AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › British network allegedly warns Apple again not to use 'iTV' name [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

British network allegedly warns Apple again not to use 'iTV' name [u] - Page 3

post #81 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:30am
Why not go with iTelevision. The name is different, but the public will still refer to it as iTV because its just easier to say or write. And since Apple is not responsible for a nickname applied by the public, they will have effectively usurped the name iTV without any legal consequences. Personally, I'm not 100% sure there will be an Apple branded television in the near future ( possible,yes - probable, maybe), and if there is, I believe they'll stick with the name Apple TV.

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #82 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Yeah, they have a market cap of slightly under £5B, but a more important figure is their cash, which is likely around £150M. If Apple offered them 50+M they'd be stupid not to accept it. After all this a physical product, not a channel. Apple should just name it iTV and then challenge them in court. They don't make hardware after all.

Surely what really matters is the value of the ITV brand to them.

A 'Smart Television' and a 'Television Broadcaster' are confusingly similar, this isn't Computer vs Music Label in the 70s when computers beeped. I expect ITV would laugh £50m out of the door.

However I think Apple will just have the product be called Apple TV.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystigo View Post

Yea. iTV has a point on this one. They own that name fair and square and have spent decades marketing and building up that brand. Apple will have to come up with a lucrative arrangement for them, or just use another name.

That may not be true. Apple's iTV is not the same product. It's (presumably) and actual TV set, not a channel. The point is Apple may be able to argue that its product will not be confused by the average person.

By the way, what's with this point in the article about "not the first time iTV has reached out to Apple?" This hardly sounds like reaching out. If they were smart, they'd simply try to license or sell their name for a boatload of money.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #84 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:51am
there is no such thing as an itv


all these comments are a waste of time.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:53am
There is also an itv network in Canada. www.itv.ca They go by as global tv now but probably still have the rights to the itv name.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 128
2/13/12 at 10:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

That may not be true. Apple's iTV is not the same product. It's (presumably) and actual TV set, not a channel. The point is Apple may be able to argue that its product will not be confused by the average person.

By the way, what's with this point in the article about "not the first time iTV has reached out to Apple?" This hardly sounds like reaching out. If they were smart, they'd simply try to license or sell their name for a boatload of money.

Under your proposal, I could create a phone operating system and call it iPhone and Apple would have no say to stop me. I HIGHLY doubt that would fly, although by your statement one is hardware and the other is not.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:02am
Why in the world would ITV publicly warn Apple over something that doesn't exist? There is no iTV device, it's all speculation at this point. If/when Apple does come out with a new device my guess is they will continue to call it Apple TV. Not everything in their product line is named "i" whatever.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

iCanSeeYou

...oh wait, the last one is the name of Google's soon-to-be-announced competing offering, complete with a new "privacy" statement

would not surprise me! lol
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Why in the world would ITV publicly warn Apple over something that doesn't exist?

Because Apple has a history of infringing on trademarks.
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

The simple and obvious solution is for ITV to change it's name.

lol, yes of course. A television corporation with more than sixty years history and owner of four channels with over 20 million regular views and various associated production companies, news outlets and web presence should change it's name to accommodate apple's new product?
Reply
Reply
post #91 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post

Using Apple's own thesaurus comes up with these terms for entertainment:

amusement, pleasure, leisure, recreation, relaxation, fun, enjoyment, interest, diversion.

along with:

show, performance, presentation, production, extravaganza, spectacle, pageant.

Taking suggestions from that list:
  • iAmusement is too long. iMuse would be great and even sounds cultural/intellectual. But it's too high-brow.
  • iPleasure sounds like porn. iPlease is too vague and general.
  • iRecreation is too vague and long.
  • iRelaxation is too long and iRelax sounds like something to put us to sleep.
  • iFun sounds like something Steve Jobs would like, but it's vague. Making a double by using iPun, pronounced like iFun, it'd also continue the tradition of using "P" words. But it's even vaguer than iPod.
  • iEnjoy is too vague. iJoy promises too much.
  • iInterest is too general and too cold.
  • iDiversion is too cold and too broad.
  • iShow is perhaps the best of all. It's short, specific and clear. It's only failing is that it isn't a 'p' word.
  • iPerformance shorten to iPerform gives the wrong impression. This is for watching.
  • iPresent sounds like a business tool.
  • iProduction or iProduce sound like the production end of TV.
  • iExtravaganza is too long and too much.
  • iSpectacle is too exaggerated.
  • iPageant sounds like a Miss American contest.

The best of the lot, by far, is iShow. A distant second, faulted mostly for vagueness, is iFun/iPun.


Besides, iShow reminds me of Ed Sullivan in the golden days of television with his "really big show."

--Michael W. Perry, Inkling Books, Seattle

I think iCenter is appropriate. It will be so much more than TV - it will be the intelligence center of the home - tv, internet, security (sensors, cameras, etc), environmental monitoring (CO, radon, etc). Why limit it to TV with iTV or Apple TV?
Reply
Reply
post #92 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

How can some little pipsqueak local company prevent the worldwide use of a known brand name by a multinational company like Apple?

How can that be fair?

pipsqueak company? Are you joking, or are you really that ignorant?
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:23am
The pundits are coining the phrase iTV not apple. Nowhere has apple said it would call the successor of the "Apple TV" the "iTV". Nothing to see hear move on the click bait is done.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

$4.9B actually.

My source might be wrong then:

Quote:
Itv Market Data

TIDM \tITV
Ticker Code \tITV.L
ISIN \tGB0033986497
Currency \tGBX
Issue Country \tGB
Sector Ticker \tNMX5550
Year End \t31-Dec-11
Shares in Issue \t3,889m
Market Cap. \t£2,359m
Market Size \t60,000
PE Ratio \t11.52%
Earnings \t6.90p
Dividend \tn/a
Yield \tn/a
# of Trades \t1,535
Vol Sold \t2,703,454
Vol Bought \t3,734,079
52 Week High \t95.85p
52 Week High Date \t3-Mar-11
52 Week Low \t50.75p
52 Week Low Date \t12-Sep-11

http://www.lse.co.uk/share-fundament...=ITV&share=itv

The current conversion rate is: 0.63444

What is your source?
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Why in the world would ITV publicly warn Apple over something that doesn't exist? There is no iTV device, it's all speculation at this point. If/when Apple does come out with a new device my guess is they will continue to call it Apple TV. Not everything in their product line is named "i" whatever.

apple could easily avoid all of this type of thing by getting away from the tired 'i'

they should go with:
Apple Douchebox (tv)
Douchepad
Macdouche pro
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 128
2/13/12 at 11:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

So call it iTV everywhere except GB, which is the only place anyone has ever heard of ITV.

And canada, australia and most of Europe. There is a world outside of the USA, and the market outside of the USA is where Apple makes a majority of it's profit.
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Yeah, they have a market cap of slightly under £5B, but a more important figure is their cash, which is likely around £150M. If Apple offered them 50+M they'd be stupid not to accept it. After all this a physical product, not a channel. Apple should just name it iTV and then challenge them in court. They don't make hardware after all.

I'm not sure 50 mil would quite be in the ballpark. I've been through a couple corporate rebrandings, both realatively minor, and both costing millions of dollars each. And that was for a company not nearly as publically known as ITV is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

That may not be true. Apple's iTV is not the same product. It's (presumably) and actual TV set, not a channel. The point is Apple may be able to argue that its product will not be confused by the average person.

I'm not sure I agree with those saying these are entirely differnt things. Apple's TV isn't going to be just a TV. It's going to be internet connected and also a source of TV content from multiple channels through Apple's online storefront. And ITV isn't just a channel. They also have an online version and also have several channels of content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

So call it iTV everywhere except GB, which is the only place anyone has ever heard of ITV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

And canada, australia and most of Europe. There is a world outside of the USA, and the market outside of the USA is where Apple makes a majority of it's profit.

I also have to laugh a bit at my fellow Americans for being so ignorant of the rest of the world at times. I've met a lot of Americans that assume that if people in another country speak English it's because they want to communicate with Americans. Forgetting the long history (not always pretty) and continuing ties those countries have with the UK. And those continuing ties include probably more UK TV networks (BBC, Sky, ITV) than US ones. Outside of CNN, I've seldom seen US networks in other countries (US shows, yes, but not US networks).
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:01pm
iTube
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:08pm
Wow what a suprise (sarcasm intended). ITV told the verge it has not talked with apple at all about this issue. No letters were sent. here is the link:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/13/27...-apple-warning
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

The pundits are coining the phrase iTV not apple. Nowhere has apple said it would call the successor of the "Apple TV" the "iTV". Nothing to see hear move on the click bait is done.

That's right. I suspect the new Apple TV will be called the Apple TV or some derivative of that name. But if Apple really wanted to the thing called iTV they could achieve that by calling it Apple iTV. Virtually everywhere, except perhaps the UK, the thing would be referred to as the iTV.

I suspect that if Apple does release an Apple TV proper, it will not come on its own but will come with additional services (content deals) and possibly even some new networking hardware. I wouldn't be surprised if they also open the thing up to apps.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

How can some little pipsqueak local company prevent the worldwide use of a known brand name by a multinational company like Apple?

How can that be fair?

O.K. The clue is in my user name - I'm from the U.K. so I have a perspective different to U.S- based subscribers however this comment and others of similar ilk just show the overwhelming chauvinism and lack of respect a few Americans have for other cultures - this is fuelled by such channels as Fox News, which don't go out of their way to present a balanced approach. Let's just pretend that for some reason Apple needed to call their new TV a 'CBS', little pipsqueak company? Not multi-national, buy them up! Shut them down! Who are they to stand in the way of the richest company in the world? Kick sand into the face of the 100 lb weakling!
The millions of British people who have grown up with the name ITV don't count after all they're not from the U.S. so stop moaning.
I love Apple and America but there are so many pumped-up hyper-nationalists there who really don't believe that all men are created equal - certainly if you're a 'furriner' you can just be steamrollered or bought - end of!
Incidentally if I was ITV I wouldn't mind sharing the name at all because of the 'halo effect' but this would be achieved by normal negotiation not by bullying.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:32pm
...for itv the British company to licence the name for worldwide use to Apple for the television. In the UK, the only place where there would be any confusion, Apple would have to to brand the Device, AppleTV or maybe AppleiTV.

It is rather arrogant to expect an established brand to change its name to suit a company in another country.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

apple could easily avoid all of this type of thing by getting away from the tired 'i'

they should go with:
Apple Douchebox (tv)
Douchepad
Macdouche pro

You seem to have a disturbing fixation on products used for feminine hygiene.
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 128
2/13/12 at 12:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_l_uk View Post

O.K. The clue is in my user name - I'm from the U.K. so I have a perspective different to U.S- based subscribers however this comment and others of similar ilk just show the overwhelming chauvinism and lack of respect a few Americans have for other cultures - this is fuelled by such channels as Fox News, which don't go out of their way to present a balanced approach. Let's just pretend that for some reason Apple needed to call their new TV a 'CBS', little pipsqueak company? Not multi-national, buy them up! Shut them down! Who are they to stand in the way of the richest company in the world? Kick sand into the face of the 100 lb weakling!
The millions of British people who have grown up with the name ITV don't count after all they're not from the U.S. so stop moaning.
I love Apple and America but there are so many pumped-up hyper-nationalists there who really don't believe that all men are created equal - certainly if you're a 'furriner' you can just be steamrollered or bought - end of!
Incidentally if I was ITV I wouldn't mind sharing the name at all because of the 'halo effect' but this would be achieved by normal negotiation not by bullying.

Thanks for the reply, but you've been trolled.
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 128
2/13/12 at 1:17pm
Apple would lose this case... it's the equivalent of calling it the NBC in the US.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 128
2/13/12 at 1:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

So call it iTV everywhere except GB, which is the only place anyone has ever heard of ITV.

ITV is not just a TV station in the UK, they are also a production company that makes and sells content worldwide, including the US.

ITV has worldwide naming rights. It's not just the UK.

Apple will have to call it something else. If they don't I hope ITV sues them for all they can get and prevents it from being sold worldwide.

Remember the 1984 advert? Big bad IBM? Seems like some people want big bad Apple.
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 128
2/13/12 at 1:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

The simple and obvious solution is for ITV to change it's name.

Its pretty obvious IBM should change its name too when apple anounces the new BM service. "Blow Me" internet dating service
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 128
2/13/12 at 2:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno View Post

Well Apple does have a track record of disregarding trademarks and dealing with the monetary consequences later. A bit of a bully. They didn't really show much respect for Apple records. Who thinks of them now when you hear "Apple"? Sitting on top the biggest pile of cash does give one a sense of power.

I remember another tech company that tried to buy their way out of unfair business practices.
Didn't turn out too well for them in the end.

All it takes is 1 judge to award iTV a statement 50 billion in damages - let Apple know that their mountain of cash isn't above the law.

It's hard to stop a juggernaut - but they can sure as hell be slowed down.
Microsoft changed their tune pretty quick when governments came looking for cash.
Remember that governments are just big business, with standing armies and real power.
As big as Apple would like to believe they are, big business governments can take their wealth at a moments notice.

Apple should play nice.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 128
2/13/12 at 2:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by maciekskontakt View Post

I think this name issue comes from casual corporate management attitude: "I name it because i like this name".

I have seen this too many times. That fact is: no you do not name it the way you like it, but you name it: a) so it makes sense to everybody and it is easy to sell; b) the name is free from legal obligations.

There are things that corporate management does not seem to get.

Names are a big deal and especially if the name chosen is a problem.

There are many examples of such issues in the past but I can only remember two.

"Nova" is the name of a car among other things. But, selling such a car in a spanish speaking country is a problem, because is translates to "it doesn't go".

Exxon is another example. Originally the company was called Exon, but graphically it was distinctive so two offset Xs were used instead. Trademarks and trade dress are rightfully important, and pays dividends (not literally in Apple's case).
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 128
2/13/12 at 2:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication View Post

Why not go with iTelevision. The name is different, but the public will still refer to it as iTV because its just easier to say or write. And since Apple is not responsible for a nickname applied by the public, they will have effectively usurped the name iTV without any legal consequences. Personally, I'm not 100% sure there will be an Apple branded television in the near future ( possible,yes - probable, maybe), and if there is, I believe they'll stick with the name Apple TV.

Also being used:

http://www.itelevision.nl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Television

They're going to call it the iCouchPotato mark my words.
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
post #111 of 128
2/13/12 at 4:11pm
  • hmm
  • Keylogger
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicthing View Post

Easy solution to this hurdle - buy them and use the name, and pick up a small selection of the content!

Look at their net worth. Apple cannot just buy everything, nor is it in their best interest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

The simple and obvious solution is for ITV to change it's name.

I'm pretty sure you're joking. In the case of a brand like ITV, they've had the name for a very long time. The entire process of rebranding would cost millions assuming that Apple wants the trademark, and this company isn't willing to fight them. It would actually be within reason for ITV to block sales of such a product simply because it would tarnish their brand recognition. It worked for Apple with Samsung.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcstarheel View Post

Also being used:

http://www.itelevision.nl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Television

They're going to call it the iCouchPotato mark my words.

I'm waiting for the day that we see some porn company trademark "fapp store". That would make me laugh.
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:40pm
I haven't been reading too much about the alleged apple TV, so i may be wrong here. Would Siri be through the TV? Shouting at my TV seems like such a hassle, it would be really cool if you could talk to your iOS device to control the TV....
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication View Post

Why not go with iTelevision.

The names iTelevision is decidedly uncool. It will be iTV or Apple TV. It's that simple. Personally as a guy interested in marketing and especially all things Apple I hope they go with iTV and find a way to work out a deal with iTV.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #114 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

Surely what really matters is the value of the ITV brand to them.

A 'Smart Television' and a 'Television Broadcaster' are confusingly similar, this isn't Computer vs Music Label in the 70s when computers beeped. I expect ITV would laugh £50m out of the door.

However I think Apple will just have the product be called Apple TV.

Brand shmand. iTV in an aged TV station with shit programming.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #115 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat View Post

there is no such thing as an itv


all these comments are a waste of time.

You sound just like the iPhone and iPad naysayers. There may well be no iTV right now, but don't blink because one's on the way.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #116 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

I'm not sure 50 mil would quite be in the ballpark. I've been through a couple corporate rebrandings, both realatively minor, and both costing millions of dollars each. And that was for a company not nearly as publically known as ITV is.

Ping didn't change their name.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #117 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

iTube

iTube of iLube

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #118 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gromit View Post

...for itv the British company to licence the name for worldwide use to Apple for the television. In the UK, the only place where there would be any confusion, Apple would have to to brand the Device, AppleTV or maybe AppleiTV.

It is rather arrogant to expect an established brand to change its name to suit a company in another country.

And we have a winner. iTV gets a cheque from Apple, Apple calls it iTV, and specifically refers to it as Apple iTV in all UK marketing. Job done. Provided iTV agrees of course, which I'm assuming they do for the sake of argument here.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #119 of 128
2/13/12 at 5:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

You sound just like the iPhone and iPad naysayers. There may well be no iTV right now, but don't blink because one's on the way.

You know, the exact same thing was said of the xMac. And the iPhone nano. And the iHome.

They all KNEW it was coming out. It never did.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #120 of 128
2/13/12 at 6:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Apple would lose this case... it's the equivalent of calling it the NBC in the US.

What case?

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › British network allegedly warns Apple again not to use 'iTV' name [u]