iPhonegate: iPhone's Real Name is Apple iPhone, Apple in the Clear?

This image was lost some time after publication, but you can still view it here.
This image was lost some time after publication, but you can still view it here.

So maybe this is just idle speculation, but we may have a reason why Apple is getting away with calling its new cellphone the iPhone and doesn't fear the Cisco lawsuit: the cellphone's real name is the Apple iPhone. Our rationale? What's the name of the streaming media set top box that Apple announced? Apple TV, right? (There's an Apple logo preceding the "TV" part in the name, hence, Apple TV.) Same thing with the Apple iPhone. Any lawyers in the house that can say whether or not this little loophole is valid?

Advertisement

Apple iPhone [Apple]

DISCUSSION

By
rawhead

For all those saying "Apple is, do as I say, not as I do", well, yes and no. Apple is ALWAYS consistent in that they always vigorously protect their intellectual property rights. They don't flip-flop there at all, and I'll be the first to admit that they'll take that too far on occasions. However, that fact does NOT contradict with their taking advantage of a trademark of other companies that have NOT been vigorously protected.

You Apple haters should stop and think for a second. Forget Apple for a minute and pretend that you're a business owner. You have a successful line of products called "Bradouche" and as a responsible business owner, you vigorously protect your registered TM. Then, you want to introduce a new line of products, and since "Bradouche" is now a household name, you want to cash in on that brand name penetration. So, you want to name your new product line "Bradoofus".

Problem is, you find out another company has Bradoofus registered and recently introduced a product with that name — most likely to ride on the "Bradouche" bandwagon, and maybe even knowing that you were about to release "Bradoofus", although you can't prove those suspicions.

Now, this company comes to you saying "Hey, wanna use "Bradoofus" for 1 Billion Bucks?". Think what you would do, if you were a responsible business owner, when in fact you knew that several other companies have had "Bradoofus" TM registered for a while and the company in question hadn't tried to protect it until, whaddaya know, NOW of all times when you are trying to release your product. You know that, legally speaking, you could probably (and in your mind rightly, use the "Bradoofus" name without a problem because the other company's hold on that TM is tenuous at best.

As a business owner, are you going to pony up the 1B, give in and use another name, or, willing to fight for its usage (although, probably not for its exclusive usage) for a nominal fee? After all, it won't cost you nearly as much to fight it in court as it would cost to "buy" that TM from the other company (1B) and if you lose, well, you can just pick another name? The other company can't claim any damage when you haven't even released your product yet?

Think about it.