Judge orders Apple, Amazon to talk settlement in 'app store' trademark fight

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple and Amazon will hold settlement negotiations over use of the term "app store," after a San Francisco judge ordered the talks.

Appstore


Attorneys for both companies will hold talks on March 21, according to Bloomberg, in Apple's trademark infringement suit. The court already sided with Amazon earlier this month when it dismissed Apple's claims of false advertising.

Although Apple's false advertising assertion was tossed out, the rest of the trademark dispute remains, and will head to a trial in August if the two sides cannot work out a deal.

Apple first filed suit against Amazon in 2011, asserting that Amazon has violated the "App Store" trademark for which Apple has applied. Other major technology companies, such as Microsoft, have sought to block Apple's application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Amazon countered last September by arguing that the "app store" moniker has become generic, allowing it to use the name "Amazon Appstore" for its own digital download service. Apple has used the name App Store since its iOS storefront opened in 2008.

The App Store has been crucial to the success of the iPhone and iPad, with hundreds of thousands of applications now available on Apple's mobile devices. The company announced earlier this month that App Store downloads have exceeded 40 billion, and almost half of those occurred in 2012 alone.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 57
    What would they really have to talk about?

    Apple: "Don't call it the Appstore."

    Amazon: "You know what the judge ruled earlier. Go fly a kite."

    End of story. Move on, Apple.....
  • Reply 2 of 57
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    Here's one trademark case Apple should have definitely won. The judge should have ordered Amz to change the name of the store to App "something". App Market. App Shop. App World (RIM). Play (Goog), etc. it would have been an easy change and should have been forced.

    I saw a video a couple of years ago where the Salesforce CEO discussed when he gave the then few years old - at the time - trademark "App Store" to Apple. Amazon not losing this case is a disgrace to trademark law IMO. My soon to be granted trademark for "Tea" doesn't feel as strong as I had imagined.
  • Reply 3 of 57
    This is one where users don't care.

    When you're on a Kindle you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Apple one.

    Where you're on an iPad you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Amazon one.

    A food store is where I buy food, an app store is where I buy apps.

    Waste of money that could be being focused on R&D and coming up with something good for the next gen phones.
  • Reply 4 of 57
    ifij775ifij775 Posts: 470member


    Apple should get it's day in court. I also don't see why litigating these disputes take so long. Our court system is a mess.

  • Reply 5 of 57


    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

    Here's one trademark case Apple should have definitely won. The judge should have ordered Amz to change the name of the store to App "something". App Market. App Shop. App World (RIM). Play (Goog), etc. it would have been an easy change and should have been forced.



    I saw a video a couple of years ago where the Salesforce CEO discussed when he gave the then few years old - at the time - trademark "App Store" to Apple. Amazon not losing this case is a disgrace to trademark law IMO. My soon to be granted trademark for "Tea" doesn't feel as strong as I had imagined.


     


    But you "lose the trademark" if you "talk about it generically", which "Apple's executives did".






    Originally Posted by realwarder View Post

    This is one where users don't care.


     



    Completely wrong.






    When you're on a Kindle you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Apple one.

    Where you're on an iPad you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Amazon one.





    Then why do I always get people asking me why "my stuff from iTunes doesn't work on here"? Maybe because people confuse them.





    A food store is where I buy food, an app store is where I buy apps.


     


    Here's some Iams. Enjoy. What's that? Oh, I went to the food store. Well, it was called "Dog FoodStore". What do you mean that's different from "Human FoodStore"?! They both say "FoodStore!" They MUST be the same! I wouldn't be able to buy from there if it didn't work here!






    Waste of money that could be being focused on R&D and coming up with something good for the next gen phones.



     


    I don't really know how companies work beyond knowing that this isn't at all how companies work.

  • Reply 6 of 57
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,767member
    Just because a trademark has become generic doesn't mean it shouldn't be able to be enforced. Kleenex and Crescent wrenches are two trademarked products that come to mind. Searching for Crescent wrenches on google brings up "adjustable" wrenches as well as actual Crescent wrenches. If you're not familiar with Crescent wrenches, they came out a long time ago. Other companies started copying the functionality of these wrenches and started calling them crescent wrenches. The courts actually followed the law and forced the other companies to change the name of their wrenches even though most people (in this field) still call any adjustable wrench a crescent wrench. This is the same thing Amazon and the others are trying to do: copy Apple and attract customers to their version of the Apple App Store confusing the customer as much as they can. I think it's time the judges go back to school.
  • Reply 7 of 57


    ... and Facebook is suing everyone with "face"-something in their name... how is that any different? The word "face" is quite generic and ubiquitous.

  • Reply 8 of 57
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 9 of 57
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 10 of 57
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    Not distinct, because Amz is well aware people will refer to it as App Store, which should be taken into account in this court case. If Apple called their OS Windows for Mac, do you think they'd get away with it. I reiterate Amz should have been forced to change it to stop them using both App Store and Appstore in its store name, anywhere.
  • Reply 11 of 57

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by realwarder View Post



    This is one where users don't care.



    When you're on a Kindle you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Apple one.



    Where you're on an iPad you're not going to confuse an App Store with an Amazon one.



    A food store is where I buy food, an app store is where I buy apps.



    Waste of money that could be being focused on R&D and coming up with something good for the next gen phones.


     


    Yes, because we all know the legal team pulls funds from R&D in order to operate </s>

  • Reply 12 of 57

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Serious question:  Who is "people", how many are they, and why are they asking you for Android help?


     


    My Windows apps don't run on my Mac, but I don't ask random people to fix that for me, or expect that they could anyway.



    YOU may not, but having worked at Geek Squad before, I can assure you there are more than enough people that don't understand this concept.


     


    "I already bought Office, why do I need to buy it again?", they ask, as I run to the back to blow my brains out! Thank God I'm not there anymore

  • Reply 13 of 57


    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

    Serious question:  Who is "people", how many are they, and why are they asking you for Android help?


     


    My Windows apps don't run on my Mac, but I don't ask random people to fix that for me, or expect that they could anyway.





    People around my city: I run a small technology service/support shop. I'd say computer, but more and more of even these people around here are getting tablets and such. Apple's not a large enough presence around here (yet) to be so exclusive.

  • Reply 14 of 57
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 15 of 57
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,321member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post



    Here's one trademark case Apple should have definitely won. The judge should have ordered Amz to change the name of the store to App "something". App Market. App Shop. App World (RIM). Play (Goog), etc. it would have been an easy change and should have been forced.



    I saw a video a couple of years ago where the Salesforce CEO discussed when he gave the then few years old - at the time - trademark "App Store" to Apple. Amazon not losing this case is a disgrace to trademark law IMO. My soon to be granted trademark for "Tea" doesn't feel as strong as I had imagined.


    How about a little trademark levity. image   Gotta admire her attempt to protect her product.


     


    "Since 1979, Ms. Fox has been selling rooster-shaped chocolate lollypops. These sell well in my birthplace of Columbia South Carolina - home of the Gamecocks. Naturally, Fox calls her lollypops "Cock Suckers."


    http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2012/12/something-can-be-both-funny-and-improperly-scandalous-even-a-federal-circuit-opinion.html


     


    Why on earth shouldn't this one be approved too!


    /s

  • Reply 16 of 57
    How about these "Judges" do their freakin job they were appointed to do.
  • Reply 17 of 57


    Who's responsibility it is to make sure you put unleaded in your car instead of diesel?


     


    If a customer gets Amazon and Apple confused, that's their fault.


    If a customer purchases an app from the wrong store, how much money are they out, 99¢? BFD! And are they going to keep buying fron the wrong store?


    Apple must feel their customers are stupid.

  • Reply 18 of 57
    Coke is as generic as you can get for cola. So there's no problem with me using Coke on my soda cans, is there?

    It must really bother the haters who thought this case was over because the false advertising aspect was ruled in Anazons favor only to find out that was by far the weakest part of the case.

    It'll be hilarious when Apple wins this and the usual excuses of Apple bribing judges come out.

    Google, Blackberry and Windows were all able to come up with unique names for their App stores. Amazon takes App Store and removes the space and thinks its OK? That's all they can come up with? How about:

    Amazon Apps
    Apps by Amazon
    Kindle Apps

    Does anyone over there have the slightest bit of creativity?
  • Reply 19 of 57
    Everything now is called app, download this app, look at that app, get that app... come on. I am always with Apple but Apple should have common sense and let this dispute end. App Store is a common name in today's technology.
  • Reply 20 of 57


    Originally Posted by maclancer View Post

    Everything now is called app, download this app, look at that app, get that app... come on.


     


    Nothing you have said is evidence that they should no longer have the trademark.






    App Store is a common name in today's technology.



     


    So is Kleenex. Why can't they have the trademark? Why should they be punished, allowing their brand and their system to have its reputation destroyed, simply because they were successful? That's not how it works.

Sign In or Register to comment.