sigh... you can trademark words to be attached to specific products and protect them as your intellectual property (example: no one can come out with a presentation application called "keynote" without apple's permission).
if apple didn't trademark the name, then they'll just have to grin and bear it. and "user interface" has proven next to impossible to protect as intellectual property in a court of law in the past.
If you are referring to the Apple v MS case, then you're off the mark. In that case Apple lost because the contract that they signed with MS allowed MS to use Apple's GUI. That was the reason Apple lost.
On topic, Apple isn't going to do anything about this unless MS puts it into the OS. There have been apps on Windows that have tried to replicated the Mac experience. I used one called Mac Bar or something that would add a global tool bar to the top of the menu. Not the first time this has happened, not the last time this is going to happen. Hell even Steve said, "It feels good to have Microsoft copying us again."
expose was just eye candy anyway, I like 10.3 for the myriad of other things windows users don't even think exist. Like iTunes... err wait.. they got that too.. hehe. Dude get over it, its the story of Apples existence. It was bound to happen sooner or later, the most we can hope for is that when they install it they get spywire and popups! popups to the evil-doers!
Personally, I think it rocks! You all should be glad that Apple had an idea so good that everyone wants to copy it. Apple can't really own the word Expose, so I'm not sure on how the legal issue is....who knows? Maybe they contaced Apple, asked them about adding WIN in front of it, and they OK'ed it? Possible? (Like I said, they should be happy!)
That doesn't mean shit. Anyone can be granted a copyright, trademark or patent. That's meaningless.
It's up to the courts to decide if it is valid or not.
Barto
That's not entirely correct. The trademark office won't issue it if it is obviously generic or inappropriate. You'd never get a trademark for the name "Paper" if you're actually selling paper.
What makes "Paper" unique is if it distinguishes a product in a unique way that has meaning in the marketplace. "Paper" might well be a valid trademark if applied to a software program, for example. And different companies can have different trademarks on very common words if the goods are being sold in different markets. Microsoft, I'm sure, has a trademark on "Excel" for software, and likewise Hyundai has a trademark for "Excel" for automobiles.
Also, registration of a trademark is generally necessary to enforce that trademark legally.
Apple, IMHO, has a very valid trademark in "Exposé" and ought to be able to clean the clock, legally speaking, of the WinExposé folks. Exposé, as applied to a GUI element/window manager, is unique enough IN THE SPECIFIC MARKET to support a valid claim.
And, yes, I'm a lawyer and I've handled some trademark litigation.
That's not entirely correct. The trademark office won't issue it if it is obviously generic or inappropriate. You'd never get a trademark for the name "Paper" if you're actually selling paper.
What makes "Paper" unique is if it distinguishes a product in a unique way that has meaning in the marketplace. "Paper" might well be a valid trademark if applied to a software program, for example. And different companies can have different trademarks on very common words if the goods are being sold in different markets. Microsoft, I'm sure, has a trademark on "Excel" for software, and likewise Hyundai has a trademark for "Excel" for automobiles.
Also, registration of a trademark is generally necessary to enforce that trademark legally.
Apple, IMHO, has a very valid trademark in "Exposé" and ought to be able to clean the clock, legally speaking, of the WinExposé folks. Exposé, as applied to a GUI element/window manager, is unique enough IN THE SPECIFIC MARKET to support a valid claim.
And, yes, I'm a lawyer and I've handled some trademark litigation.
how did you get rid of the transparent box in the dock? thats awesome. as for the whole winexpose thing, i think apple got enough public exposure about expose that people will realize the copy. also, there's no way winexpose will be faster or better.
how did you get rid of the transparent box in the dock? thats awesome. as for the whole winexpose thing, i think apple got enough public exposure about expose that people will realize the copy. also, there's no way winexpose will be faster or better.
Comments
The law is pretty clear. You can trademark "Windows 95", but you can't trademark "Windows".
Barto
Originally posted by rok
sigh... you can trademark words to be attached to specific products and protect them as your intellectual property (example: no one can come out with a presentation application called "keynote" without apple's permission).
if apple didn't trademark the name, then they'll just have to grin and bear it. and "user interface" has proven next to impossible to protect as intellectual property in a court of law in the past.
If you are referring to the Apple v MS case, then you're off the mark. In that case Apple lost because the contract that they signed with MS allowed MS to use Apple's GUI. That was the reason Apple lost.
On topic, Apple isn't going to do anything about this unless MS puts it into the OS. There have been apps on Windows that have tried to replicated the Mac experience. I used one called Mac Bar or something that would add a global tool bar to the top of the menu. Not the first time this has happened, not the last time this is going to happen. Hell even Steve said, "It feels good to have Microsoft copying us again."
Originally posted by frank_t
Well i sent 2 e-mails to apple one via there mac os x feedback page and the other on there pr page....
If you really want to get somewhere you might be better served sending an email to one of Apple's legal contacts.
Simply because Expose in based upon a deep layer of mac os X and use the Quartz extreme optimisation.
Win expose is based upon high layer of windows and do not benefit of a quartz like optimisation.
Apple, using the better underpinnings of Quartz, made something significantly more than "eye-candy."
Originally posted by kraig911
expose was just eye candy anyway, I like 10.3 for the myriad of other things windows users don't even think exist.
If you have a lot of windows open it'll also serve as helpful and personal enjoyment
Originally posted by psgamer0921
Object Dock
Personally, I think it rocks! You all should be glad that Apple had an idea so good that everyone wants to copy it. Apple can't really own the word Expose, so I'm not sure on how the legal issue is....who knows? Maybe they contaced Apple, asked them about adding WIN in front of it, and they OK'ed it? Possible? (Like I said, they should be happy!)
Thanks for the Object Dock link
Mac:
http://homepage.mac.com/fellowship/....B3425411D8.jpg
And PC:
http://homepage.mac.com/fellowship/....B0425411D8.jpg
Crazy!
Fellowship
It's up to the courts to decide if it is valid or not.
Barto
Originally posted by Barto
That doesn't mean shit. Anyone can be granted a copyright, trademark or patent. That's meaningless.
It's up to the courts to decide if it is valid or not.
Barto
That's not entirely correct. The trademark office won't issue it if it is obviously generic or inappropriate. You'd never get a trademark for the name "Paper" if you're actually selling paper.
What makes "Paper" unique is if it distinguishes a product in a unique way that has meaning in the marketplace. "Paper" might well be a valid trademark if applied to a software program, for example. And different companies can have different trademarks on very common words if the goods are being sold in different markets. Microsoft, I'm sure, has a trademark on "Excel" for software, and likewise Hyundai has a trademark for "Excel" for automobiles.
Also, registration of a trademark is generally necessary to enforce that trademark legally.
Apple, IMHO, has a very valid trademark in "Exposé" and ought to be able to clean the clock, legally speaking, of the WinExposé folks. Exposé, as applied to a GUI element/window manager, is unique enough IN THE SPECIFIC MARKET to support a valid claim.
And, yes, I'm a lawyer and I've handled some trademark litigation.
Originally posted by mpls244
That's not entirely correct. The trademark office won't issue it if it is obviously generic or inappropriate. You'd never get a trademark for the name "Paper" if you're actually selling paper.
What makes "Paper" unique is if it distinguishes a product in a unique way that has meaning in the marketplace. "Paper" might well be a valid trademark if applied to a software program, for example. And different companies can have different trademarks on very common words if the goods are being sold in different markets. Microsoft, I'm sure, has a trademark on "Excel" for software, and likewise Hyundai has a trademark for "Excel" for automobiles.
Also, registration of a trademark is generally necessary to enforce that trademark legally.
Apple, IMHO, has a very valid trademark in "Exposé" and ought to be able to clean the clock, legally speaking, of the WinExposé folks. Exposé, as applied to a GUI element/window manager, is unique enough IN THE SPECIFIC MARKET to support a valid claim.
And, yes, I'm a lawyer and I've handled some trademark litigation.
Thank you lawyer
Frank_t
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Thanks for the Object Dock link
Mac:
http://homepage.mac.com/fellowship/....B3425411D8.jpg
Crazy!
Fellowship
how did you get rid of the transparent box in the dock? thats awesome. as for the whole winexpose thing, i think apple got enough public exposure about expose that people will realize the copy. also, there's no way winexpose will be faster or better.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
how did you get rid of the transparent box in the dock? thats awesome. as for the whole winexpose thing, i think apple got enough public exposure about expose that people will realize the copy. also, there's no way winexpose will be faster or better.
Unsanity ClearDock:
http://unsanity.com/haxies/cleardock/