Cisco files infringement suit against Apple over iPhone – MarketWatch — Here’s a case where Apple gets a taste of its own medicine.
… seeking to prevent Apple from using the iPhone trademark. Cisco said it obtained the iPhone trademark in 2000 after acquiring Infogear. Cisco said Infogear’s original filing for the trademark was on March 20, 1996. “There is no doubt that Apple’s new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission,” said Mark Chandler, Cisco’s senior vice president and general counsel, in a statement.
#24 –
“You probably don’t have a Hobart mixer in your house either but they are tremendously successful in commercial kitchens. Some would argue there’s a lot more money and a lot less headache selling to businesses rather than consumers.”
Bad example. Up til a few years ago, Hobart made excellent home appliances under the name Kitchen Aid. Actually, very few companies expand from the consumer to the commercial market; the opposite is much easier. Hobart and Cisco are two prime examples. That’s also why there’re IBM micros, but no Apple mainframes.
#32 – form factor looks a lot like my sch-t509 – weird
I’m going to patent my name spelled backwards.
If Apple made masturbation devices, would they be called iCame / iMoan / iPud ?
iSwallowed
Yawn, who cares. Both companies get some publicity.
If Apple doesn’t pony up the money, then CISCO just gets an injunction AFTER Apple goes to market. Then Apple has a load of product it can’t sell.
They’ll just make all of the packets and manuals with enough space after the name so they can change it to iPHONEY with just an y…
hmmm….
Facts:
– Cisco is the most successfull company in the networking business (85% market share which means your data is probably flowing through a Cisco router right now)
– If you never heard of Cisco, it´s because Cisco operates at business level. You never heard of it because you don´t need a high end router/hub/switch at home
– Cisco owns the Iphone trademark, and unless they say so, Apple can´t use it in the US. Some people seem to think Apple can just decide to pay and use it, this is wrong. If a court rules in Cisco´s favour (and it will) Apple will have to change that name, period.
got it? good. bye now
Quoted from engadget.com:
Mark Chandler, SVP of Cisco, has weighed in with his own take on the situation. Apparently Cisco wasn’t hitting up Apple for cash, asking for royalties or hedging for an IT contract — or at least none of those were “issues at the table” and keeping them from an agreement, so there’s always the slight chance a couple such bribes were already givens. Apparently what Cisco was actually out for was an “open approach,” with Apple opening up its iPhone enough to allow interoperability with Cisco’s offering. “We wanted to make sure to differentiate the brands in a way that could work for both companies and not confuse people, since our products combine both web access and voice telephony.”
See the whole post: http://tinyurl.com/yn8vxl
Apple already stepped away from using “ITV” – must’ve decided to take a chance on the Cisco trademark.
“- Cisco owns the Iphone trademark, and unless they say so, Apple can´t use it in the US. Some people seem to think Apple can just decide to pay and use it, this is wrong. If a court rules in Cisco´s favour (and it will) Apple will have to change that name, period.”
Surely Apple knew this, so why market a product with the same name?
The device looks kinda sweet, I must admit, running OSX and all. However, if they don’t own the name, then use another. If they keep it up, Cisco should release their own iPod 🙂
I always wondered why they didn’t go with one of their old names – any reason “AppleTalk” shouldn’t work? (…and yes, I know what it is). The humor wouldn’t be lost on any of us, right.
peace
#42 – That’s why I suggested Cisco might have known about all this in advance. It’s one way to make sense of what Apple did – the huge publicity it generates. Classical PR: Free coverage as genuine news.
#39 – That’s a better explanation. Cisco wanted interoperability, and Apple didn’t get where it is now by sticking with open standards. But that begs the question of why they’d use a trademark known to be owned by another player – and another player with huge, deep pockets at that. Cisco is no small developer house with a good software idea for a Microsoft to steal. Cisco can be just as big and mean as Apple if it wants to.
Suicide. Seriously guys. A number of you should consider it.
On the Apple web-site, the newly announced (and renamed) Appletv is referred to by showing the apple logo followed by tv.
If they can ditch iTV, then they should ditch the iPhone name too – just call it Applephone – but use the apple logo instead of the word “apple”.
O
The apparent problem for Cisco, as some commentators have brought up, is that they are trying to enforce a trademark which is almost exclusively associated with Apple. Bloggers, the media and financial analysts have been calling an Apple produced phone the “iPhone” for over six months now.
Question for the lawyers here: Can you register a trademark, sit on it idly for several years, release a product a month before the thing that everybody in the world already associates with the name, and then reasonably expect to be able to enforce the trademark?
#38,
You missed one thing. Apple has already done substantial damage to the iPhone trademark. Not only will they be seeking injunctive relief, but I suspect they want the treble damages as well. The settlement could well reach into the billions of dollars, wiping out years of Apple gains in the marketplace.
Apple is going to take quite a drubbing over this clear cut case of trademark violation. Shame on Steve for this clear cut case of IP theft. It is so blatant that I suspect that the iPhone demo was his Swan Song.
Also…
Ive beem using my Razr phone all day today. One thing I noticed, is when Im not using hands free, I am using it with one hand. The more I think about that gawd awful touch screen interface, the more doubts I have that the apple engineers thought the touch screen through. At the size that thing is, there is no way to use it one handed.
Wow, also I underestimated the degree to which cell phone users HATE Cingular and ATT wireless. Just wow. What was apple thinkin…
#49 – ouch, that sucks – the razr is among the worst pos mobile device out there – malfuctioning hardware issues, crippled bluetooth, faulty OS, and the patches break the phone more then they fix it
It’s also interesting that http://www.iphone.com links to yet another “iPhone” service from another company which seems to be unrelated to either Apple or Cisco.
49 Apple has already done substantial damage to the iPhone trademark.
A trademark Apple owns in several other countries…. and Apple has owned iphone.org for years…
Not only will they be seeking injunctive relief, but I suspect they want the treble damages as well.
Treble? 3x of what, exactly?
Will they bring in the RIAA’s accountants to help “estimate” their “losses”? 🙂
#50,
Don’t know what you are talking about. Mine works fantastically. The pay per use on GPS sucks though, however it has been worth every penny the three times I have used it. The last time I used the GPS, I had to go to an industrial electricians store to buy a 500 volt switch. I bet the GPS saved me 2 hours AT LEAST. Also, the GPS works amazingly well on the lakes. You always know exactly where you are.
Why would I need bluetooth? When I buy music on my phone, it automatically appears in windows media player. Amazing! No Sync required!
And one more thing.
When I am in a VCast service area, I can watch live tv on it.
But, yah, it sucks, whatever you say dude.
Mike Voice,
Stock market closed. Apple lost all of their gains from the iPhone announcement due to the lawsuit. I wonder if apple calling the lawsuit “silly” helped or hurt the stock? Thats more than a billion dollars already lost…
That means, before it is even released, the iPhone is already a bigger loser than the Zune.
#54,
That might be clever if it were at all true. AAPL opened just under $87 on Tuesday morning before the announcement, and it closed today at $95.80 after a -1.20 loss.
So should we just go ahead and conclude now that you are full of shit?
#45, Suicide. Seriously guys. A number of you should consider it.
Comment by James Hill — 1/11/2007 @ 8:18 am
Where is an editor when you need one? I’ve had posts edited for far less offensive then this.
its a nice device, i watched the keynote and am liking the apple even more… might be a decent addition to my windows world…
just sooo damn expensive hardware
I am tired of these ‘i’ naming stuff from everything Apple, so childish
“Apple Phone” for the win!
#54That means, before it is even released, the iPhone is already a bigger loser than the Zune.
Yeah, sure….
Apple can call it “iPhone” in: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, European Union, Singapore, United Kingdom – because they have either been granted the mark, or have applied for it.
http://tinyurl.com/yjtgb8
They can call it something else, in the US – if they have to – but everyone will call it “iPhone” no matter what the official name is.
Cisco tried to use the looming announcement date as leverage against Apple, and lost the bet.
Mr Chandler says it wasn’t about money: “We hoped our products could interoperate in the future.”
You try to force the kings of closed systems into giving you interoperability with their newest gadget, and wonder “why can’t we all just get along”???
Am I supposed to believe Mr Chandler is really that naive???