing. The latter, of course, is just part of Apple's other case where they want to trademark 'App Store' as a name.
Question: Doesn't Amazon have a trademark on 'One-Click'? How is that different from Apple being able to trademark 'App Store'?
You know what's NOT in question. Amazon's pitching of the Kindle Fire as having the same screen as the iPad. That's abject nonsense right there.
As much of an Apple fan as I am, this is one Apple lawsuit I think is "abject nonsense." I'm sure Android app users know it's not the "Apple Appstore" since the software sold in the store won't run on any of Apple's devices. The customers who are going to use Amazon's store probably are not Apple customers or if they also have Apple devices, they would know the difference.
I've always knew I was in Amazon's store when I saw the "1-click" button. I don't make the leap that Amazon is affiliated with the many online stores that use this label in their name or advertising, such as OneClickCash, OneClickMoviez, or OneClick.com. IMO, it's petty of Apple to pursue this "Appstore" lawsuit and does more negative harm to the Apple brand than Apple can do itself.
Apple surely has the right to try to trademark this phrase but I believe Apple's competition has the right to object to Apple's ownership of it. Apple may win but they may lose more in customer mind share than they won in the battle.
Truly amazing that Apple's stock has declined so much in the past week when you compare their profits and gross margins to Amazon, as well as their respective PE ratios. Amazon has chosen a low margin, make no profit, give it away for free, build it and they will come business strategy to the detriment of their shareholders, while Apple continues to fire on all cylinders in every product category making record profits, the majority of industry profits, at high margins. Go figure. And Amazon keeps wanting to put a stick in Apple's eye. Maybe Amazon should start focusing on creating more profitable businesses and stop wasting the owners' (shareholders') money. Oh, and now they want to produce a phone so they can lose even more of their shareholders money. The stupidity of all this is that you can get Amazon products and services on Apple and all the major brand devices already through the web, or through Amazon produced apps that are available in the real App Store from Apple.
All I got from your rant is a butthurt Apple shareholder who is complaining about competition that is hurting his shares.
Apple's desperation is unbecoming of them. They are an industry leader and the more the moan, complain and sue they lose credibility. There just is no possible way anyone can confuse the two.
I thought it did. Both are IPS displays, and both at the same res aren't they?
EDIT: It looks like the Kindle Fire has a higher pixel density than the iPad2. That doesn't make the Fire an iPad competitor IMO, but the screens are very comparable as far as I can see.
If you actually look at Amazons website, they say it is an IPS panel providing a great viewing angle like the iPad. Nowhere are they saying it is the same, same resolution, same density, nothing just a great viewing angle.
Where is the class action? I bought a bunch of stuff from this Amazon Appstore for Android and now it won't work on my iPad!!!
With this Amazon Appstore for Android Amazon are clearly trying to profit off Apple's good name by tricking us. Nowhere in this Amazon Appstore for Android what I given a hint that apps purchased wouldn't work on my iPad.
If you actually look at Amazons website, they say it is an IPS panel providing a great viewing angle like the iPad. Nowhere are they saying it is the same, same resolution, same density, nothing just a great viewing angle.
They say a bit more than that. They claim a higher pixel density than Apple's iPad, 169ppi compared to Apple's 132ppi
Comments
Wouldn't Apple be golden, then?
I don't think so since we'd only be talking about the shortening of application(s) to app(s), which is pretty natural in language. The real question is about the specific use of App Store and its variants.
As previously stated, SalesForce had AppStore before the iPhone was even announced, much less before the iOS App Store was announced.
All that said, this isn't a patent, but a trademark, so prior art isn't an issue, but the defense of your trademark is and as far as I know SalesForce has never tried to defense AppStore in any way, shape or form. In that sense Apple does have a case and it makes sense they are defending it, but giving the way Amazon is presenting their Amazon AppStore for Android I think Amazon has a stronger case that prevents any confusion over trademark branding.
…when it clearly does not even measure the same size.
And may not be of the same quality panel. Testing would show that.
Apple should sue over the false advertising of the Kindle Fire too. Amazon misleads customers telling the display is the "...same as an iPad" on their site when it clearly does not even measure the same size.
They are both IPS displays. I think that counts. I don't think they imply it's the same size or resolution, although it's pretty close for being about half the display size.
Do they state in what why it's the same or append that after saying it's IPS?
If I were Apple I wouldn't complain with that free advertising that is clearly showing the iPad as being the ideal when it comes to tablets (or tablet-esque) devices.
edit: Here are the two statements from the Amazon Kindle Fire page:
Kindle Fire uses IPS (in-plane switching) technology - similar technology to that used on the iPad - for an extra-wide viewing angle, perfect for sharing your screen with others.
Vibrant color touchscreen with extra-wide viewing angle - same as an iPad
Those are truthful. That second quote is referencing the viewing angle; both displays are 178°.
Apple just needs to give this one up... App Store is a generic name that doesn't apply only to them. Trademark "Apple App Store" and be done with it and save some cash as anyone with a iOS device knows they can only get apps from Apple's app store without jailbreaking....
Yeah, because no one would trademark a generic term, like say, Windows?. See I even had to put TM next to Windows?, so I won't get sued.
Okay, so what does Amazon's depiction say?
Do they say, "You can download apps from the App Store" or do they say "from the Amazon App Store?"
Because the former's obviously infringing. The latter, of course, is just part of Apple's other case where they want to trademark 'App Store' as a name.
Question: Doesn't Amazon have a trademark on 'One-Click'? How is that different from Apple being able to trademark 'App Store'?
You know what's NOT in question. Amazon's pitching of the Kindle Fire as having the same screen as the iPad. That's abject nonsense right there.
As much of an Apple fan as I am, this is one Apple lawsuit I think is "abject nonsense." I'm sure Android app users know it's not the "Apple Appstore" since the software sold in the store won't run on any of Apple's devices. The customers who are going to use Amazon's store probably are not Apple customers or if they also have Apple devices, they would know the difference.
I've always knew I was in Amazon's store when I saw the "1-click" button. I don't make the leap that Amazon is affiliated with the many online stores that use this label in their name or advertising, such as OneClickCash, OneClickMoviez, or OneClick.com. IMO, it's petty of Apple to pursue this "Appstore" lawsuit and does more negative harm to the Apple brand than Apple can do itself.
Apple surely has the right to try to trademark this phrase but I believe Apple's competition has the right to object to Apple's ownership of it. Apple may win but they may lose more in customer mind share than they won in the battle.
Truly amazing that Apple's stock has declined so much in the past week when you compare their profits and gross margins to Amazon, as well as their respective PE ratios. Amazon has chosen a low margin, make no profit, give it away for free, build it and they will come business strategy to the detriment of their shareholders, while Apple continues to fire on all cylinders in every product category making record profits, the majority of industry profits, at high margins. Go figure. And Amazon keeps wanting to put a stick in Apple's eye. Maybe Amazon should start focusing on creating more profitable businesses and stop wasting the owners' (shareholders') money. Oh, and now they want to produce a phone so they can lose even more of their shareholders money. The stupidity of all this is that you can get Amazon products and services on Apple and all the major brand devices already through the web, or through Amazon produced apps that are available in the real App Store from Apple.
All I got from your rant is a butthurt Apple shareholder who is complaining about competition that is hurting his shares.
You've contributed nothing to the issue at hand.
My contribution?
Pointing out that your contribution sucks.
Yep. Generic like 'Band-Aid' and 'Kleenex'. Of course Apple can't have the right to that name anymore, because neither of those? companies? have?
Huh?
Please show me a generic brand of facial tissue that has to therm Kleenex on the box.
(Hint: There isn't any)
I thought it did. Both are IPS displays, and both at the same res aren't they?
EDIT: It looks like the Kindle Fire has a higher pixel density than the iPad2. That doesn't make the Fire an iPad competitor IMO, but the screens are very comparable as far as I can see.
If you actually look at Amazons website, they say it is an IPS panel providing a great viewing angle like the iPad. Nowhere are they saying it is the same, same resolution, same density, nothing just a great viewing angle.
Huh?
Please show me a generic brand of facial tissue that has to therm Kleenex on the box.
(Hint: There isn't any)
That's the point I was making. Please reread it. (and I could have sworn rolly eyes was sarcasm.)
With this Amazon Appstore for Android Amazon are clearly trying to profit off Apple's good name by tricking us. Nowhere in this Amazon Appstore for Android what I given a hint that apps purchased wouldn't work on my iPad.
If you actually look at Amazons website, they say it is an IPS panel providing a great viewing angle like the iPad. Nowhere are they saying it is the same, same resolution, same density, nothing just a great viewing angle.
They say a bit more than that.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.htm...l_8iij4jfqtt_b
Yep. Generic like 'Band-Aid' and 'Kleenex'. Of course Apple can't have the right to that name anymore, because neither of those? companies? have?
As per my understanding, Band-Aid and Kleenex are not as generic as App Store.
Band-aid is nowhere close to adhesive bandage.
Kleenex is nowhere close to facial tissue.
App Store is pretty close to a store which sells applications.