peacekaat

I do not agree with him. I do not agree with you.

NYC is not the wimpy little nerd but that doesn't make Apple wrong for even trying this little stunt.

Apple is directly petitioning against the City of New York before the trade mark review board.

Apple is directly halting all uses of an "apple" logo on on computers,software, business services,education services, information distribution and all advertising including DISHES!

They are claiming the rights to the logo from 1978 onwards. They are also claiming that apple stores are tourist destinations in NYC and the NYCs USE OF AN APPLE WOULD CAUSE BRAND CONFUSION. Thats on section 9 page 9 of their complaint.

Reading the actual complaint would have made it apparent to you that yes this IS a representation of Apple as a whole company. If their legal department can bring action against a large city you can bet that someone from the board of directors was let in on this.

Techguy1138

SomeoneUKno

Paul

I'm scared to go down the produce aisle now.

huygir

The audacity of you responding to krizoitz without reading his post and following his suggestion that people like you should actually read what the more sane commenters have pointed out in this thread before interjecting a knee-jerk reaction just baffles my mind. Although it does explain all the inaccuracies in your post.

BTW, I just find it amusing that so many people seem to be suggesting that Apple--but a singe corporate entity, albeit a hugely successful one--is the big, bad, bully on the playground, and that New York City--the frikkin' metropolis--is the little wimpy nerd.

Dearhaw

Nope Apple isn't suing New York. It's filing a petition so that New York can not use a logo that includes a graphic representation of an Apple.

The petition if successful will make it unlawful for New York city to use an "apple" logo.

This would set a prescient for apple to prevent ALL entities from using an apple in their logo.

They are not suing New York directly. They are going for the SAME EFFECT of trying to take the 'BIG Apple' away from New York City.

This is as sane as Microsoft suing a TV manufacturer for calling TV a window to the world.

It is also underhanded and reeks of an excessive use of corporate power.

If the Apple legal department sues to kill kittens it is still and entity of Apple and the who corporation gets the blame along with it's leader. They deserve a black eye for this.

Techguy1138

Although, honestly, to me it looks like balls more than an apple.

frndlybnny

My concern was merely that when the legal clarification is: "an amicable licensing agreement. Bottom line? This is exactly how the system is supposed to work" well, such a result, in real terms, is not so far away from exactly what the average commenter was complaining about.

And if this lawyer is implying the licensing agreement is merely a handshake, well then we agree, it's just the process that may seem...let's say imperfect.

But if that lawyer is implying a licensing agreement that's a handshake where a big wad of cash is exchanged (more common I'd wager) then that seems pretty lame and makes Apple look smurf-baggy. It might be a little unfair, but it's not a dumb reaction to say "Why should Apple be trying to get such a licensing agreement over a green peach-apple?"

Keep in mind also, Apple doesn't have to be a smurf-bag company to push for the caaash; they just have to have smurf-bag lawyers. And if I'm Apple's lawyers I'm probably going to consider it my duty to my client to be a smurf-bag and try to get the best deal possible (barring the board telling me not to.)

So, really we're all wrong. What the lawyer failed to mention and we've all failed to recognize is that at the end of the day the problem is not Apple, New York, or the process. The problem is the lawyers.

(And the city's graphic designer. I'm still not letting him or her off the hook for that stupid green peach-apple.)

92BuickLeSabre

I agree with you that most, if not all, of this process is frikkin' ridiculous. I will not argue that.

The only thing that I want to point out is that this process is taking place not because Apple is some Nazi totalitarian douche-bag company (which I'll admit is debatable ;-) but because if they want to defend their logo and brand, they pretty much HAVE TO make these objections (again, everybody, not a lawsuit, at least not yet) under current US IP laws.

And actually, in terms of your flowchart, I don't think it will come down to (d) at all. Again, the least, and likely the most Apple wants regarding this case is the record that they filed the complaint which they can use later to say "Look, we always have, and always will, actively defend our logo and brand".

Dearhaw

If it was something completely fabricated and non-existent in nature I'd agree... but this is just stupid.

Soon, Apple will be suing God for creating a fruit that is similar to it's logo.

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

krizoitz

APPLE IS NOT SUING NEW YORK

As has been pointed out above this is standard copyright practice. It wouldn't surprise me if Stever Jobs wasn't at all involved in this, its a completely standard legal step, its why they HAVE a legal department in the first place.

Seriously, whats worse than fanboi's are anti-fanboi's. Take your irrational hatred of Apple (what did Stever Jobs stick a gun to your head an make you buy an iPod? Did he throw a Mac Plus at your puppy and beat your Grandma with a wireless keyboard???) and do something more productive with it. You'll live a happier life.

krizoitz

Its been said above but apparently the Apple haters are either illiterate or willfully ignorant, so we'll try this again.

APPLE IS NOT SUING NEW YORK.

Get it yet? Please read the following posts if you don't have a frickin clue what you are talking about (hint, most of you)

92BuickLeSabre

Dearhaw

Samifumi

Whats worse than a fanboi? An anti-fanboi. Seriously, you hate Apple, we get it, why don't you go find something to love instead of spewing all the hate. Cripes!

krizoitz

Amiash

a) NYC wants to use the logo.
b) Apple says no and files papers explaining why they can't.
c) NYC has to defend their use of the logo.
d) They settle the dispute and NYC recognizes Apple's license over the apple and likely pays them money.

You can call it whatever you want. You can say "This is standard copyright application/protection not litigation." You can primp and preen and say "It's not technically a counterclaim" or "this happens all the time...standard...par for the course."

But at the end of the day I think everyone complaining recognizes that these 4 steps are occurring and are simply opining that at least two of them are kind of ridiculous. So you may disagree with the commenters, but they aren't dumb just because they aren't recognizing the precise legal arena.

(Again, I happen to find the fact that "NYC wants to use this logo" the most ridiculous, but....)

92BuickLeSabre

Anyone caught discussing fruit or using the proscribed words will be prosecuted to full extent of the law, and furthermore, forced to stand at in the middle of Times Square wearing a t-shirt that says "I'm a naughty monkey."

av8thor

jennyfur

To the ignorant masses; go see what an actual lawyer has to say about it.

[www.engadget.com]

Dearhaw

redrabbit

solOptimus

Slartibartfast

earthsaver

Krutch

frigg

"Apple won't lose its logo, but what will stop another company/organization from using a logo that is ever so slightly more similar to Apple's logo the next time around?"

Perhaps, um, SUING THOSE PARTICULAR COMPANIES?

NYC isn't a business competitor, they're a not-for-profit promoting social values.

If Apple sued an orphanage name "The Apple Orphanage" with a similar logo, would you get it then?

You sue people for attempting to make a profit off your back. You don't sue people for attempting to do good in the world unless it comes at serious detriment.

This isn't a serious detriment. Apple can redesign that logo in a heartbeat and make it work as good as any marketing firm can.

Caidence

"Third, Apple has to ACTIVELY protect its trademarks or it risks losing them. That's how the laws are set up. Blame Congress for that one. Given Apple's investment in their logo, I doubt they want to risk losing it - so they have to oppose a filing like this."

Third, New York City has to ACTIVELY protect its trademark as "The Big Apple" or it risks losing it.

Except, NYC never went around suing Apple for being Apple. NYC knows how to live and let live.

Caidence

While I'm surrounded by gagging fanboys saying Apple is a hip, aware, and friendly company, Apple picks a fight with my town -- outside of their business jurisdiction -- over something NYC has had claim over for long decades.

And, of course, there are still people who think this pathetic, do-nothing-but-look-good company is of value to someone other than Steve Jobs.

What a fucking pathetic company.

Caidence

If Giz is monitoring, please delete this and one of the previous post.

thebear91

Next thing you know, Apple will protest Washington state farmers for growing logos in their back yards.

thebear91

I suppose Apple will now sue the state of Washington for growing logos in their back yards.

thebear91

Just in-case Apple fans missed it Apple now stands for the exact opposite of all of the counter culture that they began with.

Techguy1138

leadingZer0

Didn't equate you with one. And frankly, I'm fucking tired of stupid lawsuits and this fucking litigious country of ours. I'm not saying it's a great thing Apple is doing this; I'm merely pointing out *why* they're doing it, and it's not because they're some evil Nazi bully corporation as some people would have here. And if you can't argue the actual substance of my post, why even reply? Good day, sir.

Dearhaw

Not an Apple hater. I am pretty sure you an Apple Apologist though. Thanks for stopping by.

Stoodo

skurtis.1

Brookespeed

"Apple runs no risk of losing their logo for failing to oppose this trademark filing"

Apple won't lose its logo, but what will stop another company/organization from using a logo that is ever so slightly more similar to Apple's logo the next time around? And the next time still, when somebody wants to use a logo that is even more similar? And the next time? And the next time?

And when finally a company that overlaps enough with Apple's business tries to use a logo very similar to Apple's, and Apple sues them, and even you and all the other Apple haters on Gizmodo would agree that Apple has a strong and legitimate case; but the judge is going to point to the string of all these "Apple-like" logos that have been used by various organizations in the past and say "Why didn't you try to defend your logo then?"

It's not about "losing" the Apple logo; it's about risking giving other companies and organizations the right to freely use very similar logos without being able to complain about it, and hence diluting the Apple brand.

Dearhaw

wetworker

@Samifumi:
@mmeister:

Too bad their posts will get little readership and lesser understanding among the knee-jerk reactionists and longstanding haters :-p

Dearhaw

ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT

I think A LOT of your statements are bogus. You need to ACTIVELY cease your ingress. HAVE a nice day.

Stoodo

ackthbbft

tegronin

tegronin

Second, Apple has invested A LOT of time and money building the brand with its Apple shaped logo over the last 25-30 years. There is enough similarity there to make me make me wonder if NYC isn't trying to capitalize a bit on Apple's use of the image. They could just as easily had a 3D Apple that would look significantly different than Apple's logo.

Third, Apple has to ACTIVELY protect its trademarks or it risks losing them. That's how the laws are set up. Blame Congress for that one. Given Apple's investment in their logo, I doubt they want to risk losing it - so they have to oppose a filing like this.

This is not evil Jobs or any such. This is not some personal vendetta. Such characterization seems very ignorant of the law and how businesses HAVE to operate to protect their trademarks. Go and file a trademark and (after having spent a bundle), you'll see you have to do exactly what Apple is doing here.

mmeister

lafond66

lafond66

The GreeNYC iPods are also excellent.

Normally I'm more of a linux guy, but I think I might go out and by a GreeNYC MacBook this week.

bpatten

BigDanInTX

*click**click*

*click**click*

I am so confused_

On one hand a sillouette of a bitten Apple w/ a leaf pointing to the right_

On the other hand "shape" of an apple with an "infinity loop" and a leaf pointing to the left w/ a stem pointing to the right_

then Apple resides at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino_

Apple is a computer company [even tho last years they claimed to have changed to a consumer device company]_

The city of NY is well a city run by some government_

Wait! what were we talking about again? I'm so confused !!

uberfu

myneid

packetsniffer

No problemo! The douches are the ones who are always bitching about Apple no matter what, whereas the cool city's green campaign only bitches about Apple when Greenpeace is in the house and a camera is turned on.

frigg

jvh

Note to CEO's. Don't fuck with companies using names for organizations/products that are in no way relevant to your own. Unless GreenNYC is a company selling computers, get your shit straight and fly right!

Kaiser-Machead's LEGO WALL-E

Robotube

graffiksguru

phijef

Then when I went to the Apple Store I couldn't find ONE SINGLE piece of fruit.

WTF? No apples at the apple store?

Thank God Apple is suing The Big Apple. I can't handle this level of confusion.

Life has gotten so crazy lately, I mean how am I supposed to tell the difference between a cool city's green campaign and a bunch of douches?

Jasontrainer

But in defense of Apple. A company is required to defend their trademarks, otherwise they can lose them. Apple may actually be ok with this use, but legally needs to show some degeee of fight to protect their trademark from future misuse.

Bender

trendspotter

twilight-arc

Rain-man

92BuickLeSabre

92BuickLeSabre

Granted I'm not a lawyer, but this is what I've been told.

Veeber

frigg

Computer_Chef

Monty

I personally found the Think Secret to be more repulsive because of the long term impact it could have had on 1st amendment jurisprudence. But they settled out of court. So back to Apple fanboy-ism everyone.

Samifumi

Many here have pointed out that it's been the Big Apple longer then that little tech company has been around. Seriously this is really annoying.

wanago

92BuickLeSabre

Are we merging with Atlanta and nobody told me?

92BuickLeSabre

@hagrun: I'm more than a little peeved that a company would sue my town, which has been known as the Big Apple for nigh a hundred years, over a logo that includes a representation of an apple. I'm particularly annoyed because the logo was created to promote environmental issues, which has absolutely nothing to do with computers, mp3s, personal electronics, downloadable music or any other kind of business that Apple is involved in.

And that's the rub; a trademark infringement has to hinge on confusion in the market place and Apple's use of the apple as a logo is both particular to the design and in its use in a particular kind of business. Apple has no legitimate claim to the apple as a logo outside of what it does as a business, because it was granted the use of that mark only in certain sectors and Apple has no claim against any business outside of those categories for which Apple has been granted use of the mark. For instance, right around the corner from where I live is Apple Laundry. Can Apple sue them? well, of course they can and now they probably will (sorry Tim!) but they won't win because Apple Computers never applied to use the mark in a laundry business, and there is no chance that anyone would confuse a well run, friendly, family laundry service for Apple Computers. Nor would anyone confuse an entire city's environmental campaign with Apple Computers.

So basically this is just a waste of time and money - a spurious claim and an abuse of the legal system. More importantly for me, it wastes my money. So do I take it personally? Yes, because it affects me personally. And of course on a broader level it's yet another example of a corporation overreaching and throwing out legal threats and C&D letters willy nilly, just like T-Mo did to engadget and so many other corporations have done in the last couple of years under the guise of being "required to protect their marks."

All NYers should take this as a personal insult. Maybe a protest is in order, or maybe we should all individually just go by the Apple store and remind them that they're in our city, the Big Apple, by giving them an apple. A few thousand Giz readers doing that over the next couple of days might make an impression...

weatherman

BigViper

gaiking

Joseph

Geisrud

I meant above:

let nobody be in doubt,
the big apple came before the little one.

Good for you NYC! That state is a tough one to mess with..

DigitalTrix

good for you NYC, that state is a tough one to mess with..

DigitalTrix

hagrun

mcsurfer3393

LJN

LJN

Hopefully you were joking and I just missed your humor.

packetsniffer

:P

IANBlock

EastBeast

What next, copyrighting colors?

(whispers)

Oh.

strider_mt2k

Things like this happen ALL the time. Face it folks, lawyers got bills to pay. They can't just sit around and wait for a REAL case to land on their laps.

djkibblesnbits

Because, you know, who would want to confuse Apple with a Green company? They fought hard for their 6 on the Greenpeace scale.

Way

well, the apple company is located at the "infinete loop" campus! on the other side it makes sense to use this metaphor, because green might mean recycling.

Bodypainter

Bodypainter

Boy was I ever confused. I'm glad companies like Apple and T-Mobile are around to prevent me from getting confused.

Jud

I don't get what's so funny about the "infinite loop" part. What's funny?

quikboy

pek

mikieed

Get bent.

Stacky Botrus

jo3

Serolf Divad

If Apple Co. wants to lay claim to all apple-related logos, including that of the Big Apple (a term in use since at least 1921), they can pry this Granny Smith out of my cold, dead hands. I'm thinking someone needs to organize a protest outside the Apple NYC stores. So much love (and money) we've given them here and this is how they repay us?

weatherman