Apple loses appeal for 'App Store' trademark in Australia

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 50
    nolamacguy wrote: »
    your entire post is a strawman. he clearly said he'd never heard app used "in the context of mobile applications".
    Oh, really?

    "No-one widely used the word 'app' before the App Store. Therefore, it should be a protected term in conjunction with the word 'Store'. "

    "Indeed "app" as a word only became popular because of OSX and iPhone OS."

    "You may have a short memory and forgotten that, although not new, the term 'app' was barely used by the general public until after the introduction of the relevant app store on the iPhone."

    "It's true that app was a term used before, but it wasn't common at all. I'd say software was the most used, or program, then application after those 2."

    "True. I remember the mockery and ridicule when Apple first referred to them as "apps". Maybe it had been mentioned somewhere before, but I had never heard of it."
    your links about desktop apps are irrelevant.
    Not according to the courts of law, which have repeatedly determined in multiple jurisdictions that "app" has been a pre-existing generic term for long enough that "app store" cannot be trademarked. I mean, if you really want me to, I could go provide a bunch of examples that specifically apply to mobile apps, but it really doesn't matter; "app" has been a generic term for binary executable in computing in general, including mobile computing, and indeed has been around longer than mobile computing has existed.

    No, it hasn't.

    You yourself stated that it was commonly used by developers as a shortcut for application. That means that it wasn't the proper term but a nickname.

    What Apple did was to turn the word 'app' into the official term for a mobile application. That had never been done before, and is why Apple are right to defend the sole rights to 'App Store'.
  • Reply 42 of 50
    No, it hasn't.

    You yourself stated that it was commonly used by developers as a shortcut for application. That means that it wasn't the proper term but a nickname.

    What Apple did was to turn the word 'app' into the official term for a mobile application. That had never been done before, and is why Apple are right to defend the sole rights to 'App Store'.
    Really? Wow. :D

    Well, the whole "this term which was widely used by developers and users can become the exclusive property of one corporation simply because it was a shorthand for some other term" argument is too silly to comment on directly, so here's a picture instead:

    1000
  • Reply 43 of 50
    No, it hasn't.

    You yourself stated that it was commonly used by developers as a shortcut for application. That means that it wasn't the proper term but a nickname.

    What Apple did was to turn the word 'app' into the official term for a mobile application. That had never been done before, and is why Apple are right to defend the sole rights to 'App Store'.
    Really? Wow. :D

    Well, the whole "this term which was widely used by developers and users can become the exclusive property of one corporation simply because it was a shorthand for some other term" argument is too silly to comment on directly, so here's a picture instead:

    1000

    And how did Palm refer to mobile applications in its 1,000 page manual?
  • Reply 44 of 50
    And how did Palm refer to mobile applications in its 1,000 page manual?
    Don't know, because I don't have that manual anymore (kinda surprised I managed to find the Palm Pilot in the first place, to be honest). However, I do know that the API documentation for Brew (which was one of the technologies that apps used in order to run on old dumbphones like the RAZR back in the day) used "app" all over their documentation, both in the writing and in the API names.

    https://developer.brewmp.com/reference/api-all

    https://developer.brewmp.com/search/apachesolr_search/app (851 pages of hits!)

    If you want to stick with popular things... how about Facebook? They were calling things "apps" in 2007:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20070701000000*/http://apps.facebook.com

    Or Google? They were using "apps" in 2006:


    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/google-apps-grows-up.html

    Of course, that wasn't new either, since "web apps" was the term for apps that ran on the Internet long before Google Apps came around. In fact, in this case, I can't even think of another term that would be synonymous. Did anyone ever use "web programs"? I don't think I've ever once heard it.

    Anyway, the point remains that even if none of this were true, the idea that a term that was already in wide use (as I've extensively proven) isn't generic just because it's a shortened version of another term is just plain silly. You could try to make that point in front of a court, but you'd likely be laughed out of the room.
  • Reply 45 of 50
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Durandal1707 View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    And how did Palm refer to mobile applications in its 1,000 page manual?


    Don't know, because I don't have that manual anymore (kinda surprised I managed to find the Palm Pilot in the first place, to be honest). However, I do know that the API documentation for Brew (which was one of the technologies that apps used in order to run on old dumbphones like the RAZR back in the day) used "app" all over their documentation, both in the writing and in the API names.



    https://developer.brewmp.com/reference/api-all



    https://developer.brewmp.com/search/apachesolr_search/app (851 pages of hits!)



    If you want to stick with popular things... how about Facebook? They were calling things "apps" in 2007:



    http://web.archive.org/web/20070701000000*/http://apps.facebook.com



    Or Google? They were using "apps" in 2006:





    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/google-apps-grows-up.html



    Of course, that wasn't new either, since "web apps" was the term for apps that ran on the Internet long before Google Apps came around. In fact, in this case, I can't even think of another term that would be synonymous. Did anyone ever use "web programs"? I don't think I've ever once heard it.



    Anyway, the point remains that even if none of this were true, the idea that a term that was already in wide use (as I've extensively proven) isn't generic just because it's a shortened version of another term is just plain silly. You could try to make that point in front of a court, but you'd likely be laughed out of the room.

     

     

    Again, you're wrong on two counts.

     

    Web apps are not native apps. They are simply glorified html, so your point about them doesn't stand.

     

    And just because you bring up some Google links to developer sites doesn't mean that app was widely known; it wasn't.

     

    Your attempt to win the argument on technicalities makes you a budding lawyer; perhaps you should offer your services to Samsung.

  • Reply 46 of 50

    Again, you're wrong on two counts.

    Web apps are not native apps.
    What relevance does whether it's native or not have to the fact that people were using the word "app"?
    They are simply glorified html, so your point about them doesn't stand.
    Wow, that statement proves you're not a developer. I assure you that something like Google Docs or Google Maps takes a lot more time, effort, and skill to create than your average mobile fart app.
    And just because you bring up some Google links to developer sites doesn't mean that app was widely known; it wasn't.
    I provided plenty of uses of "app" in many different contexts, including ordinary users on this very forum. You wanted something mobile. Mobile applications weren't widely known in general before the iPhone, but where they existed, they were called apps (or applets, in the case of Java-based things).
    Your attempt to win the argument on technicalities makes you a budding lawyer; perhaps you should offer your services to Samsung.
    I've already won this argument for some time now, frankly, and I've done it by presenting facts. The facts are that "app" was widely used, in many different contexts, all over the Internet, and that this is fairly trivial to find with simple Google searches. Your attempts to bring up technicalities like "oh, that's not native!" or "oh, that's not mobile!" or "oh, those people were developers!" wouldn't be very convincing to a neutral third-party observer, especially since every time you've decided to move the bar, I've still been able to provide more examples that meet your new requirements.

    The simple fact is that "app" was widely known and used before 2008. I used it frequently as far back as the 90s, and so did many others. I've extensively proven this by showing examples of the word in use in many different places all over the Internet. It's clear by now that you're not going to be satisfied no matter how many hundreds of examples I provide, but that's okay, because I've thoroughly proven this at this point, and there's really no point continuing. This argument is over.
  • Reply 47 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member

    Again, you're wrong on two counts.

    Web apps are not native apps. They are simply glorified html, so your point about them doesn't stand.

    And just because you bring up some Google links to developer sites doesn't mean that app was widely known; it wasn't.

    Your attempt to win the argument on technicalities makes you a budding lawyer; perhaps you should offer your services to Samsung.

    Is it just me or does [@]Durandal1707[/@] sound a lot like [@]Gatorguy[/@]?
  • Reply 48 of 50

    Again, you're wrong on two counts.

    Web apps are not native apps.
    What relevance does whether it's native or not have to the fact that people were using the word "app"?
    They are simply glorified html, so your point about them doesn't stand.
    Wow, that statement proves you're not a developer. I assure you that something like Google Docs or Google Maps takes a lot more time, effort, and skill to create than your average mobile fart app.
    And just because you bring up some Google links to developer sites doesn't mean that app was widely known; it wasn't.
    I provided plenty of uses of "app" in many different contexts, including ordinary users on this very forum. You wanted something mobile. Mobile applications weren't widely known in general before the iPhone, but where they existed, they were called apps (or applets, in the case of Java-based things).
    Your attempt to win the argument on technicalities makes you a budding lawyer; perhaps you should offer your services to Samsung.
    I've already won this argument for some time now, frankly, and I've done it by presenting facts. The facts are that "app" was widely used, in many different contexts, all over the Internet, and that this is fairly trivial to find with simple Google searches. Your attempts to bring up technicalities like "oh, that's not native!" or "oh, that's not mobile!" or "oh, those people were developers!" wouldn't be very convincing to a neutral third-party observer, especially since every time you've decided to move the bar, I've still been able to provide more examples that meet your new requirements.

    The simple fact is that "app" was widely known and used before 2008. I used it frequently as far back as the 90s, and so did many others. I've extensively proven this by showing examples of the word in use in many different places all over the Internet. It's clear by now that you're not going to be satisfied no matter how many hundreds of examples I provide, but that's okay, because I've thoroughly proven this at this point, and there's really no point continuing. This argument is over.

    You've won nothing.

    My points still stand. You're trying to extrapolate the small world of developers to everyone else. That's not how the law would see it. And you try to play down the difference between web apps and native apps, as though it's a superficial matter; it's not.

    The App Store was the first time anyone decided to create a store selling native mobile applications and call them officially apps.
  • Reply 49 of 50
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Durandal1707 View Post





    What relevance does whether it's native or not have to the fact that people were using the word "app"?

    Wow, that statement proves you're not a developer. I assure you that something like Google Docs or Google Maps takes a lot more time, effort, and skill to create than your average mobile fart app.

    I provided plenty of uses of "app" in many different contexts, including ordinary users on this very forum. You wanted something mobile. Mobile applications weren't widely known in general before the iPhone, but where they existed, they were called apps (or applets, in the case of Java-based things).

    I've already won this argument for some time now, frankly, and I've done it by presenting facts. The facts are that "app" was widely used, in many different contexts, all over the Internet, and that this is fairly trivial to find with simple Google searches. Your attempts to bring up technicalities like "oh, that's not native!" or "oh, that's not mobile!" or "oh, those people were developers!" wouldn't be very convincing to a neutral third-party observer, especially since every time you've decided to move the bar, I've still been able to provide more examples that meet your new requirements.



    The simple fact is that "app" was widely known and used before 2008. I used it frequently as far back as the 90s, and so did many others. I've extensively proven this by showing examples of the word in use in many different places all over the Internet. It's clear by now that you're not going to be satisfied no matter how many hundreds of examples I provide, but that's okay, because I've thoroughly proven this at this point, and there's really no point continuing. This argument is over.



    Strange a search of mobile java which was the main source of programs for dumb phones before smart phones took over i.e. after Apple launched the iPhone, doesn't seem to show much use of the term "app".

     

    Games, software programs, themes, etc seem to dominate.

     

    Funny, that.

  • Reply 50 of 50
    You've won nothing.
    I've shown that "app" was widely used just about everywhere pre-2008, from desktop computing to mobile computing to the Web, from the developer community to the user community, and I've provided links demonstrating it. Even Steve Jobs used it as a generic term, in the 90s even. You haven't really come up with anything effective to counter that.
    My points still stand.
    For a point to stand, you have to make a point first. So far, you've provided nothing other than trying to move the goalposts (to use a popular phrase on this board), which hasn't even worked out very well for you.
    You're trying to extrapolate the small world of developers to everyone else.
    Wrong; as you'll recall, I also pointed out examples from this very site, which most certainly is not primarily made up of developers. I also cited Google and Facebook, two of the most popular web sites in the world, and also the official documentation for the BREW platform, which was a huge source of mobile apps for feature phones in the US.
    That's not how the law would see it.
    That's how the law does see it. Every time Apple's tried to exert "App Store" as a trademark, they've lost in court.
    And you try to play down the difference between web apps and native apps, as though it's a superficial matter; it's not.
    It sure is, when you're talking about usage of the word "app" in the lexicon.
    The App Store was the first time anyone decided to create a store selling native mobile applications and call them officially apps.
    That's not true either; as I pointed out before, BREW officially called them apps.
    hill60 wrote: »
    Strange a search of mobile java which was the main source of programs for dumb phones before smart phones took over i.e. after Apple launched the iPhone, doesn't seem to show much use of the term "app".

    Games, software programs, themes, etc seem to dominate.

    Funny, that.
    Java officially calls them "applets." A world apart, I know.

    For many people, BREW was a bigger deal than mobile Java in the pre-smartphone years, because half of the big four mobile networks in the US, including the largest one (Verizon), only supported BREW on the devices they were selling. Verizon, in fact, blocked sideloading as well, and only allowed apps to be installed via their application store. And yup, the BREW documentation officially called them "apps". Look at my previous posts for details.
Sign In or Register to comment.