Amazon requests judge throw out Apple's claim of false advertisement

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 50

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


     


    The phase "killer app" has existed for almost as long as personal computers themselves. Wikipedia says that its origins are with VisiCalc on the Apple II, way back in 1983.



     


    Wikipedia doesn't say anything of the kind, despite your inclusion of a link that purports to support that claim.

  • Reply 42 of 50
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,088member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Really? I can buy prescription drugs from Apple? That sounds kind of illegal to me.



    iPharmacy FTW! image


    http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ipharmacy-drug-guide-pill/id348702163?mt=8

  • Reply 43 of 50
    citycity Posts: 522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by enjourni View Post



    ...The "windows" argument doesn't make sense IMHO, because "window" is a metaphor for an on-screen element, not an obvious description of what it is. Windows on a computer look nothing like windows in the real world. You could just as easily call them "squares" or "dialogs" or anything else. Microsoft decided to call them windows.


    The word "window" was used to describe the rectangles on the screen prior to Microsoft's branding of "Windows".


     


    If I open up a store that only sells high heel shoes, I would be able to trademark "Heel Store" assuming that it is not already trademarked.

  • Reply 44 of 50
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    city wrote: »
    The word "window" was used to describe the rectangles on the screen prior to Microsoft's branding of "Windows".

    While that's true, it's not a good example. Most trademark experts agree that if Linux had continued to challenge that trademark that it would have been rejected. Microsoft was able to retain the trademark because they paid some Linux group (Lindows, IIRC) in order to settle. Up to the point of settlement, the trial wasn't going well for Microsoft - the appeals court had just handed them a major setback on an important issue.
  • Reply 45 of 50

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    Your tale about 'apps' is revisionist history. It's simply not the case that apps was a commonly used synonym for 'computer programs' until after Apple popularized its use on iOS. And, most usage before that was restricted to Apple/NeXT platforms, which used .app as the extension for application bundles. Prior to usage with iOS, while 'application' was used, 'program' was much more common, and even 'executable' was still more commonly used than 'app'.


     


    As for your second point, think one word: Windows.



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


     


    The phase "killer app" has existed for almost as long as personal computers themselves. Wikipedia says that its origins are with VisiCalc on the Apple II, way back in 1983.


     


    I don't know a great deal about US IP law but English IP law is very clear - you can't trademark generic terms related to your business. If you sell apples, you can't trademark apple. If your business is in Ohio, you can't trademark Ohia. If your name is John Smith, you can't trademark John Smith. Both of the term "app" and "store" are generic when related to selling applications from a virtual store.



     


    Actually Apple has always use the word Applications for executable on classic MacOS platform where Microsoft has always used Programs (fun fact: MacOS has always used APPL has signature for executable) .  While Visical pre-dated the MacOS, the terms Killer Apps was coined long after it.  

  • Reply 46 of 50
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    Wikipedia doesn't say anything of the kind, despite your inclusion of a link that purports to support that claim.



     


    Try this link if you're having trouble.


     


    Have you seriously not heard of the term 'killer app' before though? Maybe I imagine the typical AI reader to be older than they actually are. :) 

  • Reply 47 of 50
    In jest ;)

    Should Microsoft call their store the EXE Store, the Program Store, the Executable Store ( sounds like a Middle Ages town square killing with an ax, I guess ? )

    If anyone here can't admit that Amazon's intention was to capitalized on Apple's brand value, they are either a liar (biased) or stupid.

    Amazon's intent is clear, whether it is legal is another story.
  • Reply 48 of 50

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Spacepower View Post



    In jest image

    Should Microsoft call their store the EXE Store, the Program Store, the Executable Store ( sounds like a Middle Ages town square killing with an ax, I guess ? )

    If anyone here can't admit that Amazon's intention was to capitalized on Apple's brand value, they are either a liar (biased) or stupid.

    Amazon's intent is clear, whether it is legal is another story.


     Wow really? How many iPhone users have you heard saying they want to check out the Amazon Appstore? How many people that get told "Go find it in the App Store" say "Which one, the Amazon or the Apple App Store"?


     


    App is the new Aspirin, it became a generic name thanks to Steve Jobs awesome marketing.

  • Reply 49 of 50
     Wow really? How many iPhone users have you heard saying they want to check out the Amazon Appstore? How many people that get told "Go find it in the App Store" say "Which one, the Amazon or the Apple App Store"?

    App is the new Aspirin, it became a generic name thanks to Steve Jobs awesome marketing.

    The point of this lawsuit is that Apple doesn't want "App Store" to become generic. That's why they are trying to block Amazon from using the term. Duhhhh.

    Go back to 7th grade please Mr "just joined recently to troll an Apple fan site bc my own life is so pathetic and I lack a reasonable level of intelligence" Rodriguez. The fact you even found this website means you are not an average consumer so your hypothetical " find in the App Store, which one" is silly.
  • Reply 50 of 50


    Originally Posted by Spacepower View Post

    The point of this lawsuit is that Apple doesn't want "App Store" to become generic. That's why they are trying to block Amazon from using the term.


     


    Rather, I think their position would be the same as the many brands before them.


     


    "We're thrilled that 'App Store' is generic. You just don't have the right to call your outlet 'App Store'. 'iPod' has become a generic term. Good luck calling your PMP 'iPod'. 'iPad' has even begun to be a generic term. Good luck calling your tablet 'iPad'. We're quite certain that Band-Aid would take offense to the same; why can we not protect what we have created?"

Sign In or Register to comment.