AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple sued for callings its mouse Mighty
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sued for callings its mouse Mighty - Page 2

post #41 of 119
5/21/08 at 10:26am
I am surprised it took this long for the Might Mouse name to become a problem.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 119
5/21/08 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

But it's ok for Apple to sue every creature on the planet who uses the word "pod".

They don't. They wouldn't. They can't. Only things that would confuse the consumer.
http://www.pods.com/
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 #43 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They don't. They wouldn't. They can't. Only things that would confuse the consumer.
http://www.pods.com/

I don't know about that... Apple strong-armed Google, Yahoo, and MSN into denying anyone using click-ads to include the word iPod. You can't even advertise your product as being compatible with an iPod, nope... it's "illegal". I personally find that to be unfair, because if I designed a product that works with an iPod, such as an arm-band, I should be able to advertise saying that this armband was designed for the iPod. Some companies seem to slip through the cracks, but very rarely.

As for the Mighty-Mouse name, how does that cause any damages to M&M. It's not like someone will end-up buying an Apple product instead! If anything it should've brought them more sales.

Ron Paul

Reply

Ron Paul

Reply
post #44 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

As for the Mighty-Mouse name, how does that cause any damages to M&M. It's not like someone will end-up buying an Apple product instead! If anything it should've brought them more sales.

Their argument is, when you search for Mighty Mouse, you can't find the M&M one, even if you know what you are looking for. (Unless you remember the company name of "Man & Machine")


I predict an out of court settlement: M&M gets a small payout from Apple and CBS, but in return both turns over the rights to their trademark application, AND starts paying a small royalty to use it in the future.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I don't know about that... Apple strong-armed Google, Yahoo, and MSN into denying anyone using click-ads to include the word iPod. You can't even advertise your product as being compatible with an iPod, nope... it's "illegal".

But iPod is a word that Apple created. It didn't exist before the ubiquitous PMP was invented. I replied to Haggar who stated that Apple sues anyone for using the common word pod.
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 #46 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If apple referred to the mouse as being mighty. For instance, "Apple's iMouse is one mighty mouse" they would be okay. I can't find a legitimate sentence for Star Wars.

PS: If anyone cares, Lucus trademarked Droid.

And DC & Marvel Comics share the trademark for the term "super-hero"


I'm still guessing that the court is going to side with CBS/Apple on this one. Like mentioned before when someone over 30 hears "Mighty Mouse" they generally think of the cartoon character. I mean hell, when I first heard of Apple using the name, I immediately thought "Oh man, if the owners of the cartoon didn't okay that, Apple's gonna get sued".
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I don't know about that... Apple strong-armed Google, Yahoo, and MSN into denying anyone using click-ads to include the word iPod. You can't even advertise your product as being compatible with an iPod, nope... it's "illegal". I personally find that to be unfair, because if I designed a product that works with an iPod, such as an arm-band, I should be able to advertise saying that this armband was designed for the iPod. .

What does that have to do with the claim you were defending (that Apple sues anyone who uses the word 'pod' in their product?

There's no doubt that 'iPod' is unique to Apple and they have a right to defend it. 'Pod' is not (at least not generically. There is some risk of confusion if you use it to describe a music playing device).

What you're describing is a perfectly legal defense of trademark although I believe you're wrong about not being able to claim that it's compatible.. I can't use the 'Made for iPod' logo without permission since that is trademarked. I can create a new case that fits and iPod and sell it as compatible without permission, as long as I properly identify the iPod trademark as belonging to Apple. There is also the complexity that some of those products also require licensing Apple's patents related to the iPod, as well.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #48 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafe View Post

Okay, one more to cross off of the list.

Next up:

- MacDonalds sues for infringement on "Big Mac" concept. "iMac" is too close.
- Any guy named "Mac" sues. (Class-action, maybe.)
- PETA sues for use of the word "Mouse", which should be reserved for furry rodents.
- Amazon or some League of Librarians sues because MacBooks aren't really "books".
- Anyone who breathes air sues because the "MacBook Air" product is confusing to them.

And so on. Until every creature on the planet has sued Apple at least once, we'll keep
hearing about these, I guess.

What's really sad,

"Fred "Jeep" Molnar received his nickname at birth. He later opened an eating establishment in Alpine called Jeep's Bar and Restaurant. In 1987, 15 years after Molnar started his business, Chrysler Corp. sued him for federal trademark infringement. Molnar told the carmakers to take a hike, which they grudgingly did. Many sources believe that the name jeep originated with the letters GP, standing for "General Purpose," which were affixed to the iconic Willys MB U.S. Army Jeep from World War II. "
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

As for the Mighty-Mouse name, how does that cause any damages to M&M. It's not like someone will end-up buying an Apple product instead! If anything it should've brought them more sales.

I don't think it would "bring" them any more sales, the opposite is more likely to be true. This is especially if all the results of a search return Apple's version because theirs is the more popular brand, even if you're looking for the other company's product, unless you knew what that company's name was.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

What's really sad,

"Fred "Jeep" Molnar received his nickname at birth. He later opened an eating establishment in Alpine called Jeep's Bar and Restaurant. In 1987, 15 years after Molnar started his business, Chrysler Corp. sued him for federal trademark infringement. Molnar told the carmakers to take a hike, which they grudgingly did. Many sources believe that the name jeep originated with the letters GP, standing for "General Purpose," which were affixed to the iconic Willys MB U.S. Army Jeep from World War II. "

From March 1936...( source )




Another shitty move by an automotive company...
Uzi Nissan had established a business under his surname Nissan while Nissan was still Datsun and also registered the domain name as such before Nissan automotive thought to enter the world wide web.

•

http://www.nissan.com/Lawsuit/The_Story.php
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 #51 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

What's really sad,

"Fred "Jeep" Molnar received his nickname at birth. He later opened an eating establishment in Alpine called Jeep's Bar and Restaurant. In 1987, 15 years after Molnar started his business, Chrysler Corp. sued him for federal trademark infringement. Molnar told the carmakers to take a hike, which they grudgingly did. Many sources believe that the name jeep originated with the letters GP, standing for "General Purpose," which were affixed to the iconic Willys MB U.S. Army Jeep from World War II. "

Yet Chrysler has a valid trademark for 'Jeep' and has for many years (they purchased it from Willys who registered it in 1943), so they have every right to enforce it. It sounds like they agreed that there was no risk of confusion, so they dropped it.

Simply having a nickname does not absolve you from trademark laws. If I called my daughter 'Michelle Pfeiffer' and she grew up to be an actress, she could not use the name 'Michelle Pfeiffer' even if I had called her that for years. His parents calling him 'jeep' is a red herring (want to bet that they called him that after hearing about the WIllys vehicle, anyway?).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #52 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:31am
1. CBS has the trademark and Apple licensed it from CBS correctly.
2. M&M does not have a trademark for "Mighty Mouse", it's still pending.
3. Apple has been selling the product for two years.

M&M doesn't have a leg to stand on, in fact CBS could likely counter sue them into oblivion for violating their trademark. i.e. they sold a product with a trademark name that didn't belong to them in the first place.

What's so good about a waterproof mouse? Even if it is used in hospitals... Mice are so cheap you just toss them and get a new one when they break.

I've been in lots of hospitals, all the computers are mostly laptops mounted in push carts and the touchpad it used most of the time.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:35am
Not ALL lawsuits are frivolous. If this other mouse existed before, and its name was legal, then Apple and/or CBS DID screw up. And it seems very likely to me that the original device's web search traffic--and therefore sales--was indeed drastically harmed. In which case, M&M was seriously harmed by Apple and CBS, through no fault of M&M's.

Maybe M&M's claims are false. Maybe the mouse never existed or didn't use the Mighty Mouse name, or maybe CBS can demonstrate that THEY had the right to use the name for for hardware all along. (That makes sense to me--anyone using the name is clearly benefitting from CBS's brand.) I can see why a court needs to make that call though.

Most importantly, someone needs to step up and force Apple to change the WORST product name ever Especially since it's the only mouse Apple makes, and comes with every Mac, so Apple doesn't need a catchy name to get people to buy it.

nagromme
Your Mac, PC or PS3 could help cure cancer!

Reply

nagromme
Your Mac, PC or PS3 could help cure cancer!

Reply
post #54 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

From March 1936...( source )




Another shitty move by an automotive company...
Uzi Nissan had established a business under his surname Nissan while Nissan was still Datsun and also registered the domain name as such before Nissan automotive thought to enter the world wide web.

•

http://www.nissan.com/Lawsuit/The_Story.php

Oh that website cracks me up. Had Nissan not sued him, he'd have nothing. I mean, aside from whining about the Big Bad Nissan suing him, his site offers nothing to the world. It almost sounds like he was one of those guys in the 90's who'd bought out things like Disney.com then got rich off of selling the domain name.


Oh and NIssan has been called Nissan since 1933. Dat-Sun was a subsidiary branch of the Nissan Heavy industries.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Simply having a nickname does not absolve you from trademark laws. If I called my daughter 'Michelle Pfeiffer' and she grew up to be an actress, she could not use the name 'Michelle Pfeiffer' even if I had called her that for years. His parents calling him 'jeep' is a red herring (want to bet that they called him that after hearing about the WIllys vehicle, anyway?).

I don't know if a person's name can be trademarked in that way. Multiple people are allowed to have the same name without having to check with the USPTO.

At any rate, the SAG will require you to use something else as a screen name, but I don't think necessarily for trademark reasons.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

From March 1936...( source )




Another shitty move by an automotive company...
Uzi Nissan had established a business under his surname Nissan while Nissan was still Datsun and also registered the domain name as such before Nissan automotive thought to enter the world wide web.
http://www.nissan.com/Lawsuit/The_Story.php

This is why you have to be VERY careful listening to only one side of the story.

NIssan Company cited first use of the trademark for automotive products in 1965 (Serial Number 76267105), so Mr. Nissan's "well documented prior use" doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Funny how Mr. Nissan fails to mention that.

Besides, he won the case. He was able to establish that Nissan Computers did not dilute Nissan Motor's trademark. Yes, it cost him money, but he chose to fight it because he apparently thought that the name was worth more than his legal expense.

The only legitimate gripe he has is that justice isn't free-at least in civil cases. I don't think that's a surprise to anyone.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #57 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stottm View Post

What's so good about a waterproof mouse? Even if it is used in hospitals... Mice are so cheap you just toss them and get a new one when they break.

I've been in lots of hospitals, all the computers are mostly laptops mounted in push carts and the touchpad it used most of the time.

It's the fact that it is sealed up so you won't get a bunch of chemicals, body fluids and such in it and you can clean it with disinfectants.
It's not the fact that it would quit working.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I don't know about that... Apple strong-armed Google, Yahoo, and MSN into denying anyone using click-ads to include the word iPod. You can't even advertise your product as being compatible with an iPod, nope... it's "illegal". I personally find that to be unfair, because if I designed a product that works with an iPod, such as an arm-band, I should be able to advertise saying that this armband was designed for the iPod. Some companies seem to slip through the cracks, but very rarely.

As for the Mighty-Mouse name, how does that cause any damages to M&M. It's not like someone will end-up buying an Apple product instead! If anything it should've brought them more sales.

Apple owns the name iPod. Therefore, anything used in conjunction with that, as a business, needs to be licensed. It's not a matter of "strongarming". It's the law. A company isn't allowed to use other's copyrights and trademarks without permission. Even in writing a book, permission is needed. You'll find that to be true everywhere.

You may think it's unfair, but it's not. .you can say that your armband is compatible with some of the most popular players. That would work too. But if you want to use Apple's trademark, you should have to get permission. You're feeding off their success.

The problem has to do with inappropriate use of the trademark which results in a negative opinion of it, or a dilution of it, which leads to the loss of the trademark entirely.

A company is almost forced into defending it because of those reasons.

If they don't defend it, it could fall into the public domain, as have so many other trademarks over the years.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 119
5/21/08 at 11:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

Their argument is, when you search for Mighty Mouse, you can't find the M&M one, even if you know what you are looking for. (Unless you remember the company name of "Man & Machine")

I cant find their company easily (if ay all) when I try M&M in Google.

So what does that prove? Not much.

Remember when Tiger Direct sued Apple for the same reasons? They lost as well.

Quote:
I predict an out of court settlement: M&M gets a small payout from Apple and CBS, but in return both turns over the rights to their trademark application, AND starts paying a small royalty to use it in the future.

Only if Apple is kind. I see no reason for them to give in on this. It's really a fight between M&M and CBS. CBS could protect Apple from needing to pay a settlement, the way IBM did with Linux customers in the SCO suit.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

Oh that website cracks me up. Had Nissan not sued him, he'd have nothing. I mean, aside from whining about the Big Bad Nissan suing him, his site offers nothing to the world. It almost sounds like he was one of those guys in the 90's who'd bought out things like Disney.com then got rich off of selling the domain name.


Oh and NIssan has been called Nissan since 1933. Dat-Sun was a subsidiary branch of the Nissan Heavy industries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

This is why you have to be VERY careful listening to only one side of the story.

NIssan Company cited first use of the trademark for automotive products in 1965 (Serial Number 76267105), so Mr. Nissan's "well documented prior use" doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Funny how Mr. Nissan fails to mention that.

Besides, he won the case. He was able to establish that Nissan Computers did not dilute Nissan Motor's trademark. Yes, it cost him money, but he chose to fight it because he apparently thought that the name was worth more than his legal expense.

The only legitimate gripe he has is that justice isn't free-at least in civil cases. I don't think that's a surprise to anyone.

I will admit that I do only know one side of the story and judged based on that. Regardless of when Nissan registered the name in the US it is his name, he did register a computer company with that name before domain names could be had, he did buy the name before Nissan and the name can not be confused with the automotive company. I still say he is in the right to the domain.

I assume the 1933 date is for Japan, not the US, and the the 1965 date is for the US. Is that correct?
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 #61 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:06pm
Why did it take THIS LONG for this company to come out of the woodwork to sue Apple over this?... This is a frivolous lawsuit.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I will admit that I do only know one side of the story and judged based on that. Regardless of when Nissan registered the name in the US it is his name, he did register a computer company with that name before domain names could be had, he did buy the name before Nissan and the name can not be confused with the automotive company. I still say he is in the right to the domain.

I assume the 1993 date is for Japan, not the US, and the the 1965 date is for the US. Is that correct?

Most cases have had people like him losing their rights to the name. I don't remember the cases, but I do remember one that involved a resturant, where the owners lost the rights. There have been many more.

The courts have ruled that merely having the name (as an individual) doesn't mean that you have the right to use it as a public vehicle over and above the rights owned for a well known brand.

The internet has confused this issue, because before, territory was considered to be of importance. So regional companies could have the same names. But now it's changed. When a company can appeal to a worldwide customer base through the simple process of putting up a cheap website. Where before, a company might not have bothered to sue, now they must.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

II see no reason for them to give in on this. It's really a fight between M&M and CBS. CBS could protect Apple from needing to pay a settlement, the way IBM did with Linux customers in the SCO suit.

That's going too far. IF M&M can show that CBS does not have the right to apply the trademark to computer peripherals AND IF M&M can show that they were first (this one should be easy), then M&M could collect from Apple. The fact that Apple had a license from CBS would possibly save them from punitive damages since they acted in good faith, but they could still lose (not likely, but possible).

In that scenario, Apple might be able to sue CBS for licensing them a trademark which they did not have a legal right to license. I suspect they could get their license fees back, but probably not much else.

The wild card is those two abandoned "Mighty Mouse" trademark applications. If they were abandoned because CBS asserted a right to the mark and the two applicants agreed (to the point of dropping their application), then it's about as close to a slam dunk as there is in trademark cases and M&M would lose big time.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #64 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

Their argument is, when you search for Mighty Mouse, you can't find the M&M one, even if you know what you are looking for. (Unless you remember the company name of "Man & Machine")

The first thing searched for was waterproof might mouse. It's the first listing. The next thing I did was remove mighty from the search term, assuming that not everyone has a brand in mind. It's the 5th listing.

But what if you are thinking of medical instead of waterproof. Medical mighty mouse is the 1st choice and medical mouse is the 3rd choice.

I don't see that being hard to find or confusing to the buyer.
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 #65 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:31pm
I've looked through the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, and found no prior instance of TM after the name "Mighty Mouse" on the Man-Machine web site. Don't know what the legal implications are there, but it sure appears that they've just started to use TM designator.

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.man-machine.com

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

http://www.man-machine.com/mightymouse.htm

If you look here -> http://www.man-machine.com/products.htm
the Mighty Mouse is the only product with TM after the name.
Is it the only product name they have trademarked?
Looks like they hurried and added the TM (for the lawsuit) but if all products are TM, they should have added it to those also.
I got nothin'.
Reply
I got nothin'.
Reply
post #66 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:35pm
But if you happen to remember that you're looking for a waterproof mouse, you can easily find them on Google. And, of course, Apple's mouse is nowhere to be found using that phrase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

Their argument is, when you search for Mighty Mouse, you can't find the M&M one, even if you know what you are looking for. (Unless you remember the company name of "Man & Machine")
I got nothin'.
Reply
I got nothin'.
Reply
post #67 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

That's going too far. IF M&M can show that CBS does not have the right to apply the trademark to computer peripherals AND IF M&M can show that they were first (this one should be easy), then M&M could collect from Apple. The fact that Apple had a license from CBS would possibly save them from punitive damages since they acted in good faith, but they could still lose (not likely, but possible).

In that scenario, Apple might be able to sue CBS for licensing them a trademark which they did not have a legal right to license. I suspect they could get their license fees back, but probably not much else.

The wild card is those two abandoned "Mighty Mouse" trademark applications. If they were abandoned because CBS asserted a right to the mark and the two applicants agreed (to the point of dropping their application), then it's about as close to a slam dunk as there is in trademark cases and M&M would lose big time.

That's not true. If Apple can show that it aquired the trademark in good faith from the company that claimed to own it for that purpose, and that did in actual fact own it for many years, then Apple might very well be absolved from payments.

The fact that M&M used this first for a mouse, when their application is still pending means, right now, that they have no more rights than does CBS, which would, usually, be the presumed owner in the case of an extension.

One question is when CBS applied, and when M&M applied, though that in itself, means little.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthraige View Post

If Apple were to lose this case, in spite, they should call it the Mitey Mouse or Mightier Mouse. People are such babies these days with branding. Why is this coming up 2 years later? This is like a stupid news story, for example, this is what I heard on the news: "Study showing bras most likely cause for breast cancer." Ok, and you're finally bringing this up 50+ years later? Mannnnnn. lol


But the first 50 years was just feel research.
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
post #69 of 119
5/21/08 at 12:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't think that statement is an accurate interpretation.

BTW: is anyone else getting HIV google ads on this forum? I don't get it, it's not relevant to me, to the discussion, the general content of the site or any site I've been to.

Don't know if its an improvement on the Mormon banner ads of the last few weeks or not.
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
post #70 of 119
5/21/08 at 1:28pm
The name "Mighty Mouse" should really be owned by the estate of Andy Kaufman. He made the best use of it.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 119
5/21/08 at 1:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe View Post

Don't know if its an improvement on the Mormon banner ads of the last few weeks or not.

I don't remember that, but now I get "Find a psychologist" along with two HIV related ads.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 119
5/21/08 at 1:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Depends on the recognizability of the name and the type of product. If I released a 'Dove' mouse, there is little chance that P&G would be able to stop me (I think they're the owners of the Dove soap trademark). There is no risk of confusion and a person hearing the word 'Dove' is not likely to immediately think of the soap.

OTOH, if I created a mouse called "Mercedes Benz", I'd be stopped.

...not so sure about that. "Mouse" (computer) is a homonym with "Mouse" (mammal). They describe two completely different things.

Take, for example, the word "Bow." Say I'm a gift-wrap company and just developed a very unique bow design and I patent it and trademark the name "super bow." Then my cousin, a hunting equipment manufacturer develops a powerful long-range hunting bow, patents the design and trademarks the name "super bow."

Is that an infringement? No, because my bow trademark pertains to gift wrap. My cousin's bow trademark pertains to hunting. Likewise, CBS's trademark pertains to an animated performance-enhancing drug-using mouse while M&M's pertains to a computer accessory.

Now if Apple had called it "Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger," you're right, that's a different story.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #73 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple owns the name iPod. Therefore, anything used in conjunction with that, as a business, needs to be licensed. It's not a matter of "strongarming". It's the law. A company isn't allowed to use other's copyrights and trademarks without permission. Even in writing a book, permission is needed. You'll find that to be true everywhere.

You may think it's unfair, but it's not. .you can say that your armband is compatible with some of the most popular players. That would work too. But if you want to use Apple's trademark, you should have to get permission. You're feeding off their success.

The problem has to do with inappropriate use of the trademark which results in a negative opinion of it, or a dilution of it, which leads to the loss of the trademark entirely.

A company is almost forced into defending it because of those reasons.

If they don't defend it, it could fall into the public domain, as have so many other trademarks over the years.

So it should be perfectly fine if someone manufactures a bra for a Honda Civic, and yet he cannot advertise on Google, Yahoo, or MSN that his product is compatible with a Honda Civic? I don't see how that might make a negative opinion out of Honda Civic.

Ron Paul

Reply

Ron Paul

Reply
post #74 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Irrelevant.

Objection overruled!
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

This is off topic. But there is normally a bunch of Canadians around here.*

Heading up to Vancouver tomorrow. Just in time to check out the new Apple Store opening on the 24th.*

If the dollar is right and I could get away from paying sales taxes (non-resident), this may become a bonanza.

*Apple Store, Pacific Centre
701 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V7Y 1G5

Providing I can get away from the wife.

If you have a DUI, Canada is not going to let you in the country.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #76 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

...not so sure about that. "Mouse" (computer) is a homonym with "Mouse" (mammal). They describe two completely different things.

While it is a homonym, I always wonder if it can be more accurately described as a polyseme as the terms are related in that a computer mouse was named because of its similar size and shape to the rodent.
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 #77 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

While it is a homonym, I always wonder if it can be more accurately described as a polyseme as the terms are related in that a computer mouse as named because of it's similar size and shape to the rodent.

And I thought I was being too technical...

In the end, it only depends on whether the court cares or not
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #78 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

Objection overruled!

I call for a mistrial!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #79 of 119
5/21/08 at 2:52pm
Apple MightyMouse has been introduced for a long time already, I wonder what's up with the sudden commotion?
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
post #80 of 119
5/21/08 at 3:10pm
I think it should have been dealt with sooner too. It's clearly infringing on a well-know trademarked name.

Anyway, I vote that it be renamed Shighty Mouse.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple sued for callings its mouse Mighty