or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Microsoft objects to Apple's "App Store" trademark application
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft objects to Apple's "App Store" trademark application - Page 3

post #81 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Microsoft has trademarked "Word" and long ago sued a man because his product name used the Hebrew word for "bookshelf" which they also owned. It's hard to know how they can fairly object that something sounds too general. If their objection is upheld (which may or may not have merit... I'm no expert), it should automatically be applied to their own line.

if apple has trademarked 'app' or 'apps' then i would go with apple. if not, then i agree with MS

they could call it the 'mac store' but then get sued by maxtor....
post #82 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobycat View Post

Seems like about the only words Microsoft could lay claim to are their corporate name and Visio.

Don't forget this classic: Visual InterDev

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeolian View Post

I am just "T'd" off, about this whole thing.

I would like to remind you of Mr. O.J. Simpson trying to "copywright" the term OJ. so he could cash in every time we bought O.range J.uice....

Yea, no one thought of that before him.

Copyright and trademarks are different beasts.

You can only trademark a term for a specific industry or type of product.

A trademark for a hypothetical Lumberjack truck model wouldn't prevent some other company from having a separate trademark for Lumberjack flannel shirts or boots or thermoses* -- or even paper towels.

The trademark lawsuit between the (then) Apple Computer and Apple Records started when Apple Computer began to move into music, because Apple Records felt they owned the "Apple" trademark in that niche or industry.

* Edit: On reflection, "Thermos" is already trademarked.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #83 of 153
Doesn't matter anymore if this gets dismissed or not. The APP STORE IS NOW SYNONYMOUS WITH APPLE. When people hear App Store, they think of Apple.
post #84 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by wurm5150 View Post

doesn't matter anymore if this gets dismissed or not. The app store is now synonymous with apple. When people hear app store, they think of apple.

used to be 'think different'
now its 'think douchebag'
post #85 of 153
has been one which Apple used from the beginning to describe actionable computer software. Long before OS X or iOS ... if you were having a conversation with a not-Mac user and used the term "application" the odds were they'd look at you and say "huh?" Then you'd say .. "Program" and they'd understand what you were referring to.

"Alias" anyone? Use the term "shortcut" and anyone knows of what you speak.

During the 90's ... M$ and its user community herd did everything in their power to have Apple go the way of Amiga and the rest or render it marginalized.

So let them have their "Program" store. Everyone knows what it means. Right?
post #86 of 153
Microsoft products evolve around generic terms!! Windows, Office, Word, and Internet Explorer. If MS really think it is generic, where were they all these years? It's first come first serve when it comes to trademarks.
post #87 of 153
For Apple, Microsoft is a bad case of fleas!
post #88 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Narcogen View Post

No, it is a specific term that refers to a specific public network. That's why you capitalize it when you talk about the Internet.



Combining a specific and a generic can yield a trademarkable name. Internet Explorer. Hula Hoop. Power Mac. Intel Inside.

The problem with "App Store" is that it is alleging that both terms are generics. While we've certainly all heard the dimunitive "app" as a replacement for "application" a lot more often since the iPhone, I wouldn't be at all certain that Apple could lay claim to inventing the usage. However, even then in some contexts I bet you could do it, if the combination itself was unique within a particular context. I think the problem is that the phrase "app store" is just as logical a generic description for what it is as it is a proper name for it. It's quite possible that even if it were called something else, if someone were to ask you to describe Apple's storefront for mobile applications, you might well think to refer to it as an "app store"-- again, presuming that "app" is common parlance for a mobile application.

Kleenex can insist you refer to other facial tissues without using the term Kleenex, but I doubt Kleenex would be allowed to trademark Facial Tissues to prevent competitors from using that combination of words to describe their products.

After this reply and several others, I think I'm going to apply for a trademark for the phrase "comment thread sarcasm."
post #89 of 153
Microsoft should just call it the "Napp Store" because that's what they have been doing for the last 5 years.
post #90 of 153
"You're Fired!"
post #91 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

'Apple' isn't a trademark.


APPLES TRADEMARKS\tGENERIC TERM(S)

AirMac®\twireless hardware/software solution
AirPlay®\tapplication program
AirPort®\twireless hardware/software solution
AirPort Express®\twireless hardware/software solution
AirPort Extreme®\twireless hardware/software solution
AirTunes®\tapplication program
A.Pack®\tsoftware feature
Aperture®\tapplication program
Apple®\tcomputers, computer software, computer peripherals, etc.
Apple logo®\t
Apple IIGS\tcomputer
AppleCAT®\tapplication program
AppleCD SC®\tCD-ROM drive
Apple Cinema Display®\tcomputer monitor
AppleFund\treimbursement program
AppleLink\tcommunication network/computer software
Apple Media Series\ttraining materials
Apple Remote Desktop\tremote desktop software
AppleScript®\tapplication program
AppleScript Studio®\tdevelopment software
AppleShare®\tserver software
Apple Studio Display\tcomputer monitor
AppleTalk®\tnetwork system
Apple TechStep\tdiagnostic software
Apple TV®\tdigital media extender
AppleVision\tcomputer display
AppleWorks®\tapplication program


...


http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html
post #92 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldfullerton View Post

I suggest they call their on-line store the 'Bug Store', then everyone would know it was Microsoft's.

HAHAHAHA!
This makes Microsoft seem so juvenile, they're like that little kid tattling to mommy that the other kids wont let them play with their toys.
post #93 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidW View Post

It doesn't matter how generic the terms "burger" and "place" are.



How do you analyze "wooden chair" under that test? Could it be a valid trademark?
post #94 of 153
Apple has been calling all their programs (Applications), Apps since day one.

Everyone else has "Programs".

post #95 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobycat View Post

Internet Explorer.

Internet is a generic term referring to the connections around the world of computers.
Explorer is a generic term for someone who goes around seeking out things.

Word... Office...

Seems like about the only words Microsoft could lay claim to are their corporate name and Visio.

Oh... Kin and Zune. They could lay claim to those. Not sure why they would want to... but they could.

Its not that single words are generic, its the combination that is still generic in App Store. I certainly use app store to refer to other app stores. The only variance is my capitalization of Apples App Store.

No one says Internet Explorer to mean Safari or Firefox. Speaking of, fire and fox are examples of generic words creating a unique term. Internet Explorer isnt as catchy but its just as unique.

Now Office and Word have something different going on. They are often used as genericized trademarks, like Coke, Klennex or Band-Aid, because of their dominant position, but the words themselves werent a generic and all encompassing term when first used in the product. on top of that, They also contain Microsoft, which makes them unique.

MS probably has no issue with Mac App Store as its clear what the term refers to. Its the iOS App Store which is only written as App Store that will be on concern. I think MS has a solid case here.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #96 of 153
The Walled Garden™
post #97 of 153
Quote:
Quote:
*snip*

Quote:
After years of losing smartphone market share to Apple's popular iPhone, Microsoft released a new mobile operating system, Windows Phone 7, along with Marketplace, its answer to Apple's App Store, last fall. At the end of December, it was revealed that the Windows Phone 7 platform had reached the 5,000 app milestone, well behind the more than 300,000 apps available for Apple's iOS.

Last fall, several Windows Phone 7 developers expressed concern over development for the platform, complaining that Microsoft had yet to release any app store analytics and was delaying payment until February 2011. Microsoft quickly changed course, releasing reporting tools for its developers and moving up the first pay date to January 2011.

Some pundits had speculated that Microsoft's delay in releasing Marketplace analytics was to delay the public revelation of Windows Phone 7 sales numbers. Initial reviews of WP7 were muted; reviewers praised the interface, while criticizing it as several years behind Apple's iOS and Google's Android mobile OS.

The U.S. launch of Windows Phone 7 was lackluster, with some stores reporting having sold just a handful of units.

In December, technology journalist Walt Mossberg pressed Microsoft VP Joe Belfiore for specific sales figures, but Belfiore repeatedly dodged the question. Belfiore later admitted to Mossberg that it could take at least "a couple of years" for Microsoft to "get back into the market."

*snip*
Half of this article is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand and rehashes information that's been posted at AI many times already. Is this DED again?

So motive is irrelevant?
post #98 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Its not that single words are generic, its the combination that is still generic in App Store. I certainly use app store to refer to other app stores. The only variance is my capitalization of Apples App Store.

No one says Internet Explorer to mean Safari or Firefox. Speaking of, fire and fox are examples of generic words creating a unique term. Internet Explorer isnt as catchy but its just as unique.

Now Office and Word have something different going on. They are often used as genericized trademarks, like Coke, Klennex or Band-Aid, because of their dominant position, but the words themselves werent a generic and all encompassing term when first used in the product. on top of that, They also contain Microsoft, which makes them unique.

MS probably has no issue with Mac App Store as its clear what the term refers to. Its the iOS App Store which is only written as App Store that will be on concern. I think MS has a solid case here.

I would strongly disagree as I'm not aware of App Store being in use before Apple opened The App Store. You use it now, only because they created it and have NOT YET enforced their trademark in the current derivative situations.

I think the precedences of Windows, Word and Office being upheld is previous challenges (remember Lindows) bode very well for Apple in this case. I think there is Zero chance of a summary judgement or even a restraining order.
post #99 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by CEOstevie View Post

But in general, the Windows versions of apps are more full-featured and have fewer bugs compared to the OSX version, if any such version is available.

Really? The Mac versions of Office have generally had the more innovative features before Windows. Excel and Word both gestated on the Mac first and then moved to Windows. Of course Microsoft hasn't always been interested in promoting their Mac applications, but the Mac Business Units is one of the more profitable units within Microsoft.

Quote:
And the software written by Microsoft itself (for regular computers, anyways) is always first-rate.

I dunno, Microsoft has had their share of bombs. Office hasn't always been the best experience and has had significant growing pains in the past.

Windows biggest problem is it's early evolution was in a single user non-networked environment, so developers (including Microsoft) developed lots of bad habits that eventually came back to bite them.

It's not that the Unix guys were that much smarter or more prescient than Microsoft, much of Unix's early development happened on machines that were big and expensive and often shared. If a rouge application or user took the whole machine down, the expense involved was significant, so there was an early focus on stability and security from a practical cost perspective - not some sort of moral superiority over other manufacturers like Microsoft that lots of Unix weenies tend to claim. The early days of Unix weren't exactly pretty either! Microsoft's big problem is networking and mutli-user utilization of personal computers didn't really become important until they had this large momentum of poorly architected software and cadres of programmers that were used to being coddled.

This is why I see the App Store on the iPhone and now Mac OSX as huge - the focus has shifted from pleasing the developer at all costs with backwards compatibility and support for poorly ported applications to a customer-first focus.

Whatever the name, the Apple App Store is a huge shift in thinking, and even if you don't personally buy into it, just like Android wouldn't exist without the iPhone, much of the future application quality for all operating systems will improve with Apple's relentless focus on the end user experience.

I've been a technologist for a long time, and I'm ashamed to admit that in the past, even I have had a derogatory view of the "users" - and that's just wrong. Technology doesn't exist for the sake of technology. Yes, geeks like us think it's cool, but we are in the minority. For the majority, these things are just tools - and that's OK! Currently Apple is the only company who's primary focus is on the customer - and boy is this rubbing the "tech elite" the wrong way. The sacred cow is under attack! What really amuses me is all the "open" advocates who call for Apple to basically conform to the traditions. Talk about ironic! Apple is offering more choice, but because it doesn't fit their philosophical view of the world it must be destroyed - classic hypocrisy.
post #100 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

It is too generic.

App is generic - the combination of "App Store" isn't. It could go either way. MS wouldn't have filed if they didn't think they at least had a choice.

Although I'm with an earlier poster - I doubt it will benefit MS much, and in the end it just brings more attention to Apple.
post #101 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

I would strongly disagree as I'm not aware of App Store being in use before Apple opened The App Store. You use it now, only because they created it and have NOT YET enforced their trademark in the current derivative situations.

I think the precedences of Windows, Word and Office being upheld is previous challenges (remember Lindows) bode very well for Apple in this case. I think there is Zero chance of a summary judgement or even a restraining order.

I see what youre saying. I did a Google search for app store and used various additions like blackberry and java with dates up to 2007 and found plenty of sites that use the term App Store. I cant say if they started using the term before or after Apple did. They were using Crackberry AppStore and other such names which are not generic.

Worst case scenario Apple has to make it The App Store or Apple App Store, best case is it stays the same.

As for Windows, Word and Office I dont see how those are equivalent examples. Its like saying Apple is a generic term, but it cant be confused with any other computer product at the time so its unique in that sense. Same goes for Windows, and I already noted that the name for Office and Word are simply colloquial shortenings of Microsoft Office and Microsoft Word. I dont think MS uses just Office or Word to advertise that suite or app.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #102 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I see what youre saying. I did a Google search for app store and used various additions like blackberry and java with dates up to 2007 and found plenty of sites that use the term App Store. I cant say if they started using the term before or after Apple did. They were using Crackberry AppStore and other such names which are not generic.

Worst case scenario Apple has to make it The App Store or Apple App Store, best case is it stays the same.

As for Windows, Word and Office I dont see how those are equivalent examples. Its like saying Apple is a generic term, but it cant be confused with any other computer product at the time so its unique in that sense. Same goes for Windows, and I already noted that the name for Office and Word are simply colloquial shortenings of Microsoft Office and Microsoft Word. I dont think MS uses just Office or Word to advertise that suite or app.

But they (MS) do us the generic (without MS) and they protect it. That is why i brought up Lindows. This was a case where one of (I forget which one) the early Linux UI's tried to use the name Lindows because Window was a generic term and they were NOT MS Windows (or or MS Lindows). The courts upheld MS position and disallowed the use of Lindows as 'too confusing to the user' even though Window is generic in the language and arguably generic in the UI realm going back to Xerox PARC (or further).
post #103 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

...

[I]Extension: .app

"Application program (or executable file) that runs under Mac OS X; runs when double-clicked; similar to a .EXE file in Windows. ...

The use of '.app' and 'app' actually goes back much further than OS X and started with NeXTSTEP years earlier. However, 'application' and 'app' (whether in any particular dictionary or not) have been fairly common terms for considerably longer. Yet, 'App Store' should probably be granted trademark protection since this particular phrase was not common before 2008 and clearly identifies Apple's application stores specifically.
post #104 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

But they (MS) do us the generic (without MS) and they protect it. That is why i brought up Lindows. This was a case where one of (I forget which one) the early Linux UI's tried to use the name Lindows because Window was a generic term and they were NOT MS Windows (or or MS Lindows). The courts upheld MS position and disallowed the use of Lindows as 'too confusing to the user' even though Window is generic in the language and arguably generic in the UI realm going back to Xerox PARC (or further).

I concede. You win this debate.


until next time.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #105 of 153
deleted
post #106 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

'Apple' isn't a trademark. The Apple Device and the display of the word apple using a specific font, or in a certain context is. There's more to a trade mark than a name.

If you tried to start up a computer business called Apple, I think you'd find that this word was already trademarked in that context. If on the other hand your business sold fruit, you probably would have no problem using the word in the name. Likewise, Apple might be able to trademark the word app in the context of selling computer applications online, but that doesn't mean that they'd gain any control over its use in other contexts.

But here today's irony: In order for Apple to claim a trademark on use of the word app, they had to file an app.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #107 of 153
Too bad they didn't object when the patent was filed years ago--oh, that's right, they thought the iPhone would fail and it wasn't worth their time. Completely consistent with their way of doing business: wait for someone else to innovate and succeed, then follow with copycat products.

In related news, Microsoft sues to void the patent on all products starting with a lower case "i" citing the letter's extensive use as the beginning of thousands of words in English and other languages.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #108 of 153
Dumbo (Microsoft) is always a "day late and a dollar short"!
post #109 of 153
How many commercial examples are about the "generic" name app before jan 2007?
(other than Apple ecosystem)

Maybe that the IT professionals distinction between "system software" and "application software" provides enough evidence of the generic use of the simple word "applications" related to particular programs. But how many manuals do explained this not-so-clear distinction?
And wasn't "application" the shortening for "application software"?


The shortening APP (not Ap, neither Appl, APPLI, Applic) was really so generic? How many manuals or mainstream commercials usually referred application software as "APP" before 2008?

The whole concept of the "App Store" was innovative in many ways and has established a new standard. Nokia, Blackberry, Palm, Open Handset Alliance struggled to have something really comparable.
So innovative that now we have also a "Mac" App Store that wasn't there before.
A 2005 online software store (Ovi? Amazon? Cnet?) differed from a 2011 application store.
Steve Jobs really needed to refer to others application stores as "app store".

And patently the Open Handset Alliance "App Marketplace" sells also software that matches the definition of "system software": the new term "APP" coined from Apple is more successful and widespread then "program" itself, so now it may also refer to something that is not "application software" from any "old" perspective.


Any case, "Burghy Store" or "FacialTiss" can have trademarks? An "Astro Store" who will sell spare parts for commercial space ship is trademarkable?


Want MS his own application store? May call it Application Mall...

Want Microsoft do an inusitate distinction between desktop "program" and Web "app"? May call them "Desks" and "Webs" or whatever else and spend five hundred millions dollars in commercial ads pointing this matter rather than Mac price. So simple.


P.S.: I'm a native speaker of italian and I don't speak english very well: forgive me errors and misspelling, please.
post #110 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

Dumbo (Microsoft) is always a "day late and a dollar short"!

well i don't know about a 'dollar short'.....
post #111 of 153
Since when did microsoft care about the term "App"
on Windows it's called "Programs" no one in the windows pc world calls it app (Application)
even though Application is technically the right term.

Just shut up and call yours the "prog store"

Also for those who may not be aware: Apple used the term Applications/Trash etc which is why Windows labels it's trash "Recycle" and Applications "Programs"
post #112 of 153
deleted
post #113 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

The Walled Garden

Ha! FTW!

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #114 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

* Edit: On reflection, "Thermos" is already trademarked.

Are you aware that the "thermos" has already been identified as the "worlds smartest invention"? When told of that during a press conference, a reporter said... "How can that be? ... All it does is keep hot things hot and cold thinge cold"? .... to which the inventor replied ...."Yes, ... but how does it know?" ....
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #115 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by CEOstevie View Post

But in general, the Windows versions of apps are more full-featured and have fewer bugs compared to the OSX version, if any such version is available.

And the software written by Microsoft itself (for regular computers, anyways) is always first-rate.

MS is good for the average user. I'm running a dual hexcore 64bit with windows 7.

It's not that good.
post #116 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

As for Windows, Word and Office I dont see how those are equivalent examples. Its like saying Apple is a generic term, but it cant be confused with any other computer product at the time so its unique in that sense.

Similar to the lawsuit years ago between Lexis-Nexis and Lexus (the car). The judge basically said there is no way someone would confuse the two.

As for my comments about "Internet Explorer" and such... I was joking.
post #117 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Exchange 2010 OWA (Outlook Web App).

Windows Phone 7 Apps.

Bing Maps App SDK.

Windows Web App Gallery.

Probably the big one is Office Web Apps. Word Web App, Excel Web App, Powerpoint Web App, OneNote Web App.

It looks like Microsoft wants to call a "program" that lives on the web an "application" or "app", probably to distinguish them from normal x86 "programs" running on a PC.

I'm not sure how this trademark would work if Apple won it. Would any other company be allowed to call and application an "app"?

Maybe Microsoft want to continue to use the word "app" and they may not be able to if Apple wins the trademark. Maybe "App Store" has nothing to do with it???

Funny how all of those came out after 2008...

Oh, I'm sorry, did I suddenly make you look even more clueless?

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #118 of 153
deleted
post #119 of 153
If apple had tried to trademark "Application Store" then Microsoft would be correct, but "App Store" is a Apple variant.

It is like the difference between "Motor Bike" and "Mo bike".. I would think. By shortening it apple made it catchy and so they should get to trademark it.

Just my 2 cents ...
post #120 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app

What about "App Store"? Apple didn't try to trademark just the word "App".

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Microsoft objects to Apple's "App Store" trademark application