Chinese clothing label sues Apple, says App Store logo breaks copyright

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 61
    Apple, pay up and dump that logo, I never liked it anyway. 
  • Reply 22 of 61
    Well...



    By the way, this is actually one of their shirts. LOL! (Source: http://www.itskon.com/konxmandrill/ )

    Apple should not hire Chinese graphic designers, maybe? Respect for copyrighted materials is virtually nonexistent there.
    I'd buy it
  • Reply 23 of 61
    BluntBlunt Posts: 222member
    lkrupp said:
    Speaking of Chinese ripoffs...


    Wow, now that's embarrassing. These guys have no shame.
  • Reply 24 of 61
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,885member
    lkrupp said:
    Technically this isn't copyright infringement since you can't copyright a logo. You can only trademark a logo. I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    This is China. Who says you can’t copyright a logo in China? Are you a Chinese copyright lawyer?

    The Chinese know they have Apple by the short hairs. Apple basically has no choice but to manufacture there and the Chinese consumer market is vital for their profitability so Apple is stuck and vulnerable to the whims of the government and its courts. Like parasitic lamprey sucker fish they see Apple as a tasty host to suck the blood out of, living just enough blood so as not to kill the host.
    While your are attacking with this case, let use not forget in US there are also patent troll companies and law firms salivating over huge pile of cash from Apple. 
    revenant
  • Reply 25 of 61
    I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    The case is in China itself, so that’s the reason. They’ll likely win.
  • Reply 26 of 61
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,885member
    lkrupp said:
    Speaking of Chinese ripoffs...

    Asus is a Taiwanese company.  While I don't deny Taiwanese is Chinese, but Taiwan is in a completely different political system from mainland. 
    1STnTENDERBITS
  • Reply 27 of 61
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,885member
    I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    The case is in China itself, so that’s the reason. They’ll likely win.
    They probably won't win.  But Apple probably will settle in order not to take bigger risk.  
  • Reply 28 of 61
    I like the “popsicle stick” app icon. For whatever reason, my eyes locate it easily and easier than the previous icon. The simpler the icon, the easier it is to find, e.g., the new politically correct Contacts icon (with male and female silhouettes) is harder to find than the previous icon with the single, larger male silhouette. 
  • Reply 29 of 61
    Do they sell bamboo shirts?  Those are so difficult to find...

    I didn’t notice the logo changed, and likely 99.9999% of Apple users don’t care... so what’s the risk of switching back?

    Putting the number at “millions” is ridiculous.  It would probably take 10min. to throw it into the next update.
  • Reply 30 of 61
    crofford said:
    No wonder I got confused. I thought that logo on my phone was for a clothing store. I tried to buy a shirt and all I could find was fart apps. 
    I bought a hat and thought I was getting a phone. A head phone, you know. Up until now I just thought nobody was calling me.
    edited December 2017 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 31 of 61
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,678member
    I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    Apple does sell clothing, but I don't think that matters when it comes to trademarks if the plaintiff can successfully argue that if the infringement confuses the customer and hurts sales.

    Then, at least in the US, you have to actively defend your trademark even if there is no loss of revenue—and in this case potentially revenue gained from the extra media attention to a company with such a high mindshare—or else it can be used against you with future issues in other trademark disputes.
  • Reply 32 of 61
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,678member
    lkrupp said:
    Speaking of Chinese ripoffs…

    [image]
    Those are completely different¡ One is silver and the other pewter. One has a round opening for the power cord and the other an oval. One has the USB ports to the left and the other to the right.One has a thinner arm at the pivot which is thicker toward the base and the other with a thicker arm at the pivot which is thinner toward the base. One has a flat base and the other an angled base.
    edited December 2017
  • Reply 33 of 61
    lkrupp said:
    Technically this isn't copyright infringement since you can't copyright a logo. You can only trademark a logo. I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    This is China. Who says you can’t copyright a logo in China? Are you a Chinese copyright lawyer?

    The Chinese know they have Apple by the short hairs. Apple basically has no choice but to manufacture there and the Chinese consumer market is vital for their profitability so Apple is stuck and vulnerable to the whims of the government and its courts. Like parasitic lamprey sucker fish they see Apple as a tasty host to suck the blood out of, living just enough blood so as not to kill the host.
    That's a lot of jobs relying on Apple manufacturing in China... but it's not like anyone really cares.  They'd sell their mothers if it helped them even a little bit.
  • Reply 34 of 61
    Apple should take the opportunity to rebrand because the it's a crap logo. It looks like three paddle pop sticks.
    retrogusto
  • Reply 35 of 61
    According the The Verge, Kon is basing the lawsuit on owning the trademark, not the copyright. However, I'm not so sure they have a basis for suing even in China. Logos based on triangles that are constructed of various shapes are not unusual at all, so the fact that Apple's logo is contained within a box, has a different color scheme, and also different shapes to make the triangle...not sure it's close enough. For example, the Amblin Resources logo is pretty similar to both of those logos and obviously came before both (1988). http://www.logobook.com/shape/triangle/page/2/
    I don't see how this is even a case. The App Store logo, while changed to a simpler design, predates the existence of Kon. Plus, how could there possibly be monetary damages? Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    They're not being sued for the old pre-existing logo.  They are being sued for the similarities between the current logo and the KON logo.  Their old logo is immaterial.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 36 of 61
    According the The Verge, Kon is basing the lawsuit on owning the trademark, not the copyright. However, I'm not so sure they have a basis for suing even in China. Logos based on triangles that are constructed of various shapes are not unusual at all, so the fact that Apple's logo is contained within a box, has a different color scheme, and also different shapes to make the triangle...not sure it's close enough. For example, the Amblin Resources logo is pretty similar to both of those logos and obviously came before both (1988). http://www.logobook.com/shape/triangle/page/2/
    I don't see how this is even a case. The App Store logo, while changed to a simpler design, predates the existence of Kon. Plus, how could there possibly be monetary damages? Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    They're not being sued for the old pre-existing logo.  They are being sued for the similarities between the current logo and the KON logo.  Their old logo is immaterial.
    The old logo was distinctly more different. They should go back to the old one.
  • Reply 38 of 61
    The Woolworths lawsuit obviously failed as that logo is currently in use. 
  • Reply 39 of 61
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,678member
    hentaiboy said:
    The Woolworths lawsuit obviously failed as that logo is currently in use. 
    I don't think these are typically meant to succeed in the sense of getting companies to change their logos. I chalk it up to being like animals that make themselves look bigger to appear more threatening than they really are.

  • Reply 40 of 61
    tzeshan said:
    I don't see how this company has a case since Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    The case is in China itself, so that’s the reason. They’ll likely win.
    They probably won't win.  But Apple probably will settle in order not to take bigger risk.  
    You sound like the PR department of the PRC. 
Sign In or Register to comment.