or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple applies for 'iWatch' trademark ownership in Japan
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple applies for 'iWatch' trademark ownership in Japan

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
According to a report on Sunday, Apple recently applied for the Japanese trademark rights to the "iWatch" moniker, rekindling rumors that the company is actively pursuing the launch of a wearable computing device.

Wearable Device
Apple's U.S. patent application for a wristwatch-like wearable computing device. | Source: USPTO


As reported by Bloomberg, Apple's "iWatch" filing with the Japan Patent Office dates back to June 3, but was made public just last week. The category to which the company assigned the naming rights covers handheld computing devices and watch-like devices.

Apple's Japan application is dated two days prior to an identical filing with the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, also known as Rospatent. The associated report regarding the Russian document noted the first registered "iWatch" trademark application was made in Jamaica in December of 2012.

While not definitive evidence that Apple will indeed release a wristwatch-like device, the recent trademark filings are in line with the industry practice of protecting a possible product name before it is released. The Cupertino company has done the same for past products, such as its discreet filings for the iPad in 2006.

Although no hard evidence has "leaked" pertaining to the supposed device, some reports claim Apple has dedicated a team of about 100 employees actively working on the project.

Competing companies have already announced they will be fielding entries in the wearable computing market later this year, mostly of the devices being wrist-worn "smart watches." Apple rival Samsung said in March that it plans to release a watch-like computing device by the end of this year, its third attempt at such a product.

In February, AppleInsider was first to discover an Apple patent filing for a device fitting the description of the so-called "iWatch," which boasted a touchscreen, flexible display fitted into a bracelet-type design.
post #2 of 44

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.

Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

post #3 of 44
The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if iW@tch with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?
post #4 of 44

Assuming Apple launches an iWatch this year in addition to a cheaper iPhone and iPad 5, I think we could see many record breaking quarters and the stock rise to new heights.

post #5 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post

The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if iW@tch with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?

Take a look at who he is: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rogerkhemlani

post #6 of 44

cant wait for that.
 

post #7 of 44
Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.

Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casanova View Post

cant wait for that.
 

Did not really expect Founder & Creative Director House of VOILA  Roger Khemlani  is spamming internet like this. Must be eligible for executive position at Samsung. 1devil.gif

09 - the most interesting puzzle on AppStore

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/09/id854675423?mt=8

Reply

09 - the most interesting puzzle on AppStore

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/09/id854675423?mt=8

Reply
post #8 of 44

the intertubes are going to explode this week with iwatch babble.  I predict a Forbes article "iwatch dooms apple"  and an nyt article "iwatch does not innovate time".

Doodle Dice iPhone puzzle game: A fun, free physics-laden collection of dice games.  Greatest app made yet?  Perhaps young man... Perhaps.
Reply
Doodle Dice iPhone puzzle game: A fun, free physics-laden collection of dice games.  Greatest app made yet?  Perhaps young man... Perhaps.
Reply
post #9 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

Assuming Apple launches an iWatch this year in addition to a cheaper iPhone and iPad 5, I think we could see many record breaking quarters and the stock rise to new heights.

Don't pat each other backs just yet. Wall Street is illogical.

post #10 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugbug View Post

the intertubes are going to explode this week with iwatch babble.  I predict a Forbes article "iwatch dooms apple"  and an nyt article "iwatch does not innovate time".

I predict iWatch is not enough, or simply too late, or lacks certain functions, therefore Apple is doomed.

post #11 of 44
If Apple truly wants to show people they innovate, they'll drop the stupid "i" monikers. ENOUGH already with the iCrap names! It dates back to 1998 for cryin out loud. How about something fresh and smart for a change.

"iWatch" Can't wait. I can see it now ...

iWatch TV
iWatch football
iWatch hotel guests through a peephole in the wall ...

Brilliant
post #12 of 44
That's it! iWatch isn't a watch at all, it's the new Apple TV! We know they can't get the rights to iTV, so they're going to call it iWatch. And at the same time, it distracts SONY, Google and Samsung into thinking they need to develop a watch. Brilliant!
post #13 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattBookAir View Post

That's it! iWatch isn't a watch at all, it's the new Apple TV! We know they can't get the rights to iTV, so they're going to call it iWatch. And at the same time, it distracts SONY, Google and Samsung into thinking they need to develop a watch. Brilliant!

This ^. Would be one of the best feints ever.

Edit: Or not. According to the Bloomberg source article: "The maker of iPhones is seeking protection for the name which is categorized as being for products including a handheld computer or watch device, according to a June 3 filing with the Japan Patent Office that was made public last week." Guess we really could see this thing this fall. Maybe at an iPod event (which they haven't had for a while now due to reduced interest).
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
post #14 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

No, they wouldn't. The "@" is not an "a".

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #15 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

Since you're an an employee of the company in question, can you provide a link to the product you sell that bears this name? I could fine no reference to it on your website; of course, your website is not mobile friendly.
post #16 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Don't pat each other backs just yet. Wall Street is illogical.

The last time Apple apparently responded directly to Wall Street criticism (by offering a dividend) it sent Apple's stock on a path it has yet to recover from. My recommendation is to ignore the self-interested hue and cry of salesmen and do only what is right for Apple and Apple's customers.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #17 of 44
The use of 'i' by Apple was and continues to be a brilliant strategy by Apple. It could have gone with any letter of the alphabet, an 'a' for Apple, or 'm' for Macintosh. Were FaxSam to have copied Apple with a slew of apparatuses using 'i' after 'i' had come to be identified with Apple would be seen as desperation by even the usual trolls. 'j' or '@' or an '1wink.gif' symbol would be adjuncts anyone might have tried or try today. Regardless, the idea of a preceding lower case symbol, the 'i' in this regard, just says 'Apple' product to most people. (Apple could even have used an 'i' turned sideways, still verbally referring to it as an 'i' had it known that others would have been trying to use its identifier as a way of getting money through the courts.)

Regardless, 'i' is an identifiable asset of Apple culture and it has been a brilliant stroke. The problem is that others just lack the creative spirit that is 'Apple' nature.

I would suggest the great facsimilating machine patent a 'turd'-like symbol. It would be appropriate and at least be immediately identifiable with FacsimileSam and its equal brilliant method of thinking from the water closet.

Grammar fixed.
Edited by mhikl - 7/1/13 at 8:06am

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #18 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl View Post

The use of 'i' by Apple was and continues to be a brilliant strategy by Apple. 

Regardless, 'i' is an identifiable asset of Apple culture and it has been a brilliant stroke. The problem is that others just lack the creative spirit that is 'Apple' nature.
 

I commend Apple for simplicity and consistency. But "brilliant" should be set at a much higher bar.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post

The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if iW@tch with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?
 
It doesn't matter. Apple has a history for worrying about copyright/trademark infringement after the fact. The only time they didn't get their way was when they tried to use iTV.
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.
Did you seek permission from Apple in 2000 before copying their iNaming scheme?
post #20 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.
Because everyone will be so confused. When I see a name that starts with a lowercase "i", I instantly think of the House of Voila.
post #21 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I commend Apple for simplicity and consistency. But "brilliant" should be set at a much higher bar.

stelligent, I agree that the use of 'brilliant' doesn't appear to fit well within the sphere of common advertising; however, there have been many choices taken in the industry that have come to symbolize a company in the eye of the consumer, and for which criticism has been an issue. 'Think Different' is one that has raised argument on grammatical terms, yet came to symbolize a well known company.

The use of adjectives such as 'brilliant' for hyperbole as a rhetorical device is part of English language humour. Figurative language is usually introduced in middle school, but its practice depends upon the skill and interest of the language teacher and the student's interest in reading. Such skills not learned and practiced early enough in life may be confused when come upon as a mature adult.

On the other hand, I may not have phrased my use of the word well; 1smile.gif though I do believe its use has worked out splendidly, if not brilliantly, for our favourite fruit company.

As originally posted was not the intended corrected version. iPad typing, yuck.
Edited by mhikl - 7/1/13 at 8:19am

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #22 of 44

I would love to see Apple clothesline all of these rumors if "iWatch" is actually the TV set.

post #23 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl View Post


stelligent, I agree that the use of 'brilliant' doesn't appear to fit well within the sphere of common advertising; however, there have been many choices taken in the industry that have come to symbolize a company in the eye of the consumer, and for which criticism has been an issue. 'Think Different' is one that has raised argument on grammatical terms, yet came to symbolize a well known company.

The use of adjectives such as 'brilliant' for hyperbole as a rhetorical device is part of English language humour. Figurative language is usually introduced in middle school, but its practice depends upon the skill and interest of the language teacher and the student's interest in reading. Such skills not learned and practiced early enough in life may be confused when come upon as a mature adult.

On the other hand, I may not have phrased my use of the word well; 1smile.gif though I do believe its use has worked out splendidly, if not brilliantly, for our favourite fruit company.

As originally posted was not the intended corrected version. iPad typing, yuck.

If you are British, I sort of get your point except that the Queen's use of "brilliant" is euphemistic rather than hyperbolic. Anyhow, my remark didn't deserve your brilliant treatise in response ;-)

post #24 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post

The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if iW@tch with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?

Trademark not patent and yes sometimes it can be that specific. Just as it is can specific to a market.
post #25 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post


Did not really expect Founder & Creative Director House of VOILA  
Roger Khemlani

 is spamming internet like this. Must be eligible for executive position at Samsung. 
1devil.gif

As if his spamming means anything. He should, and hopefully has, filed his objection with the deciding party and if they agree they won't grant Apple's application. If they disagree then he has to get over it.
post #26 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl View Post

The use of 'i' by Apple was and continues to be a brilliant strategy by Apple. It could have gone with any letter of the alphabet, an 'a' for Apple, or 'm' for Macintosh. Were FaxSam to have copied Apple with a slew of apparatuses using 'i' after 'i' had come to be identified with Apple would be seen as desperation by even the usual trolls. 'j' or '@' or an '1wink.gif' symbol would be adjuncts anyone might have tried or try today. Regardless, the idea of a preceding lower case symbol, the 'i' in this regard, just says 'Apple' product to most people. (Apple could even have used an 'i' turned sideways, still verbally referring to it as an 'i' had it known that others would have been trying to use its identifier as a way of getting money through the courts.)

Regardless, 'i' is an identifiable asset of Apple culture and it has been a brilliant stroke. The problem is that others just lack the creative spirit that is 'Apple' nature.

I would suggest the great facsimilating machine patent a 'turd'-like symbol. It would be appropriate and at least be immediately identifiable with FacsimileSam and its equal brilliant method of thinking from the water closet.

Grammar fixed.

The first Apple product to use the "i" suffix was the iMac which I believe Steve said meant Internet Macintosh. But still, a great marketing idea, because as you say here, any product that has that lower-case "i" in its name is automatically thought of as an Apple related product even if it isn't. 

post #27 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

 

 

Did not really expect Founder & Creative Director House of VOILA  Roger Khemlani  is spamming internet like this. Must be eligible for executive position at Samsung. 1devil.gif

Those are quite possibly the ugliest watches I've ever seen.

 

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #28 of 44
Seems to me Apple should rush out and simultaneously apply for patents everywhere on any new product well ahead of the leaks ... Just a suggestion there Tim 1biggrin.gif
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #29 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

If you are British, I sort of get your point except that the Queen's use of "brilliant" is euphemistic rather than hyperbolic. Anyhow, my remark didn't deserve your brilliant treatise in response ;-)

stelligent, neither British nor American am I; though either I would proudly call myself if that dang ice age some are predicting in the next twenty years buries my nation in miles, er, kilometres of ice.

I suspect we both like to yap and write, to the chagrin of many. Sadly my next reincarnation predicts me coming back a member of the canine species. If I have any choice in the matter, it will be as a Corgi, (& not because the Queen has them, mine is a rescue little 'b')* as they are expressively talkative and clever at food acquisition, legally or otherwise.

* the Q is on her last Corgis. No one in her line likes the damned things and she knows that when the mirror is pressed to her dead lips, Charles will already be out the door, herding the dogs down the palace stairs, rifle in hand, a disparate grin on his face. Anne will be heard, muttering under breath, "Go for it boy". 1smoking.gif

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #30 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

Never heard of it. Just like I have never heard of Proview.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

Did you seek permission from Apple in 2000 before copying their iNaming scheme?

You've laid a trap
And now it's sprung
Call up your lawyer
It has begun.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #32 of 44

Everyone assumes iWatch is an actual wrist watch. What if iWatch is a TV initiative? Or a content delivery service? We already know there are issues with using the iTV name so it isn't out the realm of possibility.

 

Cook said wearable computing was an area of interest for "exploration" but he also said young people don't wear watches and it would take something special to get them to wear something on their body.

 

I am not saying that it isn't a watch..... but it could be a red herring. Just look at all the Android OEMs and Google falling all over themselves to launch me too products even before Apple ships just so they look less like copycats. What a coupe it would be to have them all building crappy watches just to bring out some other product called iWatch that has nothing to do with a watch!!!

cut the tech garbage and check me out at

www.appletechspot.com

Reply

cut the tech garbage and check me out at

www.appletechspot.com

Reply
post #33 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleTechSpot View Post

Cook said wearable computing was an area of interest for "exploration" but he also said young people don't wear watches and it would take something special to get them to wear something on their body.

 

Ha.  For the young:  Bluetooth iWatch body piercings :)

 

Or perhaps something like the  wearable jewelry phone concept that IBM showed many years ago:

 

post #34 of 44
Just had a thought. You recall that Apple settled a trademark dispute with Swiss National Railways over the design of the Clock app. It settled it quickly, quietly, and amicably. What if this came up as a result of dealings with something else Switzerland is famous for: watches. Maybe Apple was working with the likes of Piaget, Patek Phillipe, or Rolex to co-brand a really fine timepiece that includes computer functions as well as the usual high-end bling factor?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #35 of 44

I still see this as a niche product.  I'm hoping I'm wrong.  I might buy one instead of an iPod Nano but I don't see more need than that for this rumored device.

 

If it is a full blown iOS device unlike the AppleTV and iPod Nano, then there could be gaming potential in conjunction with the AppleTV as a Nintedo style controller. Look  to Apple cutting out Nike+ with this type of device.  I'd imagine that Apple would fully support NFC with this too.

 

Anyway, I'm looking for something more than an iPod in functionality that justifies and new product line. 

post #36 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleTechSpot View Post

Everyone assumes iWatch is an actual wrist watch. What if iWatch is a TV initiative? Or a content delivery service? We already know there are issues with using the iTV name so it isn't out the realm of possibility.

 

Cook said wearable computing was an area of interest for "exploration" but he also said young people don't wear watches and it would take something special to get them to wear something on their body.

 

I am not saying that it isn't a watch..... but it could be a red herring. Just look at all the Android OEMs and Google falling all over themselves to launch me too products even before Apple ships just so they look less like copycats. What a coupe it would be to have them all building crappy watches just to bring out some other product called iWatch that has nothing to do with a watch!!!

 

Wow, you're absolutely right!  I never thought of that.  I would believe what you're saying over Apple coming out with a watch form factor.  After seeing Google Glass demoed I finally got the use of that product and would see Apple making a watch as a step back unless it were a successor to the iPod line. 

post #37 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & iw@ch as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.
Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

No, they wouldn't. The "@" is not an "a".

Trademark law is not that simplistic.
The same mark can be held by different companies if it's totally different markets, e.g. Apple might have a hard time preventing P&G from offering new "female hygiene" products called Ipad,
But at the same time Samsung couldn't just offer a tablet called 1Pad because even though it would be pronounced One Pad it looks to the consumer potentially confusingly similar to iPad.
Looks, pronunciation, product market overlap, etc. all play a role. And something that's a generic term nobody can protect.
post #38 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

The trademark iw@ch (phonetically IWATCH) ...

 

Shouldn't that phonetically be I-wat-the-rate-of-ch?

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


Never heard of it. Just like I have never heard of Proview.

 

 

Funnily enough, my dad bought a nameless brand home theatre system for a throw-away price that he used for maybe 2 months before moving on to better stuff. Recently I found it in his house and that was a 'Proview' brand home theatre system!

post #39 of 44

Nothing here to do with any patent law, its what trademark laws are based upon; as both marks are (phonetically) identical there is a clear chance of confusion which constitutes an infringement of a trademark.

post #40 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani View Post

Nothing here to do with any patent law, its what trademark laws are based upon; as both marks are (phonetically) identical there is a clear chance of confusion which constitutes an infringement of a trademark.

You know as a well as I do that there's more to it than that, including whether you've successfully maintained your mark. A quick search yielded no such product that is currently made, however.

You don't need to astro turf here. The courts will likely decide if you file an objection.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple applies for 'iWatch' trademark ownership in Japan