Amazon requests judge throw out Apple's claim of false advertisement
Amazon on Wednesday asked a federal judge to throw out an ongoing court case Apple leveled against the online retail giant for allegedly misusing the "App Store" name, saying the term has become so widespread that it is now generic.
Apple first filed suit against Amazon in March 2011 for using the "App Store" trademark in its online store for Android apps, and added the false advertising claim in November the same year after the "Amazon Appstore for Android" changed to the "Amazon Appstore." The Cupertino company asserts the name change possibly confused consumers.
In its filing on Wednesday, Amazon countered, claiming the "app store" moniker has become generic and therefore cannot constitute false advertising. The company went further, noting that Apple CEO Tim Cook and late cofounder Steve Jobs used the name to describe competitors, with Cook having referred to "the number of app stores out there" and Jobs noting the "four app stores on Android."
"Apple presumably does not contend that its past and current CEOs made false statements regarding to those other app stores to thousands of investors in earnings calls," Amazon said. "To the contrary, the use of the term 'app store' to refer to stores selling apps is commonplace in the industry."
U.S. trademark law leaves the defense of name use up to owners, and a failure to effectively protect a property can result in a trademark becoming a generic description of a service or product, as Amazon argues regarding its use of "app store."
Previous to Apple's original 2011 claim, Microsoft objected to the "App Store" trademark application, claiming the term was too generic to be registered. Apple argued that if Microsoft was able to trademark "Windows," the "App Store" name should be honored as well.
Apple first filed suit against Amazon in March 2011 for using the "App Store" trademark in its online store for Android apps, and added the false advertising claim in November the same year after the "Amazon Appstore for Android" changed to the "Amazon Appstore." The Cupertino company asserts the name change possibly confused consumers.
In its filing on Wednesday, Amazon countered, claiming the "app store" moniker has become generic and therefore cannot constitute false advertising. The company went further, noting that Apple CEO Tim Cook and late cofounder Steve Jobs used the name to describe competitors, with Cook having referred to "the number of app stores out there" and Jobs noting the "four app stores on Android."
"Apple presumably does not contend that its past and current CEOs made false statements regarding to those other app stores to thousands of investors in earnings calls," Amazon said. "To the contrary, the use of the term 'app store' to refer to stores selling apps is commonplace in the industry."
U.S. trademark law leaves the defense of name use up to owners, and a failure to effectively protect a property can result in a trademark becoming a generic description of a service or product, as Amazon argues regarding its use of "app store."
Previous to Apple's original 2011 claim, Microsoft objected to the "App Store" trademark application, claiming the term was too generic to be registered. Apple argued that if Microsoft was able to trademark "Windows," the "App Store" name should be honored as well.
Comments
I'm not sure their new name constitutes 'false advertising', but I am also not sure that I understand the entirety of what the phrase 'false advertising' can contain.
To me it sounds more like 'deceptive advertising', but perhaps that's a term too specific to be considered legally defined.
Originally Posted by DaHarder
FACT: 'App Store" Does Not Equal 'Appstore', whether Apple likes it or not.
Start a computer company called "AppleInc" and we'll see how far that gets you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm not sure their new name constitutes 'false advertising', but I am also not sure that I understand the entirety of what the phrase 'false advertising' can contain.
To me it sounds more like 'deceptive advertising', but perhaps that's a term too specific to be considered legally defined.
Start a computer company called "AppleInc" and we'll see how far that gets you.
I think I'll drink some cocacola, I just invented it.
i almost got out of my chair to sue you, before i realised you hadn't written co cacola, which i may or may not happen to have invented. but which i will not, in any case, consume, since it is only likely to dissolve my intestines and make me fat prior to that (just like the other thing).
i guess the meat of the issue lies in how many others used app store (with or without the space) before apple decided to sue amazon. if many, then i guess apple has less of a defence about it having become generic. if amazon were the first copiers (or re-inventers if you prefer) then logically speaking, it becomes justifiable that apple sued them, and is holding off on whoever else has made it a "generic" term, until the outcome of this case if known.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
FACT: 'App Store" Does Not Equal 'Appstore', whether Apple likes it or not.
Start a computer company called "AppleInc" and we'll see how far that gets you.
Typical DaHarder drive-by trolling...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
FACT: 'App Store" Does Not Equal 'Appstore', whether Apple likes it or not.
Fact [fakt] noun: something that actually exists; reality; truth
Since you have zero proof, live in your own reality, and spin propaganda to suit your agenda - you as usual speak a lot but say little.
I must admit I had never heard software referred to as apps prior to the iphone, and when i heard the reference actually thought they were some sort of special name for phone applications.
Apple's weak bit is that the alliterative "Amazon Appstore for Android" was apparently OK, according to this article.
questions, questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
So you wouldn't have a problem with someone signing up on AI as Da Harder and then posting in your style but making your posts sound rational and sane?
Mind = Blown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm not sure their new name constitutes 'false advertising', but I am also not sure that I understand the entirety of what the phrase 'false advertising' can contain.
To me it sounds more like 'deceptive advertising', but perhaps that's a term too specific to be considered legally defined.
Start a computer company called "AppleInc" and we'll see how far that gets you.
Funny. To me, it sounds like a "store" from which you can purchase "apps" from, which is exactly what it is. What exactly is deceptive about that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
So you wouldn't have a problem with someone signing up on AI as Da Harder and then posting in your style but making your posts sound rational and sane?
Ooh, that's kind of a tempting proposition... You always have to watch out for that dreaded space character.
"Cover your butts, Bernard is watching"
If Amazon had called it "The Apple App Store," or "The IOS App Store," they might have a point. But this, this is like Walgreens Drugstore suing Hewitt Drugstore for false advertising, since people might be confused by "drugstore." Apple has to prove without a shadow of a doubt that people are morons, and can't tell the difference between Amazon and Apple. This is like parking an S1500 next to an F-150, and then trying to stump people by asking them to point at the Ford.
You all attack others for disagreeing with you, yet never state exactly why your opinions have merit themselves. Brand confusion was a legitimate aspect of the Samsung lawsuit, in that they had documented evidence of consumers purchasing Tabs thinking they were iPads, and then returning them the moment they realized their mistake. Apple has yet to prove damage to brand integrity through similar circumstances here, and that, as well as freaking common sense, dictates this suit should have been tossed a long time ago. No, this is just Apple's massively overdeveloped legal department doing everything it can to justify it's expenditures as well as it's very existence.
Amazon can't use the word Android since they forked their own version. They had to take Android out of their App Store name bc Google forbids the use of their trademarked "Android" name in forked versions.
How about a little deep thinking here or would that be too much to ask from the trolls from both sides.
The question is in timing, not what tech reviewers say.
IIRC, I never saw tech reviews mentioning App Stores in Palm or Windows Mobile reviews.
Apple started using the term in 2008 and then Google started using the term Marketplace. If you have any sense of logic, or marketing and business strategy, you would understand that Amazon's intention was to mislead consumers that had heard the term App Store. They wanted to use terms that consumers associate with a decent and well support product.
If anyone ignores this they are either biased or have no sense of reason aka dumb.
Sometimes I feel that I'm responding to 13 year olds, that lack any understanding of logic and reason. Unfortunately many posters here are so biased ( from both sides ) and avoid any meaningful discussion (regardless of age) of the facts and each companies strategy and long term goals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacepower
Amazon can't use the word Android
Yes they can use it and they do use it because that is what it is.
-> Amazon Appstore for Android
They had to take Android out of their App Store
Except they didn't take it out because it is an Appstore for Android.
It isn't Appstore for Kindle iOS Devices using a forked version of Android but we can't call it Android
the internet!
In any case the use or usage & conception originates within
Apple: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apples-app-store-and-a-little-trademark-history/46336
In the soft beverage industry, in the USA, we call it soda, soda pop, cola, or coke (even when we don't specifically mean Coke VS Pepsi, bc many restaurants only sell Coke or Pepsi, not both).
Apple is fighting for the strength of their brand . They don't want their brand diluted. They want ordering a coke to mean you get a Coke, not a Pepsi or Coke, or the only one being served..
Bonus facts for anyone that wants to learn (maybe not many here)?
McDonalds had a contract with Coca Cola
In response:
Pepsi Co started Pizza Hut, KFC, and Taco Bell to sell more Pepsi Cola.
That's strategic business .
I'm going by the article's supposed facts where they took out "Android"
Did you read the article? Maybe my reading comprehension is low or you have and older device?
Btw, Apple Insider forgot to mention a blatant copy case news - Swiss newspaper Blick - Google Translate
So, that Billion will disappear fast.