AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple challenges new Woolworths logo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple challenges new Woolworths logo - Page 4

post #121 of 127
10/5/09 at 1:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post

not to mention Adobe, whom the sheep on these boards so happy to trash...

regarding the logo, why those, who think they look similar fail to see that the W logo does include their name. as someone mentioned above, it is part of their application. even if W will sell electronics, still there will be their damn name written on them!

Maybe that's all Apple Inc may require Woolworths to do in order to settle it. That Wooworth will always include their name with the logo. Or that the logo will never appear by itself on any electronic, computer equipment or music related product. (Don't forget, Apple Inc also own the Apple Records logo.)

Think about it. If you see the Woolworths logo by itself as an "apple" and not as a "W", on a computer, piece of electronics or music CD what company do you think of first? Apple Inc or Apple records. It doesn't matter that the three companies logos are different. Is what company you think of first when you see an "apple" logo on a product that matters. And once you understand this, you'll begin to understand what a "trademark" is all about. And why there are laws that protects a company's trademark. And protects consumers from companies violating some one else's trademark.
Reply
Reply
post #122 of 127
10/5/09 at 2:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

It really doesn't matter. Apple should go after them anyway if they think they have a claim. The good thing about this is that the breadth and scope of Apple's trademark will be clarified even further.

And this complaint also do something else to protect Apple Inc. Suppose Woolworth began selling computers, electronics or muisc products with just their "w" logo on it. And some of those products reach the US. Consumers here in the US may not be all that familar with Woolworth so when they see the logo they think Apple Inc.. And we all know how sue happy people in the US are. What happens next is that Woolworth will get sued for consumer fraud because they were trying to pass off their products as an Apple Inc product. Then Apple Inc will get sued for allowing this to happen. Because Apple Inc. should have known that consumers might get confused when they see the Woolworths logo.

So my making their complaint now, they are also protecting themselves from any possible lawsuits pertaining to consumers being fooled into thinking they were buying an Apple Inc product when they saw that Woolworth "apple" logo on it.
Reply
Reply
post #123 of 127
10/5/09 at 3:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidW View Post

Maybe that's all Apple Inc may require Woolworths to do in order to settle it. That Wooworth will always include their name with the logo. Or that the logo will never appear by itself on any electronic, computer equipment or music related product. (Don't forget, Apple Inc also own the Apple Records logo.)

There's nothing to settle, really. There's no suit, either, so NO-ONE IS SUING ANYONE HERE. For those of you who want Apple to blast Woolworths off the face of the earth with a lawsuit have got it all wrong. THERE IS NO SUING GOING ON. It's an administrative process which has been set into motion by Apple to rule on the validity of the mark.

Quote:
Think about it. If you see the Woolworths logo by itself as an "apple" and not as a "W", on a computer, piece of electronics or music CD what company do you think of first? Apple Inc or Apple records. It doesn't matter that the three companies logos are different. Is what company you think of first when you see an "apple" logo on a product that matters. And once you understand this, you'll begin to understand what a "trademark" is all about. And why there are laws that protects a company's trademark. And protects consumers from companies violating some one else's trademark.

If you necessarily see the Woolworths logo without the W then there is clearly an issue with the mark, but I fail to see how one might ever mistake it for the mark of a particular consumer electronics retailer. As a person who doesn't actually shop there, I saw the new branding and never once saw the connection between this and the other.

You are right about what first comes to mind, but here, I don't think it even satisfies that test. I don't think anyone with a straight face could say that the Woolworths logo could dilute the high-style Apple brand in any way. Anyone who would potentially buy a Woolies MP3 player in Australia is going to know that it's a not an iPod. Woolies, if you could force yourself to believe it, is orders of magnitude better known than Apple is in this part of the world.

Stylistically, the colours are different - despite the devious recolourisation in the article, the Woolies symbols can not be said to be a silhouette by any stretch of the imagination, a key part of the Apple's mark is the bite mark which isn't there.
Reply
Reply
post #124 of 127
10/6/09 at 1:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh View Post

When does a fruit become a nut?

When Apple's legal team gets their hand on it? Apple needs to lay off some dead weight in their legal team. This law suit is bullshit.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #125 of 127
10/6/09 at 3:44am
I'm just curious- is the green Apple logo depicted in the article a version that AI decided to include to enhance the so-called "similarity" of the two icons, or the actually logo that Apple brought forth as being infringed upon in its complaint? If the latter is true, Apple hasn't used a colored logo in years... a more accurate comparison would be the green Woolworth's logo (which looks like an apple; technically, it's an artistic interpretation of one) and the SILVER Apple logo (which actually is an apple). IMO, even without the color factor the two are pretty different in terms of style, shape, marketing, etc. I personally don't see how Apple has grounds for complaint.
Reply
Reply
post #126 of 127
10/6/09 at 4:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpw View Post

What's the significance of two leaves?

there's symbolism in every logo. two leaves facing different directions could mean:
go anywhere you want. choices. your past and future. balance.
Reply
Reply
post #127 of 127
10/8/09 at 7:16am
In other words, Apple's lawyers believe that Apple customers are too stupid to realize that they are going to a supermarket, and these same stupid customers will believe that the vegetables, canned goods, and dairy products are precisely the sort of products they would expect to find at the Genius Bar in an Apple store.

=.Old Man Dotes.=
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple challenges new Woolworths logo