Apple files for ownership of 'iWatch' trademark in Russia, report claims

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Apple has allegedly filed in Russia to register the product name "iWatch," the same name that has been unofficially used to refer to the company's rumored wrist-worn accessory.

Wearable Device
AppleInsider was first to discover an Apple patent filing describing a watch design with flexible display.


It was first claimed by Izvestia.ru this week that Apple has filed for ownership of the "iWatch" name in Russia, specifically under the 9th and 14th classes for the International Classification of Goods and Services. However, AppleInsider was unable to independently verify the alleged registration by Apple through the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, also known as Rospatent.

Apple has filed for ownership of product names before their official announcement in the past, but historically those registrations have been done discreetly overseas under shell corporation names. For example, Apple began obtaining the international rights to the iPad name early as 2006 through a British shell corporation named "IP Application Development Limited," or "IPAD Ltd."

This week's report from Russia gave no indication that the alleged "iWatch" trademark filing was done under any such secrecy. It does claim that the first registered "iWatch" trademark filing was made in Jamaica in December of 2012.

Rumors of an Apple smart watch began to pick up steam earlier this year, when a number of reports claimed that the company is developing a wearable wrist accessory. One such report claimed that the company has a 100-person team working on the project.

Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities believes an Apple "iWatch" won't arrive until late 2014 at the earliest. He expects the device to sport a 1.5- to 2-inch screen, and to focus on biometric feedback for users.

A poll conducted by ChangeWave Research this year found that 19 percent of North American consumers are interested in a hypothetical "iWatch." That's even greater demand than consumers expressed for a mythical Apple tablet before the iPad's unveiling in 2010, as well as an Intel-based Mac in 2005.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    jollypauljollypaul Posts: 328member


    People would freak out if iWatch was the name of an Apple branded TV.

  • Reply 2 of 20
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    jollypaul wrote: »
    People would freak out if iWatch was the name of an Apple branded TV.

    It's the name for their upcoming Netflix killer
  • Reply 3 of 20
    it's a snap bracelet made from a flexible display.
  • Reply 4 of 20
    sflagelsflagel Posts: 627member
    Cook said that it will be difficult to convince young people that have never worn a watch to put something on their wrist. That was a red herring: people used to have pocket watches and very quickly adopted wrist watches. Heck, people put bracelets that have no function whatsoever on their wrists. Just the fact that he made such a clearly wrong statement, indicates to me they are working on something.
  • Reply 5 of 20
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member


    Russia, why you so corrupt? :-(

  • Reply 6 of 20
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

    Russia, why you so corrupt? :-(


     


    More corrupt: Russia or South Korea?

  • Reply 7 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    jollypaul wrote: »
    People would freak out if iWatch was the name of an Apple branded TV.

    Well, it's not a good name.
  • Reply 8 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    sflagel wrote: »
    Cook said that it will be difficult to convince young people that have never worn a watch to put something on their wrist. That was a red herring.

    Actually, he added 'if it wasn't amazing', or something.
  • Reply 9 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    gazoobee wrote: »
    Russia, why you so corrupt? :-(

    Like every country.
  • Reply 10 of 20
    ochymingochyming Posts: 474member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    Russia, why you so corrupt? :-(



     


     


    AH, AH!


     


    More than the USA Congress?


    I doubt.

  • Reply 11 of 20
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,022member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflagel View Post



    Cook said that it will be difficult to convince young people that have never worn a watch to put something on their wrist. That was a red herring: people used to have pocket watches and very quickly adopted wrist watches. Heck, people put bracelets that have no function whatsoever on their wrists. Just the fact that he made such a clearly wrong statement, indicates to me they are working on something.


    Speak to any kid, they will not wear a watch no matter what, Cook statement was accurate, your statement about transition from pocket to wrist was quick is inaccurate, it took decades for that transition to happen. Kid today see no reason for time keeping, and if they really need to know the time they look at their phones.


     


    Cook also said single use wearables are good however combining multiply use into a wearable has been less then usable. He also said wearables do not lend themselves to have multiply uses. Which today is all true and I doubt Apple is that close to solving all problem wearables present. Look how long they been working the Video consumption problem and they are still not that close.


     


    With that said, I think as it was pointed out, iWatch could be TV or Netflix replacement.

  • Reply 12 of 20
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post


     


     


    AH, AH!


     


    More than the USA Congress?


    I doubt.



    Yes, definitely more.

  • Reply 13 of 20
    ochymingochyming Posts: 474member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post





    Well, it's not a good name.


     


    Indeed!


    It is very Orwellian.

  • Reply 14 of 20
    ochymingochyming Posts: 474member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    Yes, definitely more.



     


     


    OK. i guess you win.

  • Reply 15 of 20
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    Speak to any kid, they will not wear a watch no matter what, Cook statement was accurate, your statement about transition from pocket to wrist was quick is inaccurate, it took decades for that transition to happen. Kid today see no reason for time keeping, and if they really need to know the time they look at their phones.


     


    Cook also said single use wearables are good however combining multiply use into a wearable has been less then usable. He also said wearables do not lend themselves to have multiply uses. Which today is all true and I doubt Apple is that close to solving all problem wearables present. Look how long they been working the Video consumption problem and they are still not that close.


     


    With that said, I think as it was pointed out, iWatch could be TV or Netflix replacement.



    How can iWatch be a replacement for Netflix? One is a piece of hardware and the other is a service. If nothing, iWatch could be a distribution medium for Netflix.

  • Reply 16 of 20
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post


     


     


    OK. i guess you win.



    Here, I'll slip you a fiver for agreeing with me.

  • Reply 17 of 20
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    maestro64 wrote: »
    Speak to any kid, they will not wear a watch no matter what, Cook statement was accurate, your statement about transition from pocket to wrist was quick is inaccurate, it took decades for that transition to happen. Kid today see no reason for time keeping, and if they really need to know the time they look at their phones.

    Who said this is a time keeping device?
  • Reply 18 of 20
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    stelligent wrote: »
    How can iWatch be a replacement for Netflix? One is a piece of hardware and the other is a service. If nothing, iWatch could be a distribution medium for Netflix.

    As of right now iWatch is just a name which may well refer to a service. That is what was being suggested.
  • Reply 19 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Even if there is no such product from Apple, there is some value for Apple to own the name if only to keep someone else from using it.
  • Reply 20 of 20
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iaeen View Post





    Who said this is a time keeping device?


    Presicely, like my "iPhone" has never, really, been about the "telephone" part.


     


    The wrist is a very accessible location for a mobile device.

Sign In or Register to comment.