Apple objects to app's pear logo trademark application

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    Francules said:
    Honestly. Apple sucks. After over 10 years of using apple iphones and etc. i’m done. Goodbye. 
    Oops - is Tim aware ? 
    That might make the difference
    king editor the grateBeatsDogpersonMacProronn
  • Reply 22 of 38
    Brilliant marketing by Prepear with the petition, but they’re still likely to lose with regard to the trademark design. 

    Just change the leaf design so it looks more like a pear leaf (bigger and rounder, with a center line) and less exactly like the leaf in the Apple trademark. [See the Prepear app icon for a better sense of why Apple objects to this.] Retain the color scheme and the righteous outrage of the new customers this has brought into the fold, and then focus on retaining those customers.
    cornchipronn
  • Reply 23 of 38
    I will give my opinion as someone with no design experience, no trademark law knowledge and no college degree. I stared at the logos for quite some time comparing them and I do not see it. To me this seems like Apple being a petty bully. I hope this settles it for everyone...lol.
    dysamoriarezwitscflcardsfan80elijahgmuthuk_vanalingamchemengin1
  • Reply 24 of 38
    Apple is being a bit ridiculous here. Laughably so. 

    There's a reasonableness test that needs to be applied, and it surely does not pass that test.
    dysamoriacflcardsfan80elijahgmuthuk_vanalingamchemengin1
  • Reply 25 of 38
    I will give my opinion as someone with no design experience, no trademark law knowledge and no college degree. I stared at the logos for quite some time comparing them and I do not see it. To me this seems like Apple being a petty bully. I hope this settles it for everyone...lol.
    I think the reason the trademark (as opposed to the art) crosses a line is the way the inner edge of the leaf outline is designed to evoke Apple’s distinctive leaf motif, which dates to 1977 and is arguably the most essential of the three elements of Apple’s design (the leaf, the apple, and the bite). 
    ronn
  • Reply 26 of 38
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 716member
    A bit weak. Does this mean that if my logo involves a coffee cup with the handle on the right side that Apple is going to come after me because from a distance, at night, through the fog and heavy rain my logo might resemble a piece of fruit?

    I’m guessing that Tim was out of the office when this decision was made. 
    It was probably on the day he was on his inquisition about the 25 computers that got shipped to SK instead of Japan! Tomorrow some poor employee is going to have to listen to Cook’s questions about this!
    agilealtitudeelijahgronn
  • Reply 27 of 38
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 716member
    Beats said:
    A bit weak. Does this mean that if my logo involves a coffee cup with the handle on the right side that Apple is going to come after me because from a distance, at night, through the fog and heavy rain my logo might resemble a piece of fruit?

    No.

    mainyehc said:
    Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.

    And no, I’m not (just) a fanboy, but a future PhD in design, and even an undergrad with a keen eye would spot the similarities right away… This isn’t much different from spotting plagiarism in typography, you just have to overlay the curves and see how well they match. Do you want me to?

    How the hell does Samsung get away with blatantly biting Apple?




    Knockoff Apple Store with Apple App icons


    Samsungs iKnockoff default apps

    Money. And maybe different laws in SK that would just make it difficult for Apple. Easier to hit some small companies to show you are defending your trademarks. 
    Beatsanantksundaramrezwits
  • Reply 28 of 38
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    Francules said:
    Honestly. Apple sucks. After over 10 years of using apple iphones and etc. i’m done. Goodbye. 
    I’m interested in your list of grievances. It’s not just this, right?
  • Reply 29 of 38
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    S12 said:
    If anyone should be objecting, it's Pear Computers. https://www.facebook.com/PearComputers/
    Nothing there that remotely looks like infringement either.  https://icarly.fandom.com/wiki/Pear_Company/cough cough ;)



    That all said, I am pretty sure there actually was a real Pear Computer back in the Apple ][ days that was closed down due to infringement. Any old timers here remember that?
  • Reply 30 of 38
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    Francules said:
    Honestly. Apple sucks. After over 10 years of using apple iphones and etc. i’m done. Goodbye. 
    Don't let the door ....
    DAalsethronn
  • Reply 31 of 38
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 817member
    Francules said:
    Honestly. Apple sucks. After over 10 years of using apple iphones and etc. i’m done. Goodbye. 
    You left, and no one noticed...
    DAalsethronn
  • Reply 32 of 38
    mainyehc said:
    Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.

    And no, I’m not (just) a fanboy, but a future PhD in design, and even an undergrad with a keen eye would spot the similarities right away… This isn’t much different from spotting plagiarism in typography, you just have to overlay the curves and see how well they match. Do you want me to?
    I only have a degree in graphic design but I don’t think your point is valid. 

    There is only 4 sides For a 2D logo. Since it is unreasonable to put the leaf on the left, right and bottom. So it is either top left or top right. Most fruit graphic shown the fruit is upright to represent hanging from tree to represent freshness. So if you think a small company can only shows their logo in an unnatural position to avoid lawsuits from the richest company in the world is rather sad.

    Most pear selling in store is either, green, red and yellow. Apple never use these color exclusively on their logo. And the pear logo is not in rainbow color too. I don’t think the color is the problem here.

    The shape of the Apple logo is almost always solid. The pear logo used bold line to outline the shape. So I don’t think it is the problem of the line work.

    i don’t think Tim or other upper management will agree with the lawsuit, they are not that stupid. Apple cares about their image, a lot.

    what I think the problem is their law department has too much free time and someone want a promotion. 

    this lawsuit is all about someone in food industry want to use a fruit as their logo, which I think they have all the right to do it. The apple farming industry did not sue Apple for their logo when they first started. And I don’t see any logical reason for Apple to sue the small food company.

    i am an Apple fan boy but I think this suit will only damage Apple’s image. Which confirm Apple is an evil big company that want to destroy a small company.

    The person in the law department of apple should get fired.
    mazda 3smuthuk_vanalingamchemengin1
  • Reply 33 of 38
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,291member
    Not defending Apple, but this is what actually being filed:

    If anything, only the leaf looks similar shape.

    ronn
  • Reply 34 of 38
    Don't beat up on Apple for doing what the law requires of them. Beat up on yourselves for electing representatives that enact laws that require Apple to do this. You the People! If you don't like it, do something about it. Apple didn't elect them, you did!
    ronntenthousandthings
  • Reply 35 of 38
    1348513485 Posts: 250member
    mainyehc said:
    Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
    Not really. A trademark doesn't infringe if it does not cause confusion in the marketplace. There is absolutely no possibility that Apple's customers would be confused by seeing this pear logo in a completely different commercial use.  Further, good luck if Apple can show this AND demonstrate damages related to that. 
  • Reply 36 of 38
    There is a fine line between a Corporation legitimately protecting it & the behaviour of a Corporate bully.


  • Reply 37 of 38
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,016member
    13485 said:
    mainyehc said:
    Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
    Not really. A trademark doesn't infringe if it does not cause confusion in the marketplace. There is absolutely no possibility that Apple's customers would be confused by seeing this pear logo in a completely different commercial use.  Further, good luck if Apple can show this AND demonstrate damages related to that. 
    Infringement isn’t the only basis on which one can oppose federal registration, which is what Apple is doing here. One can get injunctive relief against the use of a mark or successfully oppose the federal registration of a mark based on dilution. And unlike infringement, dilution doesn’t require a showing that a mark is identical or otherwise likely to cause confusion. Someone opposing the registration of a mark, or seeking injunctive relief against a mark, doesn’t need to demonstrate actual dilution - only the likelihood thereof.

    Apple is arguing, among other things, dilution by blurring. That doesn’t require substantial similarity. It’s about association, not confusion,
    tenthousandthingsronn
Sign In or Register to comment.