Apple sued for harassing air filtration firm over airPOD mark

[AppleInsider]

A Delaware company specializing in air purification is suing Apple Inc. in order to get the iPod maker to stop causing a ruckus over the airPOD name used to market its desktop-based air filtration systems.

In the 4-page complaint, filed last week in an Illinois district court, BlueAir Inc. alleges that counsel for Apple have been making a big stink since last summer over its request for a trademark on term airPOD.

Lawyers for the Cupertino-based gadget maker have reported asserted likely confusion of BlueAir's airPOD mark with Apple's iPod mark, threatening to file oppositions with the United States Trademark Office, and more recently "making threats of seeking attorney fees and more."

BlueAir charges that it's Apple, rather than itself, which is therefore creating the actual controversy between the parties and causing harm by way of those threats of trademark infringement and unfair competition.

Introduced in June of 2006, BlueAir's airPOD product stands at 6-1/2 inches wide, 13 inches tall, and 3-1/2 inches deep. It comes clad in aluminum with the mark "airPOD" embossed on its front-side and must be plugged into a 110-volt outlet to operate.

"There is no reasonable likelihood of confusion, mistake, or error in the marketplace for persons of even the lowest perceptive capabilities who are seeking an iPod music player considering or buying an airPOD desktop air cleaner instead," BlueAir's attorneys at Chapman and Cutler LLP argue in the suit.

"'AirPOD' and iPod are distinct in sound, appearance, and connotation as applied to their respective goods," they add. "Although the ending --POD portions are identical, the initial portions AIR-- and i-- are distinct in appearance and connotation and distinguishable in sound as well to any ordinary observer."

Nevertheless, the complaint claims that Apple requested an extension with the trademark office to allow it time to file opposition to BlueAir's trademark application, and that lawyers for the Cupertino-based firm subsequently e-mailed and telephoned counsel for BlueAir demanding the company withdraw its application for the "airPOD" name and rebrand its product under a new mark not containing the three successive letters "POD."



"On information and belief, neither BlueAir nor Apple knows of any single bona fide instance of confusion between the AIRPOD mark on personal desktop air purifiers and the iPod mark for personal portable music players," BlueAir's attorneys say. "Indeed Apple has not opposed federal registrations or impending federal registrations of AIRPOD marks for air fresheners, carrying cases, and industrial air filters, nor has it, on information and belief, sought to stop the hundreds of other uses of AIRPOD and AIR POD marks for other products such as 'air time' recorders for snowboarders, and the like, findable in any Internet search for those terms."

BlueAir is seeking an order from the Court that would end the harassment by declaring that its airPOD mark is not confusingly similar to Apple’s mark and that it may be used and registered without further interference from the iPod maker.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[CREB]

Even BlueAir's design is a knockoff of an iPod. Sue them back Apple!

[schmidm77]

Nice, they even have a click wheel.

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by schmidm77

Nice, they even have a click wheel.

Haha, that's supposed to be a fan!

K

[bdkennedy1]

From a business standpoint, it looks like an iPod, it sounds like an iPod and they're making money from the iPod name. Tough luck.

[acslater017]

if it was JUST the name "airpod", or JUST the clickwheel-looking fan, i would say that this is bogus and that apple's just being stupid. i mean, apple didn't invent the word "pod."

however, given the combination of the two, apple might have an argument for better or worse

[Flat Stanley]

"the Cupertino-based gadget maker " ???

[machei]

Maybe this speaks to future iPod development. Macbook Air could be a relative of a future AirPod that streams endless music from any configured source over WiFi and is the size of a postage stamp.

[ncee]

And when they say "It's ok" - and Apple markets the airPod, they'll sure asking for damages, and or a part of the monies Apple has made, because they stole the name. or used the name, or some other bullshit thing.

It's ok with them now, but once Apple markets the AirPod and makes a killing, well that's another story!

When will this all stop …

Skip

[VertiGoGo]

Originally Posted by acslater017

if it was JUST the name "airpod", or JUST the clickwheel-looking fan, i would say that this is bogus and that apple's just being stupid. i mean, apple didn't invent the word "pod."

however, given the combination of the two, apple might have an argument for better or worse

Agreed. At first glance it appears Apple's lawyers are being petty, but once you see that the airPOD's design contains a number of similar elements to those found on an iPod and that the name includes "pod," and that it was launched in 2006 -arguably at the height of iPod hysteria- it's clear that Blueair is trying to make a buck off of Apple.

Sue the hell out of them, I say...unless airPOD gets a new name.

[pmjoe]

Originally Posted by schmidm77

Nice, they even have a click wheel.

It's called a fan. I'd recommend against sticking your fingers in it. Looks like an efficient design for airflow.

I hope they sue Apple for using "Air".

[Buck]

Originally Posted by pmjoe

Looks like an efficient design for airflow..

You work for them, right?

[ncee]

Originally Posted by acslater017

if it was JUST the name "airpod", or JUST the clickwheel-looking fan, i would say that this is bogus and that apple's just being stupid. i mean, apple didn't invent the word "pod."

however, given the combination of the two, apple might have an argument for better or worse

And Harley didn't invent the words "Harley, Davidson, Ape Hangers, Har, Dav, Hog, Hog Farm, Sportster, Evolution, V-Twin, HD and OVER 7,000 other trademarks using these and a handfull of other words, but they get people to stop using them!

A local "HOT DOG" stand USE to market their "Hot Dogs" by saying "We serve the Finest / Best HD"s in the world' Harley went after them, but DID lose, when the courts decided in this case that the HD stood for "Hot Dogs". But Harley did ASK them to spell it out from now on

Point being, it's not who invented the word, it's how you or a company uses the word.

The courts sided with the Hot Dog stand, because of something called the Gray Law, which say's something like "A word or words can be used if in fact it isn't part of a simular industry, or something like that'.


Skip

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

From a business standpoint, it looks like an iPod, it sounds like an iPod and they're making money from the iPod name. Tough luck.

Yep. That's the kicker. This isn't an accidental association. They've designed and named a product, attempting to ride on the coat-tails of another company's success.

[Chris_CA]

How do I get music onto my airPOD?

I can't figure it out but it sure smells clean!

[city]

What's the confusion? The AirPOD is too ugly to be an Apple product.

[CJD2112]

Lord people, I'm an apple fan (no pun) but even I find this jagged pill difficult to swallow. First of all, it doesn't matter what the airPod looks like, it can look exactly like an iPod as far as the law in the situation matters. Apple is claiming to have legal TM rights over the term "Pod", meaning that any time any one wants to use "pod" in a product name Apple is going to throw a hissy fit and sue. Seriously? First suing "Think Secret", now this? America is a country that LOVES to sue, we use lawyers for way too much, heck, if you look at someone crossed eye they'll sue you. This is a frivolous lawsuit, and Apple is strong arming the industry. If they want to TM "airPod" then TM it, but don't bully those in the market who do, it's their legal right.

Jobs needs some Paxil for that OCD. Seriously.

[Booga]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

Lord people, I'm an apple fan (no pun) but even I find this jagged pill difficult to swallow. First of all, it doesn't matter what the airPod looks like, it can look exactly like an iPod as far as the law in the situation matters. Apple is claiming to have legal TM rights over the term "Pod", meaning that any time any one wants to use "pod" in a product name Apple is going to throw a hissy fit and sue. Seriously? First suing "Think Secret", now this? America is a country that LOVES to sue, we use lawyers for way too much, heck, if you look at someone crossed eye they'll sue you. This is a frivolous lawsuit, and Apple is strong arming the industry. If they want to TM "airPod" then TM it, but don't bully those in the market who do, it's their legal right.

Jobs needs some Paxil for that OCD. Seriously.

I don't think that's true. I think Apple is just claiming that this product being named what it is has a substantial likelihood of being mistaken for something endorsed by or involved with Apple, Inc. Looking at it, it's easy to see why someone might think that. If someone made a hotdog-shaped container and called it the "food pod" I doubt Apple would sue. But if they made it look exactly like an iPod and called it the "fooPod" they might get sued.

[eldernorm]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

Lord people, I'm an apple fan (no pun) but even I find this jagged pill difficult to swallow. First of all, it doesn't matter what the airPod looks like, it can look exactly like an iPod as far as the law in the situation matters. Apple is claiming to have legal TM rights over the term "Pod", meaning that any time any one wants to use "pod" in a product name Apple is going to throw a hissy fit and sue. Seriously? First suing "Think Secret", now this? America is a country that LOVES to sue, we use lawyers for way too much, heck, if you look at someone crossed eye they'll sue you. This is a frivolous lawsuit, and Apple is strong arming the industry. If they want to TM "airPod" then TM it, but don't bully those in the market who do, it's their legal right.

Jobs needs some Paxil for that OCD. Seriously.

Hey, welcome to the world that Apple lives in. They just got sued again cause someone got a patent for an entertainment device that uses a computer connection to help interface audio and video. So they sued Apple for billions (in east texas - the sue me state :-) ).

Also, if you want to keep your trademark names, you have to show attempts to protect that name. Just check out styrofoam. They will jump on anyone using that name unless you are buying their brand of ----- polystyrene expanded foam cups.

Live or what passes for it, moves on. :-)

en

[johnqh]

I thought Apple trademarked "i"...think iMac, iPod, iTunes, iDvd, iMovie....

[Inkling]

They should call it a "parody" of an iPod. It works in copyright law, perhaps it will work with trademarks. This product makes fun of iPod fanaticism, so it's unlikely Apple would create such a thing.

Those who're following the Rowling's lawsuit against The Harry Potter Lexicon can find more details here:

http://rdrbooks.com/lexicon_info.html

The key factor is that dispute is that much of the material in the book has been online for up to eight years without a peep of Rowling's lawyers. This dispute could cause copyright lawyers to become less casual with what's posted online.

[deanbar]

For crying out loud Apple, don't be such a bully on something that doesn't sound or look like an iPod. I'm as big an Apple fan as anyone else, but really, this is taking things too far. America just loves to sue the backside off anyone, about time common sense took over in the courts.

Sure, sue when there is a legitimate case, but this is too petty and too strongarm.

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by deanbar

For crying out loud Apple, don't be such a bully on something that doesn't sound or look like an iPod. I'm as big an Apple fan as anyone else, but really, this is taking things too far. America just loves to sue the backside off anyone, about time common sense took over in the courts.

Sure, sue when there is a legitimate case, but this is too petty and too strongarm.

You do realize it's not Apple filing the lawsuit?
"A Delaware company specializing in air purification is suing Apple Inc.".

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by Chris_CA

You do realize it's not Apple filing the lawsuit?
"A Delaware company specializing in air purification is suing Apple Inc.".

Only because "BlueAir Inc. alleges that counsel for Apple have been making a big stink since last summer over its request for a trademark on term airPOD."

If Apple & Apple legal kept their big mouths shut, I would have never heard of airPOD or what it looks like or what it does. Out of all the third party stores like the ex-CompUSA, Costco, Target, et. al, I have never seen an airPOD anywhere within same said stores nor was I looking for one.

Thank you Apple, I now know there is a desktop air purification system called the airPOD and you have given it more visibility then BlueAir Inc. could have ever hoped to achieve. I have no further interest in airPOD's and am moving on. Apple, so should you.

[PalmerDeville]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

Apple is claiming to have legal TM rights over the term "Pod", meaning that any time any one wants to use "pod" in a product name Apple is going to throw a hissy fit and sue.

I disagree.

First, there a hundreds of products that use the word "Pod" in the name and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. Second and more to the point, there are other products actually named airpod and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. BlueAir's lawyers make Apple's argument and lack of trademark abuse even more clear with their statement below, it's not just the name - it's the name and the "iPod" look of the product combined. To think that BlueAir is not trying to benefit off the iPod popularity by using a similar name and look is absurd. In Apple's opinion there is clearly something there to defend...

Originally Posted by BlueAir's attorneys

Indeed Apple has not opposed federal registrations or impending federal registrations of AIRPOD marks for air fresheners, carrying cases, and industrial air filters, nor has it, on information and belief, sought to stop the hundreds of other uses of AIRPOD and AIR POD marks for other products such as 'air time' recorders for snowboarders, and the like, findable in any Internet search for those terms.

[CJD2112]

Originally Posted by PalmerDeville

I disagree.

First, there a hundreds of products that use the word "Pod" in the name and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. Second and more to the point, there are other products actually named airpod and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. BlueAir's lawyers make Apple's argument and lack of trademark abuse even more clear with their statement below, it's not just the name - it's the name and the "iPod" look of the product combined. To think that BlueAir is not trying to benefit off the iPod popularity by using a similar name and look is absurd. In Apple's opinion there is clearly something there to defend...

That's true. However, Apple needs to prove that this product legally infringes upon any TM's Apple has filed regarding the iPod name and whether the product in question infringes upon the marketplace Apple is currently competing. I do not see how a fan will eat at any iPod profits (and I further do not see how this product will take any profits away from Apple as Apple, Inc. does not manufacture fans).

Further, I am baffled that people claim this product looks like an iPod because "the fan blade resembles an iPod click wheel". Ok, so using that reasoning are products that manufacture wheels that resemble the iPod click wheel and use the three letters "pod" in their brand name at risk for suit from Apple? Where does it end? I swear by Apple products, but I do not give any company a pass as much as Apple fans have been giving Apple. If this had been a Microsoft issue I'm certain the above comments would be MUCH different. I do not approve of any company strong arming the industry, and over the past few years I have seen Apple strong arm the industry a few times and I do not like it. Using legal tactics to dominate the market makes for a monopoly, and like any monopoly competition is stifled. Look at Wal-Mart (a loooong off topic discussion that I will reference quickly). It is well known that they use bullying to force companies such as Rubbermaid to manufacture their products in industrial nations such as China. Rubbermaid refused, stating they employ thousands of American's by keeping plants in the US. Wal-mart responded by pulling all their products from its shelves, costing Rubbermaid about 50-60% of its sales. Rubbermaid gave in, shutting their plants down in the US, and Wal-mart responded by opening stores in the EXACT same building as the Rubbermaid plants were. They bullied them out of the US, and took over where Rubbermaid USED to be, thus plowing down the playing field in many small cities in the US and ensuring a labor force for Wal-mart. It's these kinds of practices that make me sick, and while Apple is not Wal-mart, I still do not like where Apple, Inc. has been taking the company. Big business has killed small, private business, the environment and is part of the reason the middle class is deteriorating by using legal threats and suits to strong arm the industry, and in the end we all suffer from its consequences.

These law-suits are frivolous and unnecessary, but this company would not have to take legal action had Apple not sent out its legal team to harass them. It seems Apple has been harassing this company for quite a while, claiming the use of "Pod" is a violation of TM agreements with Apple, yet they have not trademarked "Pod". Further, if Apple did have grounds why wasn't a legal suit filed? It seems as though Apple has been using their name and expensive legal team to threaten this company, in hopes they would give in or face huge legal fees. I'm glad they didn't, maybe it will wake Apple out of its state of grandiosity as they certainly seem to be getting full of themselves.

In the end, I am typing this on my shiny aluminum keyboard, ACD and Mac Pro lol, and as long as Apple continues to make superior products I will forever be using a Mac. However, not at the expense of small business and not with these "Microsoft"-esque tactics. Shame on Apple.

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

Only because "BlueAir Inc. alleges that counsel for Apple have been making a big stink since last summer over its request for a trademark on term airPOD."

If Apple & Apple legal kept their big mouths shut, I would have never heard of airPOD or what it looks like or what it does. Out of all the third party stores like the ex-CompUSA, Costco, Target, et. al, I have never seen an airPOD anywhere within same said stores nor was I looking for one.

Thank you Apple, I now know there is a desktop air purification system called the airPOD and you have given it more visibility then BlueAir Inc. could have ever hoped to achieve. I have no further interest in airPOD's and am moving on. Apple, so should you.

Exactly, and in the end, it only gives BlueAir, Inc. more press and recognition. This will only bite Apple in the, well, Apple lol.

[jlross818]

Originally Posted by PalmerDeville

I disagree.

First, there a hundreds of products that use the word "Pod" in the name and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. Second and more to the point, there are other products actually named airpod and Apple has not sent their lawyers after them. BlueAir's lawyers make Apple's argument and lack of trademark abuse even more clear with their statement below, it's not just the name - it's the name and the "iPod" look of the product combined. To think that BlueAir is not trying to benefit off the iPod popularity by using a similar name and look is absurd. In Apple's opinion there is clearly something there to defend...

Clearly this company is trying to benefit from the iPod name: I don't think anyone's disputing that. But, does that make them civilly liable? Clearly not, or else Apple would've sued BlueAir (instead of vice versa). Instead, Apple has been trying to strong arm them. There is nothing wrong with benefitting from another company's name in an entirely different industry that will in no way affect apple.

[msm859]

Originally Posted by CJD2112

That's true. However, Apple needs to prove that this product legally infringes upon any TM's Apple has filed regarding the iPod name and whether the product in question infringes upon the marketplace Apple is currently competing. I do not see how a fan will eat at any iPod profits (and I further do not see how this product will take any profits away from Apple as Apple, Inc. does not manufacture fans).

Further, I am baffled that people claim this product looks like an iPod because "the fan blade resembles an iPod click wheel". Ok, so using that reasoning are products that manufacture wheels that resemble the iPod click wheel and use the three letters "pod" in their brand name at risk for suit from Apple? Where does it end? I swear by Apple products, but I do not give any company a pass as much as Apple fans have been giving Apple. If this had been a Microsoft issue I'm certain the above comments would be MUCH different. I do not approve of any company strong arming the industry, and over the past few years I have seen Apple strong arm the industry a few times and I do not like it. Using legal tactics to dominate the market makes for a monopoly, and like any monopoly competition is stifled. Look at Wal-Mart (a loooong off topic discussion that I will reference quickly). It is well known that they use bullying to force companies such as Rubbermaid to manufacture their products in industrial nations such as China. Rubbermaid refused, stating they employ thousands of American's by keeping plants in the US. Wal-mart responded by pulling all their products from its shelves, costing Rubbermaid about 50-60% of its sales. Rubbermaid gave in, shutting their plants down in the US, and Wal-mart responded by opening stores in the EXACT same building as the Rubbermaid plants were. They bullied them out of the US, and took over where Rubbermaid USED to be, thus plowing down the playing field in many small cities in the US and ensuring a labor force for Wal-mart. It's these kinds of practices that make me sick, and while Apple is not Wal-mart, I still do not like where Apple, Inc. has been taking the company. Big business has killed small, private business, the environment and is part of the reason the middle class is deteriorating by using legal threats and suits to strong arm the industry, and in the end we all suffer from its consequences.

These law-suits are frivolous and unnecessary, but this company would not have to take legal action had Apple not sent out its legal team to harass them. It seems Apple has been harassing this company for quite a while, claiming the use of "Pod" is a violation of TM agreements with Apple, yet they have not trademarked "Pod". Further, if Apple did have grounds why wasn't a legal suit filed? It seems as though Apple has been using their name and expensive legal team to threaten this company, in hopes they would give in or face huge legal fees. I'm glad they didn't, maybe it will wake Apple out of its state of grandiosity as they certainly seem to be getting full of themselves.

In the end, I am typing this on my shiny aluminum keyboard, ACD and Mac Pro lol, and as long as Apple continues to make superior products I will forever be using a Mac. However, not at the expense of small business and not with these "Microsoft"-esque tactics. Shame on Apple.



Exactly, and in the end, it only gives BlueAir, Inc. more press and recognition. This will only bite Apple in the, well, Apple lol.

Thank you. I agree. Apple makes great products. But they seem to be losing sight of being a great company by their quest for world domination and greed.

[palex9]

lawyers are smart people who know how to justify their 6 digit incomes. they are great in inventing problems (where there actually are none) which they then offer to solve.

somebody has to reign in the apple goons as they are sometimes totally out of control. as now with this ridiculous case.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Buck

You work for them, right?

-1 : Lame accusation. I mean, is that really necessary? Would you like to be called to the mat as being paid by Apple? Argue the merits or demerits of the argument, don't go accusing people as being shills unless you have some hard proof.

[roehlstation]

What many of you don't realize is that Apple is obligated to protect it's trademark, by law it has to, if they let this one slip by then they cannot defend the next one that comes by.

[CJD2112]

Originally Posted by roehlstation

What many of you don't realize is that Apple is obligated to protect it's trademark, by law it has to, if they let this one slip by then they cannot defend the next one that comes by.

Read my posts. What you don't understand is the fact that Apple does not have "Pod" or any variation thereof TM'd. If that were true, Apple would have filed suit instead of harassing this company, which only resulted in the company filing suit against Apple, Inc.

[Pascal007]

Between Apple and the air filtration firm, who sucks the most ?

[MsNly]

Originally Posted by Pascal007

Between Apple and the air filtration firm, who sucks the most ?

No I think the question is, who "blows" the most?

[CJD2112]

Originally Posted by MsNly

No the question is who "BLOWS" the most?

LMAO That's awesome

[mike99]

> A Delaware company ...is suing Apple...
> by [asking court to declare] that its airPOD mark
> is not confusingly similar to Apple’s mark

Hmmm... Based on what I've read, they aren't actually suing Apple (they aren't asking for financial damages, etc.). They are just asking the court declare that they aren't violating Apple's trademark rights, thus assuring them ahead of time that Apple won't be able to dispute their trademark registration.

And my guess is that the court will deny their request and tell them they must go through the standard registration process, which includes the risk of having someone object to your registration application.

[huntercr]

I just got some random deep thoughts on this... this has just got to be true. It's too perfect:

Apple is suing first to get this company say publicly "no no no we don't see our products as being confusing to the public... no we swear!"

Apple says "You swear? Promise? Super double-secret promise?!"
Company: " really, never!"

Apple says " oh good, cause we're coming out with a new product, and we're going to call it an Air Pod"

and because they just made a public stink and slew of statements ( and will probably settle out of court with an agreement ) they will not be able to pursue Apple.

Amazing. If apple had brought out an AirPod themselves, this company would fight them tooth and nail to prove that it *is* infringing.

Amazingly clever, Apple.

[breeze]

[QUOTE=mike99;1206715]> A Delaware company ...is suing Apple...
> by [asking court to declare] that its airPOD mark
> is not confusingly similar to Apple’s mark

Hmmm... Based on what I've read, they aren't actually suing Apple (they aren't asking for financial damages, etc.). They are just asking the court declare that they aren't violating Apple's trademark rights, thus assuring them ahead of time that Apple won't be able to dispute their trademark registration.



POd as in iPod

Air as in Macbook Air

Click wheel look... Rip off

I'd say they want to cash in on the ubiquity of Apple products and are just using the old "best defense is offense" tactics...

[CJD2112]

[QUOTE=breeze;1206754]

Originally Posted by mike99

> A Delaware company ...is suing Apple...
> by [asking court to declare] that its airPOD mark
> is not confusingly similar to Apple’s mark

Hmmm... Based on what I've read, they aren't actually suing Apple (they aren't asking for financial damages, etc.). They are just asking the court declare that they aren't violating Apple's trademark rights, thus assuring them ahead of time that Apple won't be able to dispute their trademark registration.



POd as in iPod

Air as in Macbook Air

Click wheel look... Rip off

I'd say they want to cash in on the ubiquity of Apple products and are just using the old "best defense is offense" tactics...

Apple has been harassing Blue Air, Inc. over TM rights. Apple never filed a suit. Blue Air is suing Apple, Inc. for unlawful litigation and harassment. Apple has NOT TM'd "Pod" or anything LIKE it. Blue Air is making a product "Airpod", which happens to be a FAN, not a music device, for your work area. If Apple has any legal right they would have filed suit with Blue Air instead of simply strong arming the company as "Pod" or any variation thereof is NOT TM'd. Blue Air has the legal right to use their product as they see fit for the reasons I mentioned in this thread. In this instance, I have to agree that Apple, Inc. is NOT justified in their treatment of this matter.

[JeffDM]

[QUOTE=breeze;1206754]

Originally Posted by mike99

> A Delaware company ...is suing Apple...
> by [asking court to declare] that its airPOD mark
> is not confusingly similar to Apple’s mark

Hmmm... Based on what I've read, they aren't actually suing Apple (they aren't asking for financial damages, etc.). They are just asking the court declare that they aren't violating Apple's trademark rights, thus assuring them ahead of time that Apple won't be able to dispute their trademark registration.


POd as in iPod

Air as in Macbook Air

Click wheel look... Rip off

I'd say they want to cash in on the ubiquity of Apple products and are just using the old "best defense is offense" tactics...

There's at least one problem for your suggestion: AirPod was introduced before the MBAir was. I understand why it vaguely looks like a click wheel, but I think the fan looks more like a speaker cone with fancy trim.

I think it's kind of a gray area, it's a good idea to get this cleared up like they're trying to do.