Apple fails bid to get 'Think Different' trademark restored in EU
The EU's General Court has dismissed Apple's appeal over Swatch's "Tick Different" slogan, saying the objections are based on a "misreading" of the ruling, and the company's "Think Different" trademark remains revoked in the region.
Apple and Swatch have been involved in multiple court cases over with each company claiming the other is infringing on trademarks. The longest-running one concerned Swatch's "Tick Different" line, which Apple sued over in April 2017.
Switzerland's Federal Administrative court finally ruled in 2019 that Apple's "Think Different" slogan was not sufficiently well known in the region. Apple had been required to show that at least 50% of Swiss people associated "Think Different" with Apple, and the court ruled that this hadn't been proved.
The case then went on to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has now dismissed Apple's claims that the original ruling was flawed. In summarizing its decision, the court said that it "holds that [Apple's] argument is based on a misreading of the contested decisions."
"[The] Board of Appeal did not deny the words 'Think Different' any distinctive character," it continued, "but attributed to them a rather weak distinctive character."
With trademarks, the owner has to prove that the words or phrase is either distinctive by itself, or it achieves distinctiveness by how its use is adopted and known. The court did not disagree that Apple's slogan was distinctive, it instead maintained that this wasn't sufficient to mean consumers would be confused by "Tick Different."
The ruling was also based on how Apple had failed to prove that its trademark "had been put to genuine use for the goods concerned" during the five years before the lawsuit was filed. Apple's submissions around the use of the phrase predated "the relevant period by over 10 years."
This decision is the latest of many for Apple in its protracted trademark cases with Swatch. These include Swatch's victory in the UK over its argument that "iWatch" was too similar to "iSwatch."
Apple ultimately did not use the name iWatch, instead opting for Apple Watch, but argued that Swatch had trademarked its own name purely as a pre-emptive strike against Apple.
Similarly, Swatch won a trademark case over the phrase "one more thing," in 2015, despite that phrase being associated with Steve Jobs.
Swatch denied the Jobs connection. The company said that it had chosen the phrase because of its earlier use in "Columbo."
Read on AppleInsider
Apple and Swatch have been involved in multiple court cases over with each company claiming the other is infringing on trademarks. The longest-running one concerned Swatch's "Tick Different" line, which Apple sued over in April 2017.
Switzerland's Federal Administrative court finally ruled in 2019 that Apple's "Think Different" slogan was not sufficiently well known in the region. Apple had been required to show that at least 50% of Swiss people associated "Think Different" with Apple, and the court ruled that this hadn't been proved.
The case then went on to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has now dismissed Apple's claims that the original ruling was flawed. In summarizing its decision, the court said that it "holds that [Apple's] argument is based on a misreading of the contested decisions."
"[The] Board of Appeal did not deny the words 'Think Different' any distinctive character," it continued, "but attributed to them a rather weak distinctive character."
With trademarks, the owner has to prove that the words or phrase is either distinctive by itself, or it achieves distinctiveness by how its use is adopted and known. The court did not disagree that Apple's slogan was distinctive, it instead maintained that this wasn't sufficient to mean consumers would be confused by "Tick Different."
The ruling was also based on how Apple had failed to prove that its trademark "had been put to genuine use for the goods concerned" during the five years before the lawsuit was filed. Apple's submissions around the use of the phrase predated "the relevant period by over 10 years."
This decision is the latest of many for Apple in its protracted trademark cases with Swatch. These include Swatch's victory in the UK over its argument that "iWatch" was too similar to "iSwatch."
Apple ultimately did not use the name iWatch, instead opting for Apple Watch, but argued that Swatch had trademarked its own name purely as a pre-emptive strike against Apple.
Similarly, Swatch won a trademark case over the phrase "one more thing," in 2015, despite that phrase being associated with Steve Jobs.
Swatch denied the Jobs connection. The company said that it had chosen the phrase because of its earlier use in "Columbo."
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/advertisers-attract-attention-with-grammatical-errors-1.2764884
The other reply about it being easier to trademark is true too. Many “normal” words and “correct” phrases were already trademarked by somebody long ago. And your lawyers will tell you that your multinational brand must be legally available in all countries you do business in, which makes it even harder.
It was probably much easier to trademark “Flickr” than “Flicker”. Also this is why Amazon is full of nonsense-word brands; a Chinese tech gadget company will never be able to trademark “Apple” in the US but can get away with selling “Reddfruit” USB cables.
It's actually extremely sad and shameful that. Swatch's marketing team conceded that they suck so badly that they must steal other people's branding.
It would be funny, but it's too cringe. How much do these people get paid to come up with... nothing - and then steal someone else's stuff in order to almost sound relevant. Swatch was HUGE when I was a kid. Now they have become a joke with pulling crap like this instead of creating something original and iconic of their own. Very sad. Imagine if they actually bickled down, had some vision, cast it, executed well and reinvented for the modern age. but no... so sad.
the icing on the cake of shame is stealing "one more thing" and then trademarking it - aided an abetted by the UK legal system - as if that wasn't made famous by Jobs over and over. already. Unbelievable.
In all seriousness, the has-been company likely did this in hopes. of irritating Apple into buying them. But then again, they could just be in the same mold as Epic and have no morals, decency, or sense of right and wrong.
Of course the ad campaign refers to how Apple is always thinking differently than most. And that includes designing their products. Even if their designs goes against what most would consider to be the correct or the best way to design a product, Apple designs (more often than not) still turned out to be the better way of doing it. The one button mouse, setback keyboard on their laptops, completely getting rid of floppy drives, serial and parallel ports (in favor of USB ports), iPhones with no physical keyboard and a non-removable battery and more recently no audio jack. The list goes on. All going against what most would consider the correct or best design, at the time.
So with this ad campaign, Apple used a phrase that most would say was incorrect but the ad was also subtlety showing that Apple was thinking differently. By using "Think Different", a phrase most would say was incorrect, Apple once again showed it was the better way of doing it. If Apple were to use what most would considered to be the correct phrase, "Think Differently", then Apple would not had been thinking differently and not had turned a good ad campaign to a great ad campaign. All it took was the elimination of two letters that had no affect on the meaning of the message being conveyed ....... that was Apple thinking differently.
So he insisted on a one button mouse, where the user only had to learn what function that one button did when clicked or double clicked or held down. Even today, the MacOS GUI is designed so that a one button mouse can easily perform all the critical functions. And this can be easily demonstrated by the fact that every Mac laptop still comes with a trackpad that takes after a one button mouse. The reason why it's much easier to learn how to use a computer with MacOS than Windows, is because the MacOS GUI it still designed with a one button mouse in mind. Even though Apple came out with a multi-button mouse over 15 years ago.
We can all probably agree on one thing. That Apple wasn't thinking at all, let alone thinking differently, when they designed their "Hockey puck" mouse.