AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Salesforce chief gave Steve Jobs “App Store” trademark as token of appreciation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Salesforce chief gave Steve Jobs “App Store” trademark as token of appreciation - Page 2

post #41 of 52
8/28/11 at 7:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

How on earth is this even a valid trademark? you cannot trademark generic terms, No one could get a trademark for shoe store, book store, or computer store - so why App Store?

Apple. Windows. Align (some dietary thing). Sharp.

And since App Store is even less of a generic term than these (these being not generic at all), it's pretty much okay.
Suddenly Newton
I actually use my phone. It's not some self-esteem crutch.
Reply
Suddenly Newton
I actually use my phone. It's not some self-esteem crutch.
Reply
post #42 of 52
8/28/11 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

How on earth is this even a valid trademark? you cannot trademark generic terms, No one could get a trademark for shoe store, book store, or computer store - so why App Store?

Is there anyone at the PTO who even knows what the fuck a computer is? are the PTO reviewers living in the dark ages?

You can pretty much trademark anything as long as

(1) not used by anyone else yet.
(2) until some people complain

That's how it works
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 52
8/28/11 at 9:41am
I find it interesting none of you notice that Apple plan to use the "App Store" trademark without having ownership over it. Do not kid yourself that Apple did not know someone trademark it and had the URL for it. I bet when they did the normal trademark search they found salesforce.com owned it and when Steve was told he either called and asked for it or personally invited Marc Benioff to come to the announcement knowing full well they owned it and Steve figure Marc would react the way he did.

This is not the first time Apple took a product public without having the ownership of the trade name.

By the way, tradenames and trademarks are bought and sold all the time without selling the underlining business. Many times there is no underlining business what so ever, someone pulls a trademark registers it and does nothing with it and then turns around and sell it later, it happens more times than you think.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 52
8/28/11 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

I find it interesting none of you notice that Apple plan to use the "App Store" trademark without having ownership over it. Do not kid yourself that Apple did not know someone trademark it and had the URL for it. I bet when they did the normal trademark search they found salesforce.com owned it and when Steve was told he either called and asked for it or personally invited Marc Benioff to come to the announcement knowing full well they owned it and Steve figure Marc would react the way he did.

This is not the first time Apple took a product public without having the ownership of the trade name.

By the way, tradenames and trademarks are bought and sold all the time without selling the underlining business. Many times there is no underlining business what so ever, someone pulls a trademark registers it and does nothing with it and then turns around and sell it later, it happens more times than you think.

You need to understand how trademarks work. They are not like copyrights or patents, you have to actively be using them or you risk losing them. You also don't have to register a trademark before use, which is why , ℠, and ® are distinct.
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 #45 of 52
8/28/11 at 6:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipen View Post

You can pretty much trademark anything as long as

(1) not used by anyone else yet.
(2) until some people complain

That's how it works

At the end of the day it seems that this is the most important point. The application of trademark "rules" is inconsistent and almost seems to rely on complaints.

TradeMarkEm.com has written an interesting four part history on the "App Store" mark. Part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 52
8/28/11 at 7:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Did the shareholders get together and offer to pay Steve Jobs for his guidance?

It's a valid question.

While it was a nice thing to do, it was also a strategic asset with monetary value owned by Salesforce.com, and Marc Benioff has a fiduciary duty to act in the interests of CRM shareholders.

It's the sort of thing shareholder lawsuits are made of, and more than one startup CEO has lost control of "their" company by running it like a personal asset instead of a going concern.

Steve, of course, is free to give away his own personal time as he sees fit.

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #47 of 52
8/28/11 at 9:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

That is incorrect. A trademark is property like any other.

The only complexity is that you can not force the USPTO to recognize it in the hands of the new owner. Thus, it would typically only be sold without the underlying business to someone who wanted to use it for exactly the items covered by the original trademark.

When I said that you can't sell it, I meant that if you own a registered trademark, you cannot sell it (without the underlying business) such that that the entity you sell it to then owns the registered trademark. That seems like a bit more than just a complexity. It's not worth much if it is not USPTO-recognized and no longer registered. I guess I don't quite understand the point you are making. Am I missing something here?
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 52
8/29/11 at 6:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Windows doesn't have a thing to do with computing (HAR! ). App Store does exactly what it says.

So that's their argument.


So App Store couldn't be another name for an Appliance Store?
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 52
8/29/11 at 6:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by xsu View Post

So App Store couldn't be another name for an Appliance Store?

Given that the phrase "App Store" wasn't in use by anyone anywhere for any purpose before Apple used it, no, it couldn't be used for "Appliance Store". Because no one calls appliances "apps".
Suddenly Newton
I actually use my phone. It's not some self-esteem crutch.
Reply
Suddenly Newton
I actually use my phone. It's not some self-esteem crutch.
Reply
post #50 of 52
8/29/11 at 11:01am
The name App Store would not be in our collective consciousness if Jobs and Apple had not put it there. Nobody would be fighting to market their own App Store except that Apple made the term popular.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 52
8/29/11 at 12:24pm
Methinks you all care too much.

Also Windows has nothing to do with windows. Has everything to do with computers/software

if windows was a windows store and tried to sue "Sally's Window Store" for using windows in the name then you'd probably understand how ridiculous a notion it is outside of Apple land.

PS I was calling apps apps before the iPhone even existed. I'm sure others were as well.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 52
8/29/11 at 8:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by xsu View Post

So App Store couldn't be another name for an Appliance Store?

Sure, it could. Trademarks are industry specific. As long as they don't create "consumer confusion", you should be fine (i.e. those "appliances" probably shouldn't include computers or smartphones).

The prototypical example used to demonstrate this is Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets.

That said, a team of lawyers can pretty much ruin anyone's day, even with the law on your side...

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Salesforce chief gave Steve Jobs “App Store” trademark as token of appreciation