Apple sued for callings its mouse Mighty

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 118
    wilcowilco Posts: 985member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacHawk View Post


    Why did it take THIS LONG for this company to come out of the woodwork to sue Apple over this?... This is a frivolous lawsuit.



    RTFT.
  • Reply 82 of 118
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Anyway, I vote that it be renamed Shighty Mouse.



  • Reply 83 of 118
    jensonbjensonb Posts: 528member
    I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, M&M has more of a case than most of these companies do owing to having their hardware out first, but on the other hand, there's no mention of them contacting CBS about the Mighty Mouse name, even in an act of good faith, prior to trying to trademark it and sorry, logic dictates you not just try and trademark an existing term for a new product without contacting the original owner.



    Reminds me of a laundrette by the name of Acorn if anyone gets that reference.



    Incidentally, I was extremely tickled when I heard Apple were calling it Mighty Mouse. In fact, naming it for the pint-sized suer-hero upped the appeal for me. Though in the end I actually bought a Trust mouse with similar features and more besides (Rechargeable, presenter mode, laser pointer). Might buy one for my Mac mini though.
  • Reply 84 of 118
    wilcowilco Posts: 985member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by city View Post


    If you have a DUI, Canada is not going to let you in the country.



    IF the DUI was within the past five years, and IF you happen to be randomly stopped, and IF they give you a background check
  • Reply 85 of 118
    bobertoqbobertoq Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by walkerdarin2003 View Post


    Just throw in the iMouse



    iMouse! Very logical thinking



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    Did you read the complaint? It's because M&M is suffering now. They are quite likely to prevail if they can prove that they marketed the name first.



    Very good point...
  • Reply 86 of 118
    citycity Posts: 522member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wilco View Post


    IF the DUI was within the past five years, and IF you happen to be randomly stopped, and IF they give you a background check



    If you apply for an Approval of Rehabilitation at Canadian visa office. If you fly into Vancouver you are quite likely to be screened.
  • Reply 87 of 118
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    What does that have to do with the claim you were defending (that Apple sues anyone who uses the word 'pod' in their product?



    There's no doubt that 'iPod' is unique to Apple and they have a right to defend it. 'Pod' is not (at least not generically. There is some risk of confusion if you use it to describe a music playing device).



    How would an arcade coin counter or a furry laptop computer case be confused with an Apple iPod?



    http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/14/n...on-brand-name/



    http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/04/a...d-her-product/
  • Reply 88 of 118
    charlesscharless Posts: 301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    But the MM does look a lot like a bar of Dove soap. I certainly don't think of the bird.







    I'm not sure if that really applies as much. Trademarks of the same word can apply over several dozen different categories. Animation and the related merchandising wouldn't apply to computer peripherals.



    I don't know about that - try naming a mouse "The Mickey Mouse" and see how long you last.



    "But... the designer's name was Mickey!"
  • Reply 89 of 118
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post


    I don't know about that - try naming a mouse "The Mickey Mouse" and see how long you last.



    "But... the designer's name was Mickey!"



    As I said before, being in the right doesn't mean you won't be sued. Generally Disney (in your example) often win just because it's not worth a lawsuit, not because it wasn't legal.
  • Reply 90 of 118
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Most cases have had people like him losing their rights to the name. I don't remember the cases, but I do remember one that involved a resturant, where the owners lost the rights. There have been many more.



    Taylor wine is another one. The Taylor family sold the rights to "Taylor wine" to Coca Cola. Then one of the family members tried to introduce his own wine with the Taylor name on the label. He was shot down pretty quickly. Now he does the same thing as the Nissan guy - he runs around complaining how Coca Cola stole his name - forgetting to mention that he SOLD his name for millions of dollars.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    ...not so sure about that. "Mouse" (computer) is a homonym with "Mouse" (mammal). They describe two completely different things.



    Take, for example, the word "Bow." Say I'm a gift-wrap company and just developed a very unique bow design and I patent it and trademark the name "super bow." Then my cousin, a hunting equipment manufacturer develops a powerful long-range hunting bow, patents the design and trademarks the name "super bow."



    Is that an infringement? No, because my bow trademark pertains to gift wrap. My cousin's bow trademark pertains to hunting. Likewise, CBS's trademark pertains to an animated performance-enhancing drug-using mouse while M&M's pertains to a computer accessory.



    Now if Apple had called it "Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger," you're right, that's a different story.



    -Clive



    "super bow" is relatively generic and not identifiable with any particular trademark. "Mighty Mouse" is much more like your example of "Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger" where the name is evocative of one specific very well known cartoon character.



    CBS's trademark for "Mighty Mouse" is well enough recognized that they're going to have wide latitude in defending it from infringement. I'll bet you a box of donuts that that is exactly what happened in the two earlier attempts to trademark "Mighty Mouse" for computer peripherals.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Haggar View Post


    How would an arcade coin counter or a furry laptop computer case be confused with an Apple iPod?





    http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/14/n...on-brand-name/



    http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/04/a...d-her-product/



    The arcade counter interfaces with a laptop computer and is an entertainment device. The iPod is an entertainment device which interfaces with a computer.



    Did Apple go too far here? Maybe, but not blatantly so. They HAVE to defend their trademark, including going after items at the fringes or they'll lose the mark.
  • Reply 91 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    ...not so sure about that. "Mouse" (computer) is a homonym with "Mouse" (mammal). They describe two completely different things.



    Take, for example, the word "Bow." Say I'm a gift-wrap company and just developed a very unique bow design and I patent it and trademark the name "super bow." Then my cousin, a hunting equipment manufacturer develops a powerful long-range hunting bow, patents the design and trademarks the name "super bow."



    Is that an infringement? No, because my bow trademark pertains to gift wrap. My cousin's bow trademark pertains to hunting. Likewise, CBS's trademark pertains to an animated performance-enhancing drug-using mouse while M&M's pertains to a computer accessory.



    Now if Apple had called it "Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger," you're right, that's a different story.



    -Clive



    It also depends on how well the trademark is known. If it dominates the term. Dove Soap wouldn't do that, but others would. Mighty Mouse is not a natural combination of words. Right now, the only way most people would have heard of it is through the Comics, and Apple's product.



    When you said "bow", at first I thought you were talking about the first half of a dogs bark.
  • Reply 92 of 118
    davidwdavidw Posts: 967member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacHawk View Post


    Why did it take THIS LONG for this company to come out of the woodwork to sue Apple over this?... This is a frivolous lawsuit.



    I have a hunch that M&M waited this long to file a suit because they needed to wait and see if CBS would file a suit against them for using their "Mighty Mouse" trademark. By waiting two (or so) years and not getting a notice from CBS to stop using the name, they may have a case that CBS abandoned the trademark by failing to enforcing it.



    Which is why Apple goes after any possible infringers of their trademarks. No matter how trivial it may appear. Because one day, they may need to prove in a court of law that they are actively enforcing their trademarks. Plus the PR (bad or good) doesn't hurt.



    It makes no difference how many different meaning a word has. It only matters whether one trademark can be confused with another. If "Super Bow" the archery company and "Super Bow" yhe ribbon company are relatively small and unknown, then both trademarks can exist. If however "Super Bow" the ribbon company is a branch of 3M and is known world wide, then the archery compamy will most likly not get the trademark Unless they were first.



    Just because it's your name, it doesn't mean that you have the right to use it in your business trademark. John Doe McDonald can not name his diner "McDonald's". Joe, Jessica and Ashley can not call a TV show about themselves "The Simpsons". No matter how difficult it would be to confuse it with the other "The Simpsons". After all one is about a dysfunctional family with the worst excuse for a dad and two spoiled braty kids. The other is a cartoon.
  • Reply 93 of 118
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,242member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post


    Mighty Mouse sucks anyway, I dumped it after 2 years or squeezing the damn thing. Why Apple thought squeezing a mouse is easier than pressing a button is beyond me.



    Definitely not a Steve Jobs project.



    The NeXT Mouse was a very nice 2 button mouse. Update it, make it more contoured to the hand and add a center scrollwheel and we can call it a day.
  • Reply 94 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    So it should be perfectly fine if someone manufactures a bra for a Honda Civic, and yet he cannot advertise on Google, Yahoo, or MSN that his product is compatible with a Honda Civic? I don't see how that might make a negative opinion out of Honda Civic.



    The law is there should it become necessary to use it. That doesn't mean that every use is going to be a problem, and it doesn't mean that a company will sue every time. It depends on the intent too.



    This is why every time some nursery school paints large pictures of Disney characters on the walls of their school, Disney gets an injunction to get them to remove it {though usually, all they do is to get the school to sign a licensing agreement for a dollar or so). They must defend it, or at some point they will lose it.



    Also the others are using a trademark without permission. It's a funky part of the law.
  • Reply 95 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    So it should be perfectly fine if someone manufactures a bra for a Honda Civic, and yet he cannot advertise on Google, Yahoo, or MSN that his product is compatible with a Honda Civic? I don't see how that might make a negative opinion out of Honda Civic.



    It depends on whether cars can get breast cancer.
  • Reply 96 of 118
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    I don't think it would "bring" them any more sales, the opposite is more likely to be true. This is especially if all the results of a search return Apple's version because theirs is the more popular brand, even if you're looking for the other company's product, unless you knew what that company's name was.



    I want the mighty mouse...but all I get is that danged Apple one. What's so special about the one I want? Oh yeah...I can wash it!



    Google: mighty mouse washable



    First Hit: www.ruggedtech.com - a reseller of the M&M mouse.
  • Reply 97 of 118
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    I want the mighty mouse...but all I get is that danged Apple one. What's so special about the one I want? Oh yeah...I can wash it!



    Google: mighty mouse washable



    First Hit: www.ruggedtech.com - a reseller of the M&M mouse.



    Or waterproof or medical or bullshit lawsuit.
  • Reply 98 of 118
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,586member
    This lawsuit will never hold up. If you go to the M&M website, they are using the name explicitly playing off the equity of CBS' brand. They are in clear violation of CBS' trademark, for which Apple received a legitimate license to use.



    M&M says on their website - "Introducing the Mighty Mouse? Waterproof Optical Mouse for Medical, Industrial and Marine applications. The Mighty Mouse? One is a fully sealed IP 68 optical mouse that is a 2 button mouse. The Mighty Mouse? is both USB and PS/2. This waterproof and chemical resistant mouse can be disinfected with a variety of liquids including alcohol, 10% Bleach solutions, and CIDEX. The Mighty Mouse? feels like a standard optical mouse. You can feel the mouse button click, but there are no openings so the mouse can be cleaned."



    They are clearly playing off the trade name of the character...



    One can easily argue that they are getting tons of free publicity by filing this suit!
  • Reply 99 of 118
    tx65tx65 Posts: 31member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ros3ntan View Post


    500 lawsuits in the last 2 years.. the government should do something about this stupid kind of lawsuits.. maybe the winner can sue back and take over the company???



    cmon man.. its ridiculous.. everyday there is always a lawsuit.... its not helpful to society... we as the customer dont need this at all.



    Simple solution to this stuff,,,, make the attorney's who bring frivolous suits (as determined by a judge) liable for the defendant's legal fees. Attorney's are officers of the court and they seem to share little personal consequence from bringing suits. Yes, the plantiff can be counter sued and be ordered to pay for legal fees of the defendant, but the attorney is supposed to be the expert and advise people from doing stupid stuff.. Put some consequences back on the attorney and watch these suits disappear and dry up.



    Regarding this suit



    Fact #1 CBS owns the trademark "mighty mouse" - a unique name that applies to copyrighted works CBS owns. (there is no mighty mouse in nature)



    Fact #2 Apple licensed use of the name from the owner of the trademark as is proper and legal.



    Fact #3 M&M applied for a trademark which STILL HAS NOT been granted specific to computer pointing devices.



    Fact #4 CBS has applied to extend their long established trademark "Mighty Mouse" to other devices.



    Fact #5 M&M has a product on the market using the name "Mighty Mouse" which is a trademark of CBS, (M&M has only applied for a trademark,, it has not been granted).





    IMO,,, Apple naming a product with name "mighty mouse" has more to do with creating association to the fictional super hero.
  • Reply 100 of 118
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TX65 View Post


    Simple solution to this stuff,,,, make the attorney's who bring frivolous suits (as determined by a judge) liable for the defendant's legal fees.



    If I'm not mistaken, that is how the UK operates.
Sign In or Register to comment.