Apple needs to be More Innovative in the naming of products and services.
And i think maybe checking to see if the name is available might be a good idea.
Hope the little guy gets to keep the name.
You realize that even the "little guy" doesn't want the name right? He want's to get paid by apple so he can go off and do whatever. Yes it will harm his business because people will be confused about his iAd, ok well no one has ever heard of him because he's never done anything with it, except sit back and wait the the very moment someone pays him for us of the name. Don't fool yourself he's getting just what he planned on right now.
This is silly. The guy trademarked a technology product with the prefix "i" in 2007. What the hell did he think would happen? Who exactly was trying to confuse their product with who's? The name of his product is Innovate Ads anyway, and if I were him I'd stop trying to steal another company's marketing gimmick, and make up my own damn name and let my company succeed on its own merits.
I'm not going to go so far as to say that Apple owns the letter "i", but for all intents and purposes, it is associated with them in consumers' minds, and isn't that why these trademark suits exist? Because one person names their product in a way as to confuse the customer as to who is providing that product?
Right or wrong, he's going to get stomped by Apple's legal team, and maybe if he shells out for some good lawyers himself he'll get a nice little settlement out of it (which elevates him to the level of people who trip on the sidewalk so they can sue for damages).
But to anybody who some time after, let's say, 2003, named a product "iSomething": I see what you did there, and even if the law is on your side, I have no sympathy.
You have to be kidding with this right?
You have no sympathy for someone that has the law on their side? So basically, Apple is allowed to do whatever they want in your mind?
Just because you like their products or they are popular doesn't mean they can just do whatever they want and it's not like putting a lowercase letter in the front of a name was the greatest and ingenious marketing idea of all time. Where do you think the ad agency that came up with the name got it from?
Remember eMail? How about etrade, eBay, ePets?
All Apple did was jump on the same bandwagon and decide to use an "i" to stand for internet. I'd have to check, but I'm not even sure if they were the first ones to do it. It was just the cool thing to do at the time.
Does the company want to associate themselves with Apple? if you use an i in front of a name does that automatically mean you do? Is Google trying with iGoogle? Was Cisco when they called their internet phone an iPhone? The name of the company is Innovate Ads and they decided to call their platform iAds. They have a business in online advertising which is a space the Apple has not been in and has never been in and is pretty far away from consumer products, which has been Apples core business. I don't see anything in their business that specifically targeted them to Apple. They were just jumping on the whole lowercase i bandwagon that is cool to do, just like Google did and just like ebay, etoys and epets and let's not forget the ingenious name of eMac.
I don't know how this case will land but let's not pretend that everything Apple does is all good. Very simply, Apple is just doing what they want to do because they know they have enough cash and are bigger then everyone else out there to get what they want. And don't pretend that if this was about a Microsoft or some other company you would be making the same argument.
... and engaged in "aggressive pursuit" of the Gizmodo journalist ...
Tells you that the legal team for this company is amateur at best. Including emotional, slanted language like that is just unprofessional. Especially when the easily discoverable facts are quite the opposite of this statement.
Also, come'on, they are advertisers. They don't have any morals and it's not about the principal of the situation, it's just about the money.
Apple will pay them, buy them out, or give them some free access to the iAd platform and that will be that.
Anyone else think per_se might be John Cecil or someone else from Innovate Media Group?
To think that someone would mistakenly buy ad space from Apple based on the reputation of "iAds" is completely ridiculous. I do think Innovate ought to be allowed to continue to use the name of their product, though.
Also, "iAds" is more of a defined product, and "iAd" is more of a pay for exposure service.
This is the first time I've ever found myself agreeing with the plaintiff.
Really? I would very interested to know how many people attempted to, or successfully trademarked, every freaking name they could think of once Apple started down the "i[insert successful product here]" path.
On that basis, this just comes across as another money grab. Then again, I am thinking of changing my legal name to "i am Me", just to piss everybody off.
And no, I am not saying that Apple owns the word "i", but they were certainly the first company to use the lower case "i" as the preface to a product name associated with the internet.
I agree with TheWatchfulOne, sounds fishy. Doesn't look like Apple even owns the iadtoday url with which they are alleged to be spreading the iAd mantra!
You realize that even the "little guy" doesn't want the name right? He want's to get paid by apple so he can go off and do whatever. Yes it will harm his business because people will be confused about his iAd, ok well no one has ever heard of him because he's never done anything with it, except sit back and wait the the very moment someone pays him for us of the name. Don't fool yourself he's getting just what he planned on right now.
Didnt realise you know the person and his plans.
but i imagine you are just guessing , just like im guessing he has used the name.
All that is mute considering he does own the name.
Is it that hard to check to see if the name is being used that Apple couldnt have looked before announcing iAd? ( I honestly dont know )
Im guessing Apple's lawyers cant figure it out considering this isnt the first time
they didnt own the name of a product that they have announced.
Apple actually wasn't the first one to use the i- prefix.
The original company that registered the iphone registered it back in 1996.
Remember iRiver? they made MP3 players called iMP-something before the iPod came out
Remember iPaq PDAs?
More recently, iGoogle, iCoke and the iPlayer from the BBC
iRiver was 1999 and iPaq was 2000. Infogear Technology did register iPhone in 1996 before they were bought by Cisco in 2000 tho yes. Can't find when Apple filed for the iMac trademark, altho the product was released in 1998.
Comments
In the last two cases these were either completely unrelated products in different markets, or they were long unused.
This time it's a little guy defending their core business trade name. It literally could be life or death for them companywise
Apple will likely simply compensate them, and not have it go to trial.
I always thought iAd was kind of a lame name though so I don't think I'll shed any tears on the unlikely event that Apple loses the trademark
This latest Supreme Court ruling makes this a moot issue:
http://scoopertino.com/high-court-up...reduced-to-25/
Good stuff!
And i think maybe checking to see if the name is available might be a good idea.
Hope the little guy gets to keep the name.
Apple needs to be More Innovative in the naming of products and services.
And i think maybe checking to see if the name is available might be a good idea.
Hope the little guy gets to keep the name.
You realize that even the "little guy" doesn't want the name right? He want's to get paid by apple so he can go off and do whatever. Yes it will harm his business because people will be confused about his iAd, ok well no one has ever heard of him because he's never done anything with it, except sit back and wait the the very moment someone pays him for us of the name. Don't fool yourself he's getting just what he planned on right now.
This is silly. The guy trademarked a technology product with the prefix "i" in 2007. What the hell did he think would happen? Who exactly was trying to confuse their product with who's? The name of his product is Innovate Ads anyway, and if I were him I'd stop trying to steal another company's marketing gimmick, and make up my own damn name and let my company succeed on its own merits.
I'm not going to go so far as to say that Apple owns the letter "i", but for all intents and purposes, it is associated with them in consumers' minds, and isn't that why these trademark suits exist? Because one person names their product in a way as to confuse the customer as to who is providing that product?
Right or wrong, he's going to get stomped by Apple's legal team, and maybe if he shells out for some good lawyers himself he'll get a nice little settlement out of it (which elevates him to the level of people who trip on the sidewalk so they can sue for damages).
But to anybody who some time after, let's say, 2003, named a product "iSomething": I see what you did there, and even if the law is on your side, I have no sympathy.
You have to be kidding with this right?
You have no sympathy for someone that has the law on their side? So basically, Apple is allowed to do whatever they want in your mind?
Just because you like their products or they are popular doesn't mean they can just do whatever they want and it's not like putting a lowercase letter in the front of a name was the greatest and ingenious marketing idea of all time. Where do you think the ad agency that came up with the name got it from?
Remember eMail? How about etrade, eBay, ePets?
All Apple did was jump on the same bandwagon and decide to use an "i" to stand for internet. I'd have to check, but I'm not even sure if they were the first ones to do it. It was just the cool thing to do at the time.
Does the company want to associate themselves with Apple? if you use an i in front of a name does that automatically mean you do? Is Google trying with iGoogle? Was Cisco when they called their internet phone an iPhone? The name of the company is Innovate Ads and they decided to call their platform iAds. They have a business in online advertising which is a space the Apple has not been in and has never been in and is pretty far away from consumer products, which has been Apples core business. I don't see anything in their business that specifically targeted them to Apple. They were just jumping on the whole lowercase i bandwagon that is cool to do, just like Google did and just like ebay, etoys and epets and let's not forget the ingenious name of eMac.
I don't know how this case will land but let's not pretend that everything Apple does is all good. Very simply, Apple is just doing what they want to do because they know they have enough cash and are bigger then everyone else out there to get what they want. And don't pretend that if this was about a Microsoft or some other company you would be making the same argument.
... and engaged in "aggressive pursuit" of the Gizmodo journalist ...
Tells you that the legal team for this company is amateur at best. Including emotional, slanted language like that is just unprofessional. Especially when the easily discoverable facts are quite the opposite of this statement.
Also, come'on, they are advertisers. They don't have any morals and it's not about the principal of the situation, it's just about the money.
Apple will pay them, buy them out, or give them some free access to the iAd platform and that will be that.
iPromote
iPeddle
iPersuade
iMarket
iMedia
And I'm sure most anyone here can also come up with something just as suitable. Try it - it's fun!
To think that someone would mistakenly buy ad space from Apple based on the reputation of "iAds" is completely ridiculous. I do think Innovate ought to be allowed to continue to use the name of their product, though.
Also, "iAds" is more of a defined product, and "iAd" is more of a pay for exposure service.
This is the first time I've ever found myself agreeing with the plaintiff.
Really? I would very interested to know how many people attempted to, or successfully trademarked, every freaking name they could think of once Apple started down the "i[insert successful product here]" path.
On that basis, this just comes across as another money grab. Then again, I am thinking of changing my legal name to "i am Me", just to piss everybody off.
And no, I am not saying that Apple owns the word "i", but they were certainly the first company to use the lower case "i" as the preface to a product name associated with the internet.
The original company that registered the iphone registered it back in 1996.
Remember iRiver? they made MP3 players called iMP-something before the iPod came out
Remember iPaq PDAs?
More recently, iGoogle, iCoke and the iPlayer from the BBC
Apple actually wasn't the first one to use the i- prefix.
The original company that registered the iphone registered it back in 1996.
Remember iRiver? they made MP3 players called iMP-something before the iPod came out
Remember iPaq PDAs?
More recently, iGoogle, iCoke and the iPlayer from the BBC
I forgot to add "first wildly successful"
Registrant:
McMillan Creative
Galveston, Texas
You realize that even the "little guy" doesn't want the name right? He want's to get paid by apple so he can go off and do whatever. Yes it will harm his business because people will be confused about his iAd, ok well no one has ever heard of him because he's never done anything with it, except sit back and wait the the very moment someone pays him for us of the name. Don't fool yourself he's getting just what he planned on right now.
Didnt realise you know the person and his plans.
but i imagine you are just guessing , just like im guessing he has used the name.
All that is mute considering he does own the name.
Is it that hard to check to see if the name is being used that Apple couldnt have looked before announcing iAd? ( I honestly dont know )
Im guessing Apple's lawyers cant figure it out considering this isnt the first time
they didnt own the name of a product that they have announced.
Interactive ads : http://www.innovateads.com/
Apple actually wasn't the first one to use the i- prefix.
The original company that registered the iphone registered it back in 1996.
Remember iRiver? they made MP3 players called iMP-something before the iPod came out
Remember iPaq PDAs?
More recently, iGoogle, iCoke and the iPlayer from the BBC
iRiver was 1999 and iPaq was 2000. Infogear Technology did register iPhone in 1996 before they were bought by Cisco in 2000 tho yes. Can't find when Apple filed for the iMac trademark, altho the product was released in 1998.