Apple loses iPhone naming rights in Brazil, report says

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Brazil's National Industrial Property Institute (INPI) on Monday reportedly rejected an Apple claim for exclusive "iphone" naming rights in the country, noting that the mark was filed for by a local electronics company in 2000.

Gradiente iphone
Gradiente's Android-based iphone. | Source: Gradiente


Citing people familiar with the matter, local publication Folha de S.Paulo reported on Tuesday that the INPI ruled Brazilian electronics maker IGB, which was awarded rights to "iphone" under the Gradiente brand in 2008 after filing for it in 2000, will retain exclusive rights to the trademark. There has yet to be official word regarding the decision, however, as technical problems with INPI's Intellectual Property Magazine have pushed back a scheduled announcement to Feb. 13.

In an interview with Bloomberg, IGB Chairman Eugenio Emilio Staub said Apple has not contacted the company.

?We?re open to a dialogue for anything, anytime,? Staub said. ?We?re not radicals.?

INPI Spokesman Marcelo Chimento confirmed a ruling had been made, but declined to share details regarding the decision.

A follow-up report from Reuters corroborates the Brazilian publication's claims, adding that IGB Electronica SA, a company created after a restructuring of Gradiente, launched its own "iphone" smartphone in December. The device runs Google's Android operating system and retails for 599 reais, or about $302.

Apple sought exclusive rights to the "iPhone" moniker in 2006, eight months before the company launched the first iteration of the popular handset in 2007.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    Apple gets a Brazilian!
  • Reply 2 of 33
    whodawhoda Posts: 29member
    Apple should call it the iSuckitBrazil
  • Reply 3 of 33
    %u201CWe%u2019re open to a dialogue for anything, anytime,%u201D = $$$$$$$
  • Reply 4 of 33
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,675member
    Didn't Apple just set up a manufacturing facility in Brazil? How many Apple iPhones are sold in Brazil and South America (not counting the Contras? Time for Apple to renegotiate that contract.
  • Reply 5 of 33
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,402member
    rob53 wrote: »
    Didn't Apple just set up a manufacturing facility in Brazil? How many Apple iPhones are sold in Brazil and South America (not counting the Contras? Time for Apple to renegotiate that contract.

    My exact thought when I read this. I'd say that should amount to leverage but apparently not!
  • Reply 6 of 33
    Very interesting. Apple's team will be forced to shake off the "i" standard and invent a strong, marketable identity for the SA phone. Could actually open things up a bit if they look at it positively.
  • Reply 7 of 33
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member


    Apple will pay what it takes to get the name.


     


    Apple started the "i" thing in 1998 with the iMac. Afterwards, a couple other companies had the foresight (or luck!) to grab similar names that Apple ended up wanting as well. Such is life. Write the check!

  • Reply 8 of 33
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,608member
    Story is a little short on information; what did Gradient produce as an iphone prior to Apple's trademark request in 2006 up until the release of an android handset in 2011?
  • Reply 9 of 33

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mjrkong View Post



    Could actually open things up a bit .....


    What does that mean?

  • Reply 10 of 33
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,672member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    Apple will pay what it takes to get the name.



    Yes,


     


    and considering they are not 'radicals', they'll obviously be very reasonable. (I  mean we know what them damn radicals are like


     


    /s

  • Reply 11 of 33
    citycity Posts: 522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    Apple will pay what it takes to get the name.


     


    Apple started the "i" thing in 1998 with the iMac. Afterwards, a couple other companies had the foresight (or luck!) to grab similar names that Apple ended up wanting as well. Such is life. Write the check!


     



     


    IMAX (Image Maximum) predates (about 1971) iMac!

  • Reply 12 of 33
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,603member
    'If' gradient didn't produce a mobile phone before 2011 called the iphone does Apple not have a case against them of 'passing off'
  • Reply 13 of 33
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    What does that mean?



    Perhaps he was thinking that it would give Apple an opportunity to come up with something new - either to replace the iPhone as a brand name - or to complement it with a product that perhaps is a lower cost model that would only be sold in specific countries such as Brasil. 

  • Reply 14 of 33


    Apple will be paying dearly for that. Someone's gonna get rich.

  • Reply 15 of 33


    Let's hope this doesn't the buy out doesn't come close to a Proview price point!

  • Reply 16 of 33
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    Apple started the "i" thing in 1998 with the iMac. Afterwards, a couple other companies had the foresight (or luck!) to grab similar names that Apple ended up wanting as well. Such is life. Write the check!



     


    Apple did not start the "i" thing.   Using "i" (lower or upper case) as a prefix meaning "internet" or "interactive" was pretty common in the industry, starting in the early '90s along with the growth and popularity of the internet.


     


    Heck, that's why Apple's advertising agency pushed Jobs to use "iMac"... to go with the latest fad... instead of using the name that Jobs wanted, the "MacMan" ... which itself was a rather old fad at the time (adding "Man" on the end, because of the Sony Walkman).

  • Reply 17 of 33
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,672member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


     


    Apple did not start the "i" thing.   Using "i" (lower or upper case) as a prefix meaning "internet" or "interactive" was pretty common in the industry, starting in the early '90s along with the growth and popularity of the internet.


     


    Heck, that's why Apple's advertising agency pushed Jobs to use "iMac"... to go with the latest fad... instead of using the name that Jobs wanted, the "MacMan" ... which itself was a rather old fad at the time (adding "Man" on the end, because of the Sony Walkman).



    Interim - Actually Steve Jobs called himself iCEO when he returned to Apple. I think that was 1997 and I am pretty sure it predated the release of the first iMac.

  • Reply 18 of 33
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post



    'If' gradient didn't produce a mobile phone before 2011 called the iphone does Apple not have a case against them of 'passing off'




    There was a case between Cisco and Apple that was settled. Cisco actually had a trademark on iphone and a shipping product.

  • Reply 19 of 33


    Originally Posted by paxman View Post

    Interim - Actually Steve Jobs called himself iCEO when he returned to Apple. I think that was 1997 and I am pretty sure it predated the release of the first iMac.


     


    He returned in '96, first iMac in '98, but I believe there was an "iProduct" from a third party in roughly '94-5… 

  • Reply 20 of 33
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,608member
    hmm wrote: »
    irnchriz wrote: »
    'If' gradient didn't produce a mobile phone before 2011 called the iphone does Apple not have a case against them of 'passing off'


    There was a case between Cisco and Apple that was settled. Cisco actually had a trademark on iphone and a shipping product.
    But that was before the iPhone actually shipped. I am surprised Cisco didn't have the trademark resolved.
Sign In or Register to comment.