I don't get it. Why not instead trade mark some combo term not in general use such as StormStart, iStart, UpStart, whatever. Apple is begging for trouble, but then maybe there is some method in its madness and doing this in Australia gets coverage, will not be allowed, and Apple jumps in with a more viable TM mark from its secret cupboard.
In other news, The Rolling Stones slapped a lawsuit against Apple requesting an injunction for the trademark 'startup' as the group said it sounds too similar to their song, "Start Me Up"!
Good job maneuvering themselves into a position where they, as a company, soon needs to be killed for mankind's best.
"for the good of mankind" would be the English phrase you're looking for.
I'll use you as an example of how not to think of this so narrowly that you miss the point, like others here.
Apple is setting up, for the first time in retail and consumer tech history, a coherent group of services that are designed to get new customers up and running, and old customers repaired and running again.
They want to call this multifaceted group of services by a single name, reflecting a single concept: "Startup."
That doesn't keep anyone from using the term "startup" in ordinary discourse, when referring to new businesses, for example, any more than the phrase "get real" would be off limits if, say, Coca-Cola trademarked it.
It would keep Samsung from using the term to refer to customer sevices (fat chance!) inside their stores, if they ever opened any. Or Amazon.
There is nothing new or insidious about any of this. Y'all just hate it when Apple does new stuff that looks corporate, when in reality they're doing something so beyond corporate and so consumer-focused that you can't even see it, you're so full of reflexive negativity.
Remember folks, Apple is always evil, and you don't need to use your brain when a knee-jerk will do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleh1234
Why not just trademark the whole English language then? Pathetic
Remember when Apple tradmarked "AirPort" for WiFi products and the sky didn't fall? We can even still build airports! That's similar to how the sky won't fall due to some product/feature called StartUp.
Remember how we all can still buy apple pies, apple cider, and even apples, even though Apple trademarked "Apple"? People can still talk about burying time capsules even though "Time Capsule" (and "Time Machine") are trademarked for backups; and millions of products are still sold in the color aqua even though Apple trademarked "Aqua" for its UI design.
How about "Boot Camp," "Carbon," and the fonts "Charcoal," "Chicago," "Geneva", "Monaco," "New York," "Textile" and "Sand"? I'm no lawyer, but it almost starts to seem as though these Apple trademarks aren't about trademarking language in general--they're about trademarking specific USES of the words as product/feature names.
How have we survived "Bonjour," "Cocoa," "Exposé," "FaceTime," "Final Cut," "FlyOver," the venerable "Finder," and "GarageBand"? Home musicians are still able to call themselves by that long-known term, even if competing software companies can't steal the name for their music apps. Continue down the alphabet: "Inkwell," "Instruments", "KeyChain," "Keynote," "Pages," "Numbers," "Lightning," "Logic," "Launchpad," "Mission Control," "PassBook," "Photo Booth," "Quartz," "Retina," "Safari," "Sherlock," "SoundTrack," "Spaces," "Spotlight," and "Tubes."
And what about the airline "Southwest," the music company "Pandora," the drink "50/50", the restaurant "Rally's," and, say, "Amazon"? Don't get me started on the VW "Rabbit." Someone pointed out "Windows," but I give Microsoft a free pass since they invented UI windows as we know them. (Wait, actually that was Apple... Xerox PARC's UIs had content in rectangles, but they couldn't overlap or be dragged.) Seems Apple's not the only evil tyrant out to steal the very words from our mouths....
Answer, no. Other than Chrome, Android, Blogger, Ad Words, Boomerang, Closure, Dart, Daydream, DoubleClick, Freebase, Glass, Go, Hangouts, I'm Feeling Lucky, Internet Revolution, Motif, Nexus, Schemer, SingleTap, Street View and Widfire. All trademarked, along with a zillion more like Google Reader that they apparently couldn't get without "Google" on the front. Doesn't mean they didn't try! I wonder if they're working on trademarking "Play"? Better be an outcry if they attempt that!
In spite of Nagromme's commentary, this seems like a rather silly trademark. It will have to be so narrow that it won't be particularly useful.
I'm guessing that it's more of a defensive application - to keep someone else from blocking their use of the term.
This seems more like an Apple version of Geeksquad. Or some sort of an expansion of the Genius Bar concept. If this includes home and business support at remote locations, they will market the crap out of it. So it is critical to have a name that is protected before you dump a truck load of money on the marketing of it. It sounds more like a name to gather all of the existing services under for service and training (genius bar, one on one, Workshops, dedicated to business, jointventure).
I had not heard of jointventure before. Maybe startup is a rebrand of that or a similar collection of consumer services to get one name to simplify marketing of all they do.
"for the good of mankind" would be the English phrase you're looking for.
I'll use you as an example of how not to think of this so narrowly that you miss the point, like others here.
Apple is setting up, for the first time in retail and consumer tech history, a coherent group of services that are designed to get new customers up and running, and old customers repaired and running again.
They want to call this multifaceted group of services by a single name, reflecting a single concept: "Startup."
That doesn't keep anyone from using the term "startup" in ordinary discourse, when referring to new businesses, for example, any more than the phrase "get real" would be off limits if, say, Coca-Cola trademarked it.
It would keep Samsung from using the term to refer to customer sevices (fat chance!) inside their stores, if they ever opened any. Or Amazon.
There is nothing new or insidious about any of this. Y'all just hate it when Apple does new stuff that looks corporate, when in reality they're doing something so beyond corporate and so consumer-focused that you can't even see it, you're so full of reflexive negativity.
Remember folks, Apple is always evil, and you don't need to use your brain when a knee-jerk will do!
Remember when Apple tradmarked "AirPort" for WiFi products and the sky didn't fall? We can even still build airports! That's similar to how the sky won't fall due to some product/feature called StartUp.
Remember how we all can still buy apple pies, apple cider, and even apples, even though Apple trademarked "Apple"? People can still talk about burying time capsules even though "Time Capsule" (and "Time Machine") are trademarked for backups; and millions of products are still sold in the color aqua even though Apple trademarked "Aqua" for its UI design.
How about "Boot Camp," "Carbon," and the fonts "Charcoal," "Chicago," "Geneva", "Monaco," "New York," "Textile" and "Sand"? I'm no lawyer, but it almost starts to seem as though these Apple trademarks aren't about trademarking language in general--they're about trademarking specific USES of the words as product/feature names.
How have we survived "Bonjour," "Cocoa," "Exposé," "FaceTime," "Final Cut," "FlyOver," the venerable "Finder," and "GarageBand"? Home musicians are still able to call themselves by that long-known term, even if competing software companies can't steal the name for their music apps. Continue down the alphabet: "Inkwell," "Instruments", "KeyChain," "Keynote," "Pages," "Numbers," "Lightning," "Logic," "Launchpad," "Mission Control," "PassBook," "Photo Booth," "Quartz," "Retina," "Safari," "Sherlock," "SoundTrack," "Spaces," "Spotlight," and "Tubes."
And what about the airline "Southwest," the music company "Pandora," the drink "50/50", the restaurant "Rally's," and, say, "Amazon"? Don't get me started on the VW "Rabbit." Someone pointed out "Windows," but I give Microsoft a free pass since they invented UI windows as we know them. (Wait, actually that was Apple... Xerox PARC's UIs had content in rectangles, but they couldn't overlap or be dragged.) Seems Apple's not the only evil tyrant out to steal the very words from our mouths....
Answer, no. Other than Chrome, Android, Blogger, Ad Words, Boomerang, Closure, Dart, Daydream, DoubleClick, Freebase, Glass, Go, Hangouts, I'm Feeling Lucky, Internet Revolution, Motif, Nexus, Schemer, SingleTap, Street View and Widfire. All trademarked, along with a zillion more like Google Reader that they apparently couldn't get without "Google" on the front. Doesn't mean they didn't try! I wonder if they're working on trademarking "Play"? Better be an outcry if they attempt that!
That, too.
But I thought most of this would have been obvious to most people already.
Seeing some of the nonsense in this thread, I see I was wrong.
The test for whether a trademark is in violation of another is whether the average consumer can get confuse between the two and think they're products from the same company.
First of all, "Startup" is not "Startup-Explorer". Second, "Startup" is most likely not software, but a service.(at least it seems) Not many are going to confuse Apple "Startup" service with "Startup-Explorer, a software meant for PC's. Now if "Startup-Explorer" was a very widely use software and nearly everyone refers to it as just "Startup", then Apple would have a harder time getting "Startup" as their trademark. But not impossible, if they're are still not similar products.
I think the biggest hurdle Apple has to over come is whether the term "Startup" is too generic for the product they want to use the trademark for. Just like how you can get a trademark for "Apple" if your company sells music or if your company sells computers. But you can't get a trademark for "Apple", if your company sells apples.
Apple is taking a trademark out of the term "Startup". They are not getting a copyright for it. Therefore, the word "startup can still be used in everyday language to describe what it means. A trademark only limits the term when some one wants to name a business or service that is similar to what Apple is using the term for.
The test for whether a trademark is in violation of another is whether the average consumer can get confuse between the two and think they're products from the same company.
First of all, "Startup" is not "Startup-Explorer". Second, "Startup" is most likely not software, but a service.(at least it seems) Not many are going to confuse Apple "Startup" service with "Startup-Explorer, a software meant for PC's. Now if "Startup-Explorer" was a very widely use software and nearly everyone refers to it as just "Startup", then Apple would have a harder time getting "Startup" as their trademark. But not impossible, if they're are still not similar products.
I think the biggest hurdle Apple has to over come is whether the term "Startup" is too generic for the product they want to use the trademark for. Just like how you can get a trademark for "Apple" if your company sells music or if your company sells computers. But you can't get a trademark for "Apple", if your company sells apples.
Apple is taking a trademark out of the term "Startup". They are not getting a copyright for it. Therefore, the word "startup can still be used in everyday language to describe what it means. A trademark only limits the term when some one wants to name a business or service that is similar to what Apple is using the term for.
While that's all correct, the entire trademark situation got a lot messier when USPTO allowed Microsoft to trademark "Windows" and "Office".
In other news, The Rolling Stones slapped a lawsuit against Apple requesting an injunction for the trademark 'startup' as the group said it sounds too similar to their song, "Start Me Up"!
Comments
Addendum. "SpankU" is my gift to Apple.
"for the good of mankind" would be the English phrase you're looking for.
I'll use you as an example of how not to think of this so narrowly that you miss the point, like others here.
Apple is setting up, for the first time in retail and consumer tech history, a coherent group of services that are designed to get new customers up and running, and old customers repaired and running again.
They want to call this multifaceted group of services by a single name, reflecting a single concept: "Startup."
That doesn't keep anyone from using the term "startup" in ordinary discourse, when referring to new businesses, for example, any more than the phrase "get real" would be off limits if, say, Coca-Cola trademarked it.
It would keep Samsung from using the term to refer to customer sevices (fat chance!) inside their stores, if they ever opened any. Or Amazon.
There is nothing new or insidious about any of this. Y'all just hate it when Apple does new stuff that looks corporate, when in reality they're doing something so beyond corporate and so consumer-focused that you can't even see it, you're so full of reflexive negativity.
http://www.pctools.com/startup-explorer/
or even this:
http://www.wikihow.com/Change-Startup-Programs-on-Your-Computer
Remember folks, Apple is always evil, and you don't need to use your brain when a knee-jerk will do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleh1234
Why not just trademark the whole English language then? Pathetic
Remember when Apple tradmarked "AirPort" for WiFi products and the sky didn't fall? We can even still build airports! That's similar to how the sky won't fall due to some product/feature called StartUp.
Remember how we all can still buy apple pies, apple cider, and even apples, even though Apple trademarked "Apple"? People can still talk about burying time capsules even though "Time Capsule" (and "Time Machine") are trademarked for backups; and millions of products are still sold in the color aqua even though Apple trademarked "Aqua" for its UI design.
How about "Boot Camp," "Carbon," and the fonts "Charcoal," "Chicago," "Geneva", "Monaco," "New York," "Textile" and "Sand"? I'm no lawyer, but it almost starts to seem as though these Apple trademarks aren't about trademarking language in general--they're about trademarking specific USES of the words as product/feature names.
How have we survived "Bonjour," "Cocoa," "Exposé," "FaceTime," "Final Cut," "FlyOver," the venerable "Finder," and "GarageBand"? Home musicians are still able to call themselves by that long-known term, even if competing software companies can't steal the name for their music apps. Continue down the alphabet: "Inkwell," "Instruments", "KeyChain," "Keynote," "Pages," "Numbers," "Lightning," "Logic," "Launchpad," "Mission Control," "PassBook," "Photo Booth," "Quartz," "Retina," "Safari," "Sherlock," "SoundTrack," "Spaces," "Spotlight," and "Tubes."
And what about the airline "Southwest," the music company "Pandora," the drink "50/50", the restaurant "Rally's," and, say, "Amazon"? Don't get me started on the VW "Rabbit." Someone pointed out "Windows," but I give Microsoft a free pass since they invented UI windows as we know them. (Wait, actually that was Apple... Xerox PARC's UIs had content in rectangles, but they couldn't overlap or be dragged.) Seems Apple's not the only evil tyrant out to steal the very words from our mouths....
And I was curious... would Google ever trademark an existing word?
Answer, no. Other than Chrome, Android, Blogger, Ad Words, Boomerang, Closure, Dart, Daydream, DoubleClick, Freebase, Glass, Go, Hangouts, I'm Feeling Lucky, Internet Revolution, Motif, Nexus, Schemer, SingleTap, Street View and Widfire. All trademarked, along with a zillion more like Google Reader that they apparently couldn't get without "Google" on the front. Doesn't mean they didn't try! I wonder if they're working on trademarking "Play"? Better be an outcry if they attempt that!
This is a new low for Apple! Good job making more people hate you Apple!
Originally Posted by NelsonX
This is a new low for Apple! Good job making more people hate you Apple!
Come off it.
Great posting !
Thanks Nagromme for a thoughtful commentary !
I'm guessing that it's more of a defensive application - to keep someone else from blocking their use of the term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
In spite of Nagromme's commentary, this seems like a rather silly trademark. It will have to be so narrow that it won't be particularly useful.
I'm guessing that it's more of a defensive application - to keep someone else from blocking their use of the term.
except they have to then use the term in a manner in which it was trademarked correct? you cannot just TM a word or phrase and not use it.
This seems more like an Apple version of Geeksquad. Or some sort of an expansion of the Genius Bar concept. If this includes home and business support at remote locations, they will market the crap out of it. So it is critical to have a name that is protected before you dump a truck load of money on the marketing of it. It sounds more like a name to gather all of the existing services under for service and training (genius bar, one on one, Workshops, dedicated to business, jointventure).
I had not heard of jointventure before. Maybe startup is a rebrand of that or a similar collection of consumer services to get one name to simplify marketing of all they do.
http://www.apple.com/retail/jointventure/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
"for the good of mankind" would be the English phrase you're looking for.
I'll use you as an example of how not to think of this so narrowly that you miss the point, like others here.
Apple is setting up, for the first time in retail and consumer tech history, a coherent group of services that are designed to get new customers up and running, and old customers repaired and running again.
They want to call this multifaceted group of services by a single name, reflecting a single concept: "Startup."
That doesn't keep anyone from using the term "startup" in ordinary discourse, when referring to new businesses, for example, any more than the phrase "get real" would be off limits if, say, Coca-Cola trademarked it.
It would keep Samsung from using the term to refer to customer sevices (fat chance!) inside their stores, if they ever opened any. Or Amazon.
There is nothing new or insidious about any of this. Y'all just hate it when Apple does new stuff that looks corporate, when in reality they're doing something so beyond corporate and so consumer-focused that you can't even see it, you're so full of reflexive negativity.
That.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
Remember folks, Apple is always evil, and you don't need to use your brain when a knee-jerk will do!
Remember when Apple tradmarked "AirPort" for WiFi products and the sky didn't fall? We can even still build airports! That's similar to how the sky won't fall due to some product/feature called StartUp.
Remember how we all can still buy apple pies, apple cider, and even apples, even though Apple trademarked "Apple"? People can still talk about burying time capsules even though "Time Capsule" (and "Time Machine") are trademarked for backups; and millions of products are still sold in the color aqua even though Apple trademarked "Aqua" for its UI design.
How about "Boot Camp," "Carbon," and the fonts "Charcoal," "Chicago," "Geneva", "Monaco," "New York," "Textile" and "Sand"? I'm no lawyer, but it almost starts to seem as though these Apple trademarks aren't about trademarking language in general--they're about trademarking specific USES of the words as product/feature names.
How have we survived "Bonjour," "Cocoa," "Exposé," "FaceTime," "Final Cut," "FlyOver," the venerable "Finder," and "GarageBand"? Home musicians are still able to call themselves by that long-known term, even if competing software companies can't steal the name for their music apps. Continue down the alphabet: "Inkwell," "Instruments", "KeyChain," "Keynote," "Pages," "Numbers," "Lightning," "Logic," "Launchpad," "Mission Control," "PassBook," "Photo Booth," "Quartz," "Retina," "Safari," "Sherlock," "SoundTrack," "Spaces," "Spotlight," and "Tubes."
And what about the airline "Southwest," the music company "Pandora," the drink "50/50", the restaurant "Rally's," and, say, "Amazon"? Don't get me started on the VW "Rabbit." Someone pointed out "Windows," but I give Microsoft a free pass since they invented UI windows as we know them. (Wait, actually that was Apple... Xerox PARC's UIs had content in rectangles, but they couldn't overlap or be dragged.) Seems Apple's not the only evil tyrant out to steal the very words from our mouths....
And I was curious... would Google ever trademark an existing word?
Answer, no. Other than Chrome, Android, Blogger, Ad Words, Boomerang, Closure, Dart, Daydream, DoubleClick, Freebase, Glass, Go, Hangouts, I'm Feeling Lucky, Internet Revolution, Motif, Nexus, Schemer, SingleTap, Street View and Widfire. All trademarked, along with a zillion more like Google Reader that they apparently couldn't get without "Google" on the front. Doesn't mean they didn't try! I wonder if they're working on trademarking "Play"? Better be an outcry if they attempt that!
That, too.
But I thought most of this would have been obvious to most people already.
Seeing some of the nonsense in this thread, I see I was wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Curious if something like this would be a trademark violation? I really don't know.
http://www.pctools.com/startup-explorer/
or even this:
http://www.wikihow.com/Change-Startup-Programs-on-Your-Computer
The test for whether a trademark is in violation of another is whether the average consumer can get confuse between the two and think they're products from the same company.
First of all, "Startup" is not "Startup-Explorer". Second, "Startup" is most likely not software, but a service.(at least it seems) Not many are going to confuse Apple "Startup" service with "Startup-Explorer, a software meant for PC's. Now if "Startup-Explorer" was a very widely use software and nearly everyone refers to it as just "Startup", then Apple would have a harder time getting "Startup" as their trademark. But not impossible, if they're are still not similar products.
I think the biggest hurdle Apple has to over come is whether the term "Startup" is too generic for the product they want to use the trademark for. Just like how you can get a trademark for "Apple" if your company sells music or if your company sells computers. But you can't get a trademark for "Apple", if your company sells apples.
Apple is taking a trademark out of the term "Startup". They are not getting a copyright for it. Therefore, the word "startup can still be used in everyday language to describe what it means. A trademark only limits the term when some one wants to name a business or service that is similar to what Apple is using the term for.
While that's all correct, the entire trademark situation got a lot messier when USPTO allowed Microsoft to trademark "Windows" and "Office".
Which was licensed to MS for the Win95 launch.