Apple applies for 'iWatch' trademark ownership in Japan

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
According to a report on Sunday, Apple recently applied for the Japanese trademark rights to the "iWatch" moniker, rekindling rumors that the company is actively pursuing the launch of a wearable computing device.

Wearable Device
Apple's U.S. patent application for a wristwatch-like wearable computing device. | Source: USPTO


As reported by Bloomberg, Apple's "iWatch" filing with the Japan Patent Office dates back to June 3, but was made public just last week. The category to which the company assigned the naming rights covers handheld computing devices and watch-like devices.

Apple's Japan application is dated two days prior to an identical filing with the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, also known as Rospatent. The associated report regarding the Russian document noted the first registered "iWatch" trademark application was made in Jamaica in December of 2012.

While not definitive evidence that Apple will indeed release a wristwatch-like device, the recent trademark filings are in line with the industry practice of protecting a possible product name before it is released. The Cupertino company has done the same for past products, such as its discreet filings for the iPad in 2006.

Although no hard evidence has "leaked" pertaining to the supposed device, some reports claim Apple has dedicated a team of about 100 employees actively working on the project.

Competing companies have already announced they will be fielding entries in the wearable computing market later this year, mostly of the devices being wrist-worn "smart watches." Apple rival Samsung said in March that it plans to release a watch-like computing device by the end of this year, its third attempt at such a product.

In February, AppleInsider was first to discover an Apple patent filing for a device fitting the description of the so-called "iWatch," which boasted a touchscreen, flexible display fitted into a bracelet-type design.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44


    The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.


    Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.

  • Reply 2 of 44
    lerxtlerxt Posts: 184member
    The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if [email protected] with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?
  • Reply 3 of 44
    blackbookblackbook Posts: 1,361member


    Assuming Apple launches an iWatch this year in addition to a cheaper iPhone and iPad 5, I think we could see many record breaking quarters and the stock rise to new heights.

  • Reply 4 of 44
    tylerdtylerd Posts: 27member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post



    The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if [email protected] with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?


    Take a look at who he is: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rogerkhemlani

  • Reply 5 of 44
    casanovacasanova Posts: 1member


    cant wait for that.

     

  • Reply 6 of 44
    chandra69chandra69 Posts: 638member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by Roger Khemlani


    The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.


    Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.



     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Casanova View Post


    cant wait for that.

     



    Did not really expect Founder & Creative Director House of VOILA  Roger Khemlani  is spamming internet like this. Must be eligible for executive position at Samsung. image

  • Reply 7 of 44
    dugbugdugbug Posts: 283member


    the intertubes are going to explode this week with iwatch babble.  I predict a Forbes article "iwatch dooms apple"  and an nyt article "iwatch does not innovate time".

  • Reply 8 of 44
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by blackbook View Post


    Assuming Apple launches an iWatch this year in addition to a cheaper iPhone and iPad 5, I think we could see many record breaking quarters and the stock rise to new heights.



    Don't pat each other backs just yet. Wall Street is illogical.


  • Reply 9 of 44
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dugbug View Post


    the intertubes are going to explode this week with iwatch babble.  I predict a Forbes article "iwatch dooms apple"  and an nyt article "iwatch does not innovate time".



    I predict iWatch is not enough, or simply too late, or lacks certain functions, therefore Apple is doomed.


  • Reply 10 of 44
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,399member
    If Apple truly wants to show people they innovate, they'll drop the stupid "i" monikers. ENOUGH already with the iCrap names! It dates back to 1998 for cryin out loud. How about something fresh and smart for a change.

    "iWatch" Can't wait. I can see it now ...

    iWatch TV
    iWatch football
    iWatch hotel guests through a peephole in the wall ...

    Brilliant
  • Reply 11 of 44
    mattbookairmattbookair Posts: 161member
    That's it! iWatch isn't a watch at all, it's the new Apple TV! We know they can't get the rights to iTV, so they're going to call it iWatch. And at the same time, it distracts SONY, Google and Samsung into thinking they need to develop a watch. Brilliant!
  • Reply 12 of 44
    smiles77smiles77 Posts: 668member
    That's it! iWatch isn't a watch at all, it's the new Apple TV! We know they can't get the rights to iTV, so they're going to call it iWatch. And at the same time, it distracts SONY, Google and Samsung into thinking they need to develop a watch. Brilliant!

    This ^. Would be one of the best feints ever.

    Edit: Or not. According to the Bloomberg source article: "The maker of iPhones is seeking protection for the name which is categorized as being for products including a handheld computer or watch device, according to a June 3 filing with the Japan Patent Office that was made public last week." Guess we really could see this thing this fall. Maybe at an iPod event (which they haven't had for a while now due to reduced interest).
  • Reply 13 of 44
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,836member
    [SIZE=10pt]The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=10pt]Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.[/SIZE]

    No, they wouldn't. The "@" is not an "a".
  • Reply 14 of 44
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    [SIZE=10pt]The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=10pt]Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.[/SIZE]

    Since you're an an employee of the company in question, can you provide a link to the product you sell that bears this name? I could fine no reference to it on your website; of course, your website is not mobile friendly.
  • Reply 15 of 44
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,836member
    matrix07 wrote: »
    Don't pat each other backs just yet. Wall Street is illogical.

    The last time Apple apparently responded directly to Wall Street criticism (by offering a dividend) it sent Apple's stock on a path it has yet to recover from. My recommendation is to ignore the self-interested hue and cry of salesmen and do only what is right for Apple and Apple's customers.
  • Reply 16 of 44
    mhiklmhikl Posts: 471member
    The use of 'i' by Apple was and continues to be a brilliant strategy by Apple. It could have gone with any letter of the alphabet, an 'a' for Apple, or 'm' for Macintosh. Were FaxSam to have copied Apple with a slew of apparatuses using 'i' after 'i' had come to be identified with Apple would be seen as desperation by even the usual trolls. 'j' or '@' or an ';)' symbol would be adjuncts anyone might have tried or try today. Regardless, the idea of a preceding lower case symbol, the 'i' in this regard, just says 'Apple' product to most people. (Apple could even have used an 'i' turned sideways, still verbally referring to it as an 'i' had it known that others would have been trying to use its identifier as a way of getting money through the courts.)

    Regardless, 'i' is an identifiable asset of Apple culture and it has been a brilliant stroke. The problem is that others just lack the creative spirit that is 'Apple' nature.

    I would suggest the great facsimilating machine patent a 'turd'-like symbol. It would be appropriate and at least be immediately identifiable with FacsimileSam and its equal brilliant method of thinking from the water closet.

    Grammar fixed.
  • Reply 17 of 44
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mhikl View Post



    The use of 'i' by Apple was and continues to be a brilliant strategy by Apple. 




    Regardless, 'i' is an identifiable asset of Apple culture and it has been a brilliant stroke. The problem is that others just lack the creative spirit that is 'Apple' nature.

     


    I commend Apple for simplicity and consistency. But "brilliant" should be set at a much higher bar.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post



    The above guy has been posting all over the Internet. I wonder if [email protected] with an @, is the same as iWatch, according to patent law?


     


    It doesn't matter. Apple has a history for worrying about copyright/trademark infringement after the fact. The only time they didn't get their way was when they tried to use iTV.

  • Reply 18 of 44
    [SIZE=10pt]The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=10pt]Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.[/SIZE]
    Did you seek permission from Apple in 2000 before copying their iNaming scheme?
  • Reply 19 of 44
    [SIZE=10pt]The trademark [email protected] (phonetically IWATCH) belongs to Intertime (FE) Holdings Ltd, Hong Kong; the internationally famous manufacturer of VOILA Watches & [email protected] as per Japanese Trademark Certificate 4400665 dated July 14, 2000.[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=10pt]Apple would need to seek permission from Intertime before commencing any trade.[/SIZE]
    Because everyone will be so confused. When I see a name that starts with a lowercase "i", I instantly think of the House of Voila.
  • Reply 20 of 44
    mhiklmhikl Posts: 471member
    stelligent wrote: »
    I commend Apple for simplicity and consistency. But "brilliant" should be set at a much higher bar.

    stelligent, I agree that the use of 'brilliant' doesn't appear to fit well within the sphere of common advertising; however, there have been many choices taken in the industry that have come to symbolize a company in the eye of the consumer, and for which criticism has been an issue. 'Think Different' is one that has raised argument on grammatical terms, yet came to symbolize a well known company.

    The use of adjectives such as 'brilliant' for hyperbole as a rhetorical device is part of English language humour. Figurative language is usually introduced in middle school, but its practice depends upon the skill and interest of the language teacher and the student's interest in reading. Such skills not learned and practiced early enough in life may be confused when come upon as a mature adult.

    On the other hand, I may not have phrased my use of the word well; :) though I do believe its use has worked out splendidly, if not brilliantly, for our favourite fruit company.

    As originally posted was not the intended corrected version. iPad typing, yuck.
Sign In or Register to comment.