Microsoft Bares Fangs to Block Apple Trademark

[Cyberjester]

Although I am an Apple fan, and somewhat dislike Microsoft and it's practices, I have to support M$ this time arround. Besides being a common term that describes how it is used, it has already been shown in the case of BLU-Ray, that you can't trademark a phrase of common words, since the name could describe any device with a blue ray laser.

Hopefully Microsoft wins this battle so we can throw it back in their face, and have them lose the trademark on "Windows".

Although I am a Microsoft fan, and somewhat dislike Apple and it's practices, I have to support MSFT this time around over a monopolistic and greedy company that stole the idea, logo and name from The Beatles.

Although I think they won that case given Beatles music is now all over iTunes, so they're more than likely going to win this one. Mores the pity.

Apple did popularise the term "app", however they didn't trademark it before this, and it's gone into popular usage. Go onto an FOSS forum and people are talking about apps in no relation to an iPhone or iPad. If they had trademarked it prior to bringing out the iPhone, then maybe. But as it is, no. Unfortunately that whole army of lawyers thing

 

[Griffolion]

How generic, broad or general is "Windows"?

Windows in the Microsoft term is the name given to a specific product owned by Microsoft, just because 'Windows' can also denote glass doesn't mean MS should lose their trademark because actual physical window companies want to have the word 'Windows' in their name as the 'Windows' MS is referring to points to a specific product in a specific industry. This gives actual window companies the freedom to use the word 'Windows' in their names etc.

This story reminds me a little of Sony getting refused the originally proposed 'Blue-Ray' trademark as it contained 'blue' in it which is a free word under creative commons or whatever. Hence the term 'Blu-Ray'.

Still, I agree with MS, 'App' (Application) and 'Store' are two very common words that are way too generic for anyone to own even if Apple putting a pretty coat of gloss and clever marketing on the concept put centralised apps in the public eye. Apple could probably do be able to differentiate between making something popular and actually inventing a concept from scratch.

 

[The Random One]

Man, I remember there was a time when I and everyone else would call out Microsoft on trying to bully Apple. Now, the jackassery of the two companies balances out perfectly.

- Hi, I'm a Mac.
- And I´m a PC.
- We're both assholes.

 

[CrystalShadow]

It's a funny world really.

I don't know how generic 'app store' is (though it sounds very generic, like it shouldn't belong to any one company).

But how trademarks work is a bit dodgy anyway.

I mean, in Australia, a shop that had been using a name for years, if not decades was forced to stop. (Toys'R'Us). Because a large company started trading in Australia with that name.

Now, if this process worked the way you expected, the little shop should have won that, and forced the big company (who arrived much later on) to use something else.
But, clearly the guys with the most money won.


Meanwhile, Intel, which is a huge company, lost their request to have '586' trademarked. (despite probably having a trademark on 286, 386, and 486) because the judge thought it was too generic, and it shouldn't be possible to trademark a number. ("What if I lived at number '586'?").
Intel lost, and the 'pentium' processor was born.

Peh. Laws.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

MS may actually win this one. Letting Apple take "App Store" would let so many other businesses do stupid things. Imagine the stupid lawsuits if GameStop tried to trademark, "Trade-In".

well it didnt stop marvel and dc to trademark the phrase ?Super Hero?...
or the word zombie back then.......

and apple could be so smart to argue that app stands for apple

Marvel probably has very limited trademarking on those words though. Paris Hilton trademarked "That's Hot" People still use the phrase so I guess it can't be a very effective trademark clause can it?

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Why are apple trying to trademark EVERYTHING?

because there's only so many black turtlenecks a person can buy.

 

[evilneko]

Yeah, I'm with Microsoft on this one. "App Store" is way too generic.