Cartier sues Apple over third party iPhone watch software

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Luxury watch maker Cartier International filed suit against Apple today for allowing a third party iPhone developer to post an application depicting a watch image which Cartier claims infringes on its designs. Later, however, it withdrew the complaint.



The watch maker originally insisted that it has never authorized Apple to use images that appear similar to the company's watches, despite the fact that the iPhone title, named Fake Watch, was only a software representation of certain famous watch designs. But in a quick retreat from its stance earlier in the day, Cartier pulled the lawsuit after Apple removed the allegedly offending software from the App Store.



"Our concerns have been addressed," Fox Rothschild LLD attorney Jonathan Lagarenne said on behalf of Cartier.



The free Fake Watch application did enable users to obtain the time using their iPhone or iPod touch, a direct blow to Cartier's fancy watch business. The software developer also offered a premium, paid version of the app under the name "Fake Watch Gold Edition."



Both versions shamelessly offered to present the time using a images of "look-alike famous wristwatches." Apple did not offer a public comment on the suit.



The suit would have had an impact on Apple's mobile software approval process, which has frequently been maligned by developers annoyed by the length of time it takes to get an application approved, frustrated by the occasional rejection of applications based on issues that may seem arbitrary or unfair, or shocked by the nature of certain titles that do manage to make it through the approvals process.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 39
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    I just read where Apple denied Eucalyptus, a very nicely executed e-book reader app, because one of the public domain titles it allows you to access is the Kama Sutra.



    This despite the fact you can get that on several other e-book readers already in the App Store, on via Mobile Safari, for that matter.



    You get the feeling that the App Store approval process is just some guys who were tasked with keeping up with the flood of applications, and that they weren't really given any guidelines beyond something vague and not very binding, so they just go by their gut. Like there's one guy who's really a prude, and if he happens to see something that offends him he rejects, whereas the next guy might be paranoid about IP, and the next guy thinks fat jokes are right out, and so on.



    Whatever it is, it's totally broken and Apple needs to do something yesterday. It just make them look amateurish and erratic.
  • Reply 2 of 39
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,113member
    I wonder if Cartier made any effort first to contact either Apple and Fake Watch to demand that they cease and desist from presenting the Cartier watch images. Otherwise, a combination of overaggressive Cartier marketers and junkyard dog lawyers could have launched their suit out of the box, for the free product publicity that Cartier would reap.
  • Reply 3 of 39
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Who gives a damn, there are bigger issues to deal with than this crap.
  • Reply 4 of 39
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,871member
    Cartier.... whatever.... the product will be dead in another generation.....
  • Reply 5 of 39
    I am sure Judge Judy will be able to deliver a fair and impartial verdict.
  • Reply 6 of 39
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Jesus H Christmas!!



    Will Cartier International just calm the hell down?



    Dam, talk about nuking the site from orbit...



    Apple should counter sue for a frivolous lawsuit.





    Heck why don't we Mac users sue Apple over missing the Java exploit?



    That will teach them huh? Just as stupid.
  • Reply 7 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post


    I wonder if Cartier made any effort first to contact either Apple and Fake Watch to demand that they cease and desist from presenting the Cartier watch images. Otherwise, a combination of overaggressive Cartier marketers and junkyard dog lawyers could have launched their suit out of the box, for the free product publicity that Cartier would reap.



    I think C&D is a part of the process, but that usually isn't presented to the public. If they don't respond, then they file.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Cartier.... whatever.... the product will be dead in another generation.....



    You mean watches? AFIAK, they're now bought as jewelry, not to tell time. I expect that watches will stick around as long as there are people who want to wear metal knick-knacks. It's not as if very expensive watches were about getting much more accurate time anyways, they're jewelry and status symbols.
  • Reply 8 of 39
    Cartier, like all luxury brands, has bigger problems with imitation goods on the streets and eBay. A cease and desist would have been enough.
  • Reply 9 of 39
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,353member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Like there's one guy who's really a prude, and if he happens to see something that offends him he rejects, whereas the next guy might be paranoid about IP, and the next guy thinks fat jokes are right out, and so on.



    Whatever it is, it's totally broken and Apple needs to do something yesterday. It just make them look amateurish and erratic.



    But not erotic.......!



  • Reply 10 of 39
    shookstershookster Posts: 113member
    Quote:

    The free Fake Watch application did enable users to obtain the time using their iPhone or iPod touch, a direct blow to Cartier's fancy watch business.



    Er... what? Do they really think people will strap iPhones to their wrists instead of a watch? If anything, it helps their brand.



    I can now see why Apple was so cautious with the Eucalyptus situation - there really are people who will sue for anything (although a little consistency would be nice).
  • Reply 11 of 39
    felix01felix01 Posts: 221member
    Lots of times we malign Apple in the various forums for what many view as frivolous cease and desist letters to protect their trademarked/copyrighted names, images, etc. I don't see this as being much different except that Cartier rolled out the big guns first...a lawsuit vs a cease and desist to Apple and the developer. Probably overkill but it got Apple's attention fast and was solved to Cartier's satisfaction so I guess they achieved their objective.



    Appears though that the developer knew from the start he was on thin ground due to the "fake" reference. A lick on him and because of that indiscretion he'll have an extremely hard time getting any future apps approved. Worth it? Probably not.
  • Reply 12 of 39
    igod 2.0igod 2.0 Posts: 77member
    Cartier sues Apple over a SIMULATED version of their wristwatch (mind you again, you can't literaly put this watch on your wrist) while people on the street and eBay resell the actual product for a way cheaper price and then keeping 100% of the profit...Cartier, you guys have bigger problems on your hand, like preventing your product from being leaked on the streets, yet you find time for something as frivolous as this... Hmm...I can see where Apple can be a threat, the way the Apple is so innovative and intuitive, the might just figure out a way to generate one on your wrist directly from the iPhone...
  • Reply 13 of 39
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    You make little sense. You can get the same content from just about any number of other ebook reader, including Amazon's ebook reader. You can buy the book online. Further, you can use Safari to read the text. In addition, this application doesn't even violated Apple's own terms, which prohibit the application from containing objectionable content. This application is nothing more then a search engine that allows you to view the content you searched for.



    So, what is there to be cautious about? The only thing we have going on here is a complete lack of common sense and consistency.



    This is why the Electronic Frontier Foundation is fighting to make it clear that jail breaking an iPhone must be legal. The guy who developed Eucalyptus says he works on the application for a year. Nobody with common sense would think the guy violated Apple's terms. So, all his work is for nothing. Further, as an iPhone OWNER I want the application.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shookster View Post


    Er... what? Do they really think people will strap iPhones to their wrists instead of a watch? If anything, it helps their brand.



    I can now see why Apple was so cautious with the Eucalyptus situation - there really are people who will sue for anything (although a little consistency would be nice).



  • Reply 14 of 39
    fast fred 1fast fred 1 Posts: 294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    I think C&D is a part of the process, but that usually isn't presented to the public. If they don't respond, then they file.







    You mean watches? AFIAK, they're now bought as jewelry, not to tell time. I expect that watches will stick around as long as there are people who want to wear metal knick-knacks. It's not as if very expensive watches were about getting much more accurate time anyways, they're jewelry and status symbols.



    Yeah... I'm saving my money for the Nose Watch.
  • Reply 15 of 39
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Lawsuit pulled.



    Quote:

    A legal battle over iPhone application software appears to have ended almost as soon as it began.



    A lawyer representing Cartier International N.V. late Friday said it is withdrawing a suit the company filed earlier in the day against Apple Inc. The suit alleged that two applications for the iPhone infringed on the trademark for the luxury brand's Tank watches.



    The applications have been removed from Apple's App Store. "Our concerns have been addressed," said Jonathan Lagarenne, the attorney for Fox Rothschild LLD representing Cartier.




    Yea fsck you too Cartier, a phone call would have been just fine. Assh*les.



    Rest of article here...



    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1243...googlenews_wsj
  • Reply 16 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    Lawsuit pulled.



    Yea fsck you too Cartier, a phone call would have been just fine. Assh*les.



    That's making some assumptions. How do you know that a C&D wasn't submitted? How do you know that hypothetical C&D wasn't ignored? Some people do ignore C&Ds if they don't think it's serious, sometimes it takes actual filing to get the attention of the other party.
  • Reply 17 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fast Fred 1 View Post


    Yeah... I'm saving my money for the Nose Watch.



    Har har.



    You know what I meant.
  • Reply 18 of 39
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Whatever it is, it's totally broken and Apple needs to do something yesterday. It just make them look amateurish and erratic.



    It seems that the success has outgrown their expectations, but the approval process, which I like in theory, is very erratic, as you say. This Fake Watch app is not one I?d consider an odd inclusion. I can easily see them approving these kind of apps for years to come with them being taken down immediately after content trademark holders inform Apple of a potential issue, but the baby shaker app shouldn?t have gotten through when fart apps are denied and so forth. Though it is still under a year old so I guess we can?t be too critical, we have to expect some growing pains for new services and products.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    Who gives a damn, there are bigger issues to deal with than this crap.



    For example? World peace, world hunger, human rights, human trafficking, why Adam should have won American Idol? There are always more pressing issues and none of them will be addressed at Appleinsider.com.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Cartier.... whatever.... the product will be dead in another generation.....



    This turned out to be some good free advertising for them. I didn?t even know they were still in business.
  • Reply 19 of 39
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:

    That's making some assumptions. How do you know that a C&D wasn't submitted? How do you know that the C&D wasn't ignored? Some people do ignore C&Ds if they don't think it's serious, sometimes it takes actual filing to get the attention of the other party.



    Would be interesting if that was the case, hopefully Cartier would explain the reasons for their overreaction.



    Which of course would shed some light on Apple's behavior... or lack of it.



    Drama, yea baby, yea.



    Drama - an exciting, emotional, or unexpected series of events or set of circumstances
  • Reply 20 of 39
    bareddbaredd Posts: 30member
    Heck, I think with all the stupid lawsuits apple are getting for pointless apps, they are doing pretty well. the watch this week, shazam last week, im sure there was one the week before. Im not surprised if there legal team must be having a nightmare, "wait deny this app someone will sue because it is using 1 pixel less than the iphone is designed for, quick pull that app its so happy it made someone cry!" Christ. Would be worse than hell in my eyes.
Sign In or Register to comment.