Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 14th Jan 2007 03:11 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y "When Steve Jobs took the stage this week to present one of the most important products in his company's history, he knew that the very name of the iPhone was in dispute and that U.S. communications officials had not even approved the device. Those facts might have concerned other business leaders in his position. But Mr. Jobs didn't miss a beat." More here.
Thread beginning with comment 201519
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
the iphone trademark
by unclefester on Sun 14th Jan 2007 06:50 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

The whole iphone trademark beat up is just to generate a lot of free publicity for Apple and Cisco. The case will be settled amicably in a few months.

Reply Score: 2

RE: the iphone trademark
by raver31 on Sun 14th Jan 2007 08:36 in reply to "the iphone trademark"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, and you could imagine a settlement if there was a version of Microsoft Zen instead of Zune ?
In fact, remember Lindows ? They had to change name to Linspire because Lindows "sounded" to close to Windows, a trademark of Microsoft.

It is not some silly patent they are moaning about, it is a trademark. There are massive differences. I will point them out.

Trademarks are worldwide identifiers of a product. They stop others copying the name or trading under it.

Patents are only valid in the country they are granted under, and they are only to show that the holder was the first person to apply for it, and that person should have sole rights for a specified amount of time.


In fact, why am I even trying to explain this to you, go look for it http://www.google.com

Edited 2007-01-14 08:37

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: the iphone trademark
by joeprusa on Sun 14th Jan 2007 10:11 in reply to "RE: the iphone trademark"
joeprusa Member since:
2006-05-25

- well, I that Cisco iPhone is actually completely different device. They hardly overlap with Apple. Plus they do not have the trademark registered worldwide AFAIK, so there is a settlement waiting to happen sooner or later.
- the Lindows case got settled and Mr. Robertson received 20 million from MS for changing the name. Otherwise MS was in danger of losing the trademark "Windows" at court altogether as a generic term. But that's a completely different story.

Edit - not quite sure how much - this claims 15 million ( http://contracts.onecle.com/lindows/microsoft.settle.2004.07.16.sht... ), this one 1.1 billion ( http://news.com.com/2100-1046-5078074.html )

Edited 2007-01-14 10:24

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: the iphone trademark
by Moochman on Sun 14th Jan 2007 10:26 in reply to "RE: the iphone trademark"
Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually, Apple copied the "Nano" terminology from Creative, but nothing ever happened, presumably because it was a brand but NOT a trademark (or maybe because Creative thought the confusion might be good for their business, so they didn't bother doing anything).

In any case, in recent articles it has been revealed that Cisco is trying to protect their brand, but may not actually hold a *trademark* on the name "iPhone".

Edited 2007-01-14 10:28

Reply Parent Score: 1