Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
They're breaking apart from the pack, creating their own ecosystem. This is called differentiation. And it's a rare very, very valuable commodity these days, but one that exists in abundance at Apple.
When you've got over $100 billion in cash, you have the luxury of charting your own destiny, and (evidently) everyone else's. What they couldn't do in the 90s (and did the wrong way), they're doing now. And it's paying off.
All Apple needs to keep doing is one thing: bringing great products to market that delight consumers. They've been doing that for at least over a decade, with no end in sight.
What some people seem to be forgetting is that with trademarks, you are required to aggressively defend them, so Apple is essentially required to sue anyone who might be infringing their trademark, or risk losing it.
But, Amazon is clearly infringing the "APP STORE" trademark by using "Appstore" as part of the name of their store. The App Store (Apple's) is frequently referred to as the Apple App Store, and Amazon Appstore sounds like exactly the same thing, just from Amazon instead of Apple. Removing a space from the trademark doesn't make it magically not confusing. And Amazon wants it to be confusing so everyone thinks it's just like Apple's App Store. And it's not a generic term at all, it only seems that way because The App Store seems like it's always been there and that we've always had 'apps', but that's not an accurate representation of history.
If we took it the other way around, and they were inserting a space, it would be just the same. If Dunkin Donuts opened a set of stores called Dunkin Donuts Star Bucks, does anyone not think that there would be confusion? Does anyone not think the public would think it was some sort of joint venture between Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks? Does anyone not think that Starbucks would have it's lawyers filing suit before the end of the day?
Of course not. It's still being processed. It takes a few years, in case you didn't know.
---
(I was right in #5 above about more jumping in soon.....)
Not to mention Amazon has filed several briefs slowing the process, even though they know the term, Appstore, was not on their radar until Apple made it successful.
Perfect example of how trademarks and patents have gotten out of control. There is nothing on an iPad that wasn't on star trek 20 years ago. App store is too generic. Why not trademark "Department Store" or even the Apple "Retail Store?"
How about Amazon or Windows?
I might set up a bookstore that sells books about South American rivers, I'll call it the Amazon bookstore.
Microsoft does not sell windows and Amazon is not about the river. Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! So yes it's generic and should not be trademark-ed.
Microsoft does not sell windows and Amazon is not about the river. Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! So yes it's generic and should not be trademark-ed.
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
That said, it's possible for App Store to become app store thus being genericized which is why Apple needs to defend it now instead of later before that happens. I certainly use the lower-case in forums to refer to the general online app stores of all these environments. This is why Apple is doing it. Even if they lose against Amazon's Appstore (which I think they will) it doesn't mean that all uses of the combined terms of app+store are free to use an i think it will help give Apple's formulation a legal foundation for being the only App Store, as stated.
I wonder if I could apply to register the name "Television" and sue everyone while my Trademark application spends the next few years shuffling from one desk to another.
What a great idea - sue companies violating a trademark you don't own. Whatever will they think of next. Ingenious.
Microsoft does not sell windows and Amazon is not about the river. Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! So yes it's generic and should not be trademark-ed.
I'd say that it is worse than generic, and that it is merely descriptive, like "table".
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
That said, it's possible for App Store to become app store thus being genericized which is why Apple needs to defend it now instead of later before that happens. I certainly use the lower-case in forums to refer to the general online app stores of all these environments. This is why Apple is doing it. Even if they lose against Amazon's Appstore (which I think they will) it doesn't mean that all uses of the combined terms of app+store are free to use an i think it will help give Apple's formulation a legal foundation for being the only App Store, as stated.
what does taco bell mean? taco with a bell or what?
App Store is an app store. see there? nothing changed in the meaning. Trademarking "App Store" is like trademarking "Operating System" for an operating system.
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
If you want to hold that arguement, then you'll need to defend "Taco Restaurant" as a valid, non descriptive, and non-generic trademark.
If you want to hold that arguement, then you'll need to defend "Taco Restaurant" as a valid, non descriptive, and non-generic trademark.
Does Taco Restaurant exist? I've never heard of it. I think you're just making shit up. Taco Bell does exist and based on the previous comment it shouldn't be allowed to use that name because both Taco and Bell are common words.
Does Taco Restaurant exist? I've never heard of it. I think you're just making shit up. Taco Bell does exist and based on the previous comment it shouldn't be allowed to use that name because both Taco and Bell are common words.
Nobody in the thread said that trademarks need to be coined words, Maybe that explains your misunderstanding.
"Taco Bell" is fanciful. It does not describe the establishment literally.
App Store, on the other hand, is merely descriptive, much like Taco Restaurant.
Nobody is complaining that the two words, apart from each other, have independent meanings. Is that what you thought "generic" means? That the mark is composed of common words?
Learn the basics, then come back to the grown-ups table.
Nobody in the thread said that trademarks need to be coined words, Maybe that explains your misunderstanding.
"Taco Bell" is fanciful. It does not describe the establishment literally.
App Store, on the other hand, is merely descriptive, much like Taco Restaurant.
Nobody is complaining that the two words, apart from each other, have independent meanings. Is that what you thought "generic" means? That the mark is composed of common words?
Learn the basics, then come back to the grown-ups table.
"Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! "
PS: There are plenty of examples of incorporated business that use store and other such terms, like shop and shoppe, in the name and would win in court you tried to copy their unique name made of common words.
I'm surprised they don't pretend it's a shortened version of the Apple store, but i suppose that would be the App'store.
I don't tink that would make a difference in the trademark case. If it was a case of someone else using App Store before Apple and then Apple wanting ownership of it then it would but that isn't the case and I think Apple would lose that argument in court.
"Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! "
PS: There are plenty of examples of incorporated business that use store and other such terms, like shop and shoppe, in the name and would win in court you tried to copy their unique name made of common words.
Maybe that's not a good explanation from me why "app store" is generic.
Let me put it this way. Before Apple launched its "App Store", if someone says "app store" to you what would you imagine? if it's a store that sells app then I would say the term is generic. Now compare it to "taco bell".
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell
Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
They're breaking apart from the pack, creating their own ecosystem. This is called differentiation. And it's a rare very, very valuable commodity these days, but one that exists in abundance at Apple.
When you've got over $100 billion in cash, you have the luxury of charting your own destiny, and (evidently) everyone else's. What they couldn't do in the 90s (and did the wrong way), they're doing now. And it's paying off.
All Apple needs to keep doing is one thing: bringing great products to market that delight consumers. They've been doing that for at least over a decade, with no end in sight.
What some people seem to be forgetting is that with trademarks, you are required to aggressively defend them, so Apple is essentially required to sue anyone who might be infringing their trademark, or risk losing it.
But, Amazon is clearly infringing the "APP STORE" trademark by using "Appstore" as part of the name of their store. The App Store (Apple's) is frequently referred to as the Apple App Store, and Amazon Appstore sounds like exactly the same thing, just from Amazon instead of Apple. Removing a space from the trademark doesn't make it magically not confusing. And Amazon wants it to be confusing so everyone thinks it's just like Apple's App Store. And it's not a generic term at all, it only seems that way because The App Store seems like it's always been there and that we've always had 'apps', but that's not an accurate representation of history.
If we took it the other way around, and they were inserting a space, it would be just the same. If Dunkin Donuts opened a set of stores called Dunkin Donuts Star Bucks, does anyone not think that there would be confusion? Does anyone not think the public would think it was some sort of joint venture between Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks? Does anyone not think that Starbucks would have it's lawyers filing suit before the end of the day?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Of course not. It's still being processed. It takes a few years, in case you didn't know.
---
(I was right in #5 above about more jumping in soon.....)
Not to mention Amazon has filed several briefs slowing the process, even though they know the term, Appstore, was not on their radar until Apple made it successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell
Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
Does that include the bridge between you and this site?
See ya.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfkindc
Perfect example of how trademarks and patents have gotten out of control. There is nothing on an iPad that wasn't on star trek 20 years ago. App store is too generic. Why not trademark "Department Store" or even the Apple "Retail Store?"
How about Amazon or Windows?
I might set up a bookstore that sells books about South American rivers, I'll call it the Amazon bookstore.
Obviously that shouldn't be a problem.
I have to weigh in by saying that "app store" seems pretty generic to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
How about Amazon or Windows?
Microsoft does not sell windows and Amazon is not about the river. Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! So yes it's generic and should not be trademark-ed.
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
That said, it's possible for App Store to become app store thus being genericized which is why Apple needs to defend it now instead of later before that happens. I certainly use the lower-case in forums to refer to the general online app stores of all these environments. This is why Apple is doing it. Even if they lose against Amazon's Appstore (which I think they will) it doesn't mean that all uses of the combined terms of app+store are free to use an i think it will help give Apple's formulation a legal foundation for being the only App Store, as stated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe
Apple doesn't even OWN the trademark. Yet.
I wonder if I could apply to register the name "Television" and sue everyone while my Trademark application spends the next few years shuffling from one desk to another.
What a great idea - sue companies violating a trademark you don't own. Whatever will they think of next. Ingenious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iang1234
Microsoft does not sell windows and Amazon is not about the river. Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! So yes it's generic and should not be trademark-ed.
I'd say that it is worse than generic, and that it is merely descriptive, like "table".
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
That said, it's possible for App Store to become app store thus being genericized which is why Apple needs to defend it now instead of later before that happens. I certainly use the lower-case in forums to refer to the general online app stores of all these environments. This is why Apple is doing it. Even if they lose against Amazon's Appstore (which I think they will) it doesn't mean that all uses of the combined terms of app+store are free to use an i think it will help give Apple's formulation a legal foundation for being the only App Store, as stated.
what does taco bell mean? taco with a bell or what?
App Store is an app store. see there? nothing changed in the meaning. Trademarking "App Store" is like trademarking "Operating System" for an operating system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
You've misrepresented the issue by saying that App AND Store are, combined, a single generic term. That's a logically fallacy. Taking multiple generic terms can made a unique term. If you want to hold that argument then you'll need to defend, say, the name Taco Bell.
If you want to hold that arguement, then you'll need to defend "Taco Restaurant" as a valid, non descriptive, and non-generic trademark.
Does Taco Restaurant exist? I've never heard of it. I think you're just making shit up. Taco Bell does exist and based on the previous comment it shouldn't be allowed to use that name because both Taco and Bell are common words.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I think you're just making shit up.
Gotta say, though, the man knows how to pick his emoji properly. Perfect one, agreed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Does Taco Restaurant exist? I've never heard of it. I think you're just making shit up. Taco Bell does exist and based on the previous comment it shouldn't be allowed to use that name because both Taco and Bell are common words.
Nobody in the thread said that trademarks need to be coined words, Maybe that explains your misunderstanding.
"Taco Bell" is fanciful. It does not describe the establishment literally.
App Store, on the other hand, is merely descriptive, much like Taco Restaurant.
Nobody is complaining that the two words, apart from each other, have independent meanings. Is that what you thought "generic" means? That the mark is composed of common words?
Learn the basics, then come back to the grown-ups table.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Gotta say, though, the man knows how to pick his emoji properly. Perfect one, agreed?
This explains everything:
"Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! "
PS: There are plenty of examples of incorporated business that use store and other such terms, like shop and shoppe, in the name and would win in court you tried to copy their unique name made of common words.
I'm surprised they don't pretend it's a shortened version of the Apple store, but i suppose that would be the App'store.
I don't tink that would make a difference in the trademark case. If it was a case of someone else using App Store before Apple and then Apple wanting ownership of it then it would but that isn't the case and I think Apple would lose that argument in court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
"Guess what "app store" is about? App and store! "
PS: There are plenty of examples of incorporated business that use store and other such terms, like shop and shoppe, in the name and would win in court you tried to copy their unique name made of common words.
Maybe that's not a good explanation from me why "app store" is generic.
Let me put it this way. Before Apple launched its "App Store", if someone says "app store" to you what would you imagine? if it's a store that sells app then I would say the term is generic. Now compare it to "taco bell".