Brilliant marketing by Prepear with the petition, but they’re still likely to lose with regard to the trademark design.
Just change the leaf design so it looks more like a pear leaf (bigger and rounder, with a center line) and less exactly like the leaf in the Apple trademark. [See the Prepear app icon for a better sense of why Apple objects to this.] Retain the color scheme and the righteous outrage of the new customers this has brought into the fold, and then focus on retaining those customers.
I will give my opinion as someone with no design experience, no trademark law knowledge and no college degree. I stared at the logos for quite some time comparing them and I do not see it. To me this seems like Apple being a petty bully. I hope this settles it for everyone...lol.
I will give my opinion as someone with no design experience, no trademark law knowledge and no college degree. I stared at the logos for quite some time comparing them and I do not see it. To me this seems like Apple being a petty bully. I hope this settles it for everyone...lol.
I think the reason the trademark (as opposed to the art) crosses a line is the way the inner edge of the leaf outline is designed to evoke Apple’s distinctive leaf motif, which dates to 1977 and is arguably the most essential of the three elements of Apple’s design (the leaf, the apple, and the bite).
A bit weak. Does this mean that if my logo involves a coffee cup with the handle on the right side that Apple is going to come after me because from a distance, at night, through the fog and heavy rain my logo might resemble a piece of fruit?
I’m guessing that Tim was out of the office when this decision was made.
It was probably on the day he was on his inquisition about the 25 computers that got shipped to SK instead of Japan! Tomorrow some poor employee is going to have to listen to Cook’s questions about this!
A bit weak. Does this mean that if my logo involves a coffee cup with the handle on the right side that Apple is going to come after me because from a distance, at night, through the fog and heavy rain my logo might resemble a piece of fruit?
Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
And no, I’m not (just) a fanboy, but a future PhD in design, and even an undergrad with a keen eye would spot the similarities right away… This isn’t much different from spotting plagiarism in typography, you just have to overlay the curves and see how well they match. Do you want me to?
How the hell does Samsung get away with blatantly biting Apple?
Knockoff Apple Store with Apple App icons
Samsungs iKnockoff default apps
Money. And maybe different laws in SK that would just make it difficult for Apple. Easier to hit some small companies to show you are defending your trademarks.
That all said, I am pretty sure there actually was a real Pear Computer back in the Apple ][ days that was closed down due to infringement. Any old timers here remember that?
Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
And no, I’m not (just) a fanboy, but a future PhD in design, and even an undergrad with a keen eye would spot the similarities right away… This isn’t much different from spotting plagiarism in typography, you just have to overlay the curves and see how well they match. Do you want me to?
I only have a degree in graphic design but I don’t think your point is valid.
There is only 4 sides For a 2D logo. Since it is unreasonable to put the leaf on the left, right and bottom. So it is either top left or top right. Most fruit graphic shown the fruit is upright to represent hanging from tree to represent freshness. So if you think a small company can only shows their logo in an unnatural position to avoid lawsuits from the richest company in the world is rather sad.
Most pear selling in store is either, green, red and yellow. Apple never use these color exclusively on their logo. And the pear logo is not in rainbow color too. I don’t think the color is the problem here.
The shape of the Apple logo is almost always solid. The pear logo used bold line to outline the shape. So I don’t think it is the problem of the line work.
i don’t think Tim or other upper management will agree with the lawsuit, they are not that stupid. Apple cares about their image, a lot.
what I think the problem is their law department has too much free time and someone want a promotion.
this lawsuit is all about someone in food industry want to use a fruit as their logo, which I think they have all the right to do it. The apple farming industry did not sue Apple for their logo when they first started. And I don’t see any logical reason for Apple to sue the small food company.
i am an Apple fan boy but I think this suit will only damage Apple’s image. Which confirm Apple is an evil big company that want to destroy a small company.
The person in the law department of apple should get fired.
Don't beat up on Apple for doing what the law requires of them. Beat up on yourselves for electing representatives that enact laws that require Apple to do this. You the People! If you don't like it, do something about it. Apple didn't elect them, you did!
Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
Not really. A trademark doesn't infringe if it does not cause confusion in the marketplace. There is absolutely no possibility that Apple's customers would be confused by seeing this pear logo in a completely different commercial use. Further, good luck if Apple can show this AND demonstrate damages related to that.
Objectively and geometrically speaking, the leaf design is way too similar and it’s on the same side. Also, its angle is similar, only mirrored. Apple does have a bit of a leg to stand on here, I’m afraid.
Not really. A trademark doesn't infringe if it does not cause confusion in the marketplace. There is absolutely no possibility that Apple's customers would be confused by seeing this pear logo in a completely different commercial use. Further, good luck if Apple can show this AND demonstrate damages related to that.
Infringement isn’t the only basis on which one can oppose federal registration, which is what Apple is doing here. One can get injunctive relief against the use of a mark or successfully oppose the federal registration of a mark based on dilution. And unlike infringement, dilution doesn’t require a showing that a mark is identical or otherwise likely to cause confusion. Someone opposing the registration of a mark, or seeking injunctive relief against a mark, doesn’t need to demonstrate actual dilution - only the likelihood thereof.
Apple is arguing, among other things, dilution by blurring. That doesn’t require substantial similarity. It’s about association, not confusion,
Comments
That might make the difference
There's a reasonableness test that needs to be applied, and it surely does not pass that test.
That all said, I am pretty sure there actually was a real Pear Computer back in the Apple ][ days that was closed down due to infringement. Any old timers here remember that?
Most pear selling in store is either, green, red and yellow. Apple never use these color exclusively on their logo. And the pear logo is not in rainbow color too. I don’t think the color is the problem here.
The shape of the Apple logo is almost always solid. The pear logo used bold line to outline the shape. So I don’t think it is the problem of the line work.
i don’t think Tim or other upper management will agree with the lawsuit, they are not that stupid. Apple cares about their image, a lot.
what I think the problem is their law department has too much free time and someone want a promotion.
i am an Apple fan boy but I think this suit will only damage Apple’s image. Which confirm Apple is an evil big company that want to destroy a small company.
The person in the law department of apple should get fired.
If anything, only the leaf looks similar shape.
Apple is arguing, among other things, dilution by blurring. That doesn’t require substantial similarity. It’s about association, not confusion,