Feeds

back to article Apple loses round to Amazon in 'App Store' name dispute

A US judge has ruled in Amazon's favor in a case in which Apple accused the online retail giant of false advertising in its use of the term "app store" in its Amazon Appstore for Android. "The court finds no support for the proposition that Amazon has expressly or impliedly communicated that its Appstore for Android possesses …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

Thing I don't get is who cares - nobody calls the apple "app store" the app store - everyone calls it itunes except maybe apple and its lawyers. So it's moot.

Just more money to lawyers and the court system.

12
0
Silver badge
Meh

Who cares that they lost case.............

The lawyers?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

I'll bet it really hurts Apple to see all of their high tech inventions being copied by other. Other manufacturers need to realize that it takes about 100 PH.D's in engineering to invent the expression 'app store', rectangles with rounded corners and the general shape of an apple leaf. People need to start respecting other people's property and companies patients.

11
2
WTF?

iTunes?

Why would you call it iTunes? I've got an ipad but I've never used iTunes. I've downloaded lots of apps through the handy app on there called, erm, "App Store". Yes I know that I could use connect my iPad to a computer and use iTunes on there to download apps, but that just seems perverse.

Not that I agree that Apple should be able to trademark the term App Store. The should have called it iStore or something if they wanted a unique, trademarkable name.

0
1
Bronze badge
Meh

Re: Why would you call it iTunes?

Hmm... possibly because of those nice 'iTunes' vouchers one buys in HMV, Game, PC World, et al, that allow you to buy apps? Just a wild shot in the dark there.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Job's himself used the term generically on several occasions.

Fie on you Apple.

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Fie...

..today's mot du jour

1
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward

As punishment for your foolishness, you now owe the internet an explanation of how patents are different from trademarks. And an apology.

13
0

I wouldn't mind....

...but apple have made it so that there can't be any other apple app store other than theirs on apple devices. So deception isn't therefore possible. So I fail to see apples case.

4
0
Bronze badge
Go

Re: I wouldn't mind....

They reckoned that by calling it "App Store" implied some sort of connection even on another device. I can sort of see what they mean, but I think the term is too generic anyway.

0
0

Re: I wouldn't mind....

I totally agree.

Its a bit like claiming rights to "petrol station". BP have every right to get narked if I call my petrol station a "BP Petrol Station" but if its an "ESSO Petrol Station" or just a plain vanilla "Petrol Station" then so what. We both sell petrol, but I can't sell BP petrol. i.e. BP is the brand. It's that simple.

8
0
Silver badge
Pint

Drip drip drip till the dam bursts

Apple peaked in the middle of last year. We're now in a free-for-all as everyone at last sees the emperor has no clothes, and are beginning to stick it to them for realizing how they've actually been cheated all these years.

20
0

Fruit Store?

I don't understand why Apple haven't sued every fruit store in the world that sells Apples, for trademark infringement

5
0
Silver badge
Happy

Well now, I have two Archimedes 3.5in floppies here marked Apps1 and Apps2, which contain, er... store lots of um... Apps.

5
0
Silver badge

But, but - Apps didn't exist until Apple invented them!

(Seriously - I have seen people, including media journalists, who really seem to think "apps" are some new kind of thing, and don't realise it's short for application, as has been used as shorthand for years before the media picked it. Now with Windows 8 adopting the term, I've even seen people saying things like "Now Windows does apps too". Ironically this may come back to bite Apple, if people start thinking that Windows does apps, but Macs don't...)

1
0
Facepalm

Is this still going on?

I thought it would have been thrown out or settled by now for being so obviously frivolous and slightly deranged

6
0
Silver badge

God help me but I am with M$ on this one. If war is politics by other means then all this patent/trademark nonsense seems to be business by other means.

4
2

Gah, this is so dull.

How is "Application Store" any different to the Canonical "Software Store". Slightly different words for the same thing. "Applications" and "Apps" is the same god damn meaning. It's starting to seem to me however that there is in fact a big difference: "Applications" are used by proper professional people (to create and develop shit), and "Apps" are used by people to pass the time during travel, or avoid speaking to their family/loved ones.

6
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Apples losing streak continues ...

and it is high all this stupidity stopped.

Perception is far more important than what some bling outfit in Cupertino says. App Stores are generic and besides the US is only a segment of the market where the rest of the world knows what an App Store is.

4
0
FAIL

Let me get this straight...

The complaint that ``app store'' is generic is coming from the company that claims it has a trademark on ``windows''?

1
11
Anonymous Coward

Re: Let me get this straight...

Irony - you gotta love it.

0
3

Re: Let me get this straight...

For goodness sake. This one comes up every single time!

Microsoft have not got a trademark affecting anyone involved with the manufacturing, selling, purchasing, fitting or maintenance of panes of glass. They have a copyright on the term Windows in the context of computer software. It's specific.

4
0
Bronze badge

Re: Let me get this straight...

"app store" is the equivalent of "operating system" not "Windows".

3
0
Silver badge

Re: Let me get this straight... @Neill Mitchell

Point well made, but I'm sure that Xerox (Star), MIT (X Windows), Sun (SunTools), Digital Research (GEM) and even Apple (Lisa) were using the term "Window" and it's plural form in relation to computer systems a long time before MS Windows version 1 went to market.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Let me get this straight...

Indeed, and there's also the point that two wrongs don't make a right anyway.

Interestingly, it's not really clear they would win a case on "Windows", even in the context of computing - the problem is that "window" is a generic term even within computing (e.g., X Windows). When they tried to sue Lindows, they lost the original case, and settled out of court. The last thing they wanted was to risk losing the trademark on their flagship product.

It'll be interesting to see how this goes, since Apple seem determined to go through the courts - if they lose, it'll be fair game for anyone to use "app store", without any fear of action!

(Also, copyrights are a different thing altogether, the issue is trademarks.)

1
0
Silver badge
Mushroom

Re: Let me get this straight... @Neill Mitchell

Oh FFS.......

People REALLY don't get it....despite it being incredibly easy to grasp.

I could launch a car brand called "Wheels". Just because every fucking car in the world has wheels, in no way does it stop me having a BRAND called "Wheels". If I tried to to stop people putting wheels on their car, or said they now had to be referred to as round floor contact devices, then I would deserve to be shot down in a ball of flames, but otherwise my brand is valid.

Any good tech sites where the IQ in forums is above 3?

1
2

Re: Let me get this straight... @Lost all faith...

Blimey, calm down. Not sure why you are shouting at me or calling me a moron. Nowhere did I say you could not have a brand that is a distinct representation of a word or having a trademark prevents others using the word in general context. That was precisely my point.

"I could launch a car brand called "Wheels". Just because every fucking car in the world has wheels, in no way does it stop me having a BRAND called "Wheels"."

Firstly, you can only have a trademark within a set of categories and sub classes. You could not simply trademark the word "Wheels" in general and start going after people who use it anywhere. As I say, that was the entire point of my post.

Secondly, you can only gain a trademark if your trademark was distinctive for the goods and services you provide. In other words they can be recognised as signs that differentiates your goods or service as different from someone else's within the categories and sub classes you have been granted the trademark.

So in your example, the "Wheels" would have to be formed of some distinct design unique to the automotive categories and classes you were trying to register it.

See, I do get it. Now go take a nice long cold shower.

1
1

round floor contact devices

But Shirley...

Parabolicley bulged cylindrical car to ground interface unit

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Let me get this straight... @Lost all faith...

Neil why on earth do you think I'm referring to you? You're one of the few people that can grasp the concept, it's the idiots referring to Windows and and how xyz program had windows before MS came along.

1
1

Re: Let me get this straight... @Lost all faith...

I assumed because of the @Neill Mitchell, that your post was directed at me.

So happy to hear it was not, it did confuse me a little. Anyway, glad we're both pointing out the same thing. A thumbs up will balance everything out :)

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Let me get this straight...@Mark .

The case of (W|w)indows is indeed interesting. One could argue that Microsoft Windows is so widespread that they have no real need to trademark the name. Far from deceiving people, any other software whose name refers to windows probably has to explain that it isn't Microsoft.

0
0
Vic
Silver badge

Re: Let me get this straight...

> They have a copyright on the term Windows

No they don't. They have a trademark on the term.

Vic.

0
0
Go

Re: Let me get this straight... @Neill Mitchell

See "WIMP": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_%28computing%29

0
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Apple is now pathetic than Ballmer's MSFT...

...I swear - at least Ballmer usually simply makes up shit about themselves, not other ones.

1
1
Bronze badge

Another oxymoron:

"Microsoft argued that "The undisputed evidence shows that 'app store' is a generic name for a store offering apps.""

Didn't MS Patent or Trademark "Windows", a generic name?

0
6
Silver badge
FAIL

Wrong...

MS taking a trademark on the name Windows is no different then Apple having one on Apple, Itunes or Snow Leopard. Its the product name, its original, its non-descriptive and hence trademarkable.

What your looking for is a comparion between Operating System and App Store, which is descriptive and generic, and hence should not be trademarkable.

Try and use some common sense from time to time...

1
1
Silver badge

You can't trademark a straightforward description

You can't trademark a straightforward description -- otherwise, you would be locking everyone else out of the market by the back door; which would be anti-competitive behaviour. It's a store, it sells apps. "App store" is about as descriptive as you can get for a store that sells apps. Not trademarkable. Ting! Next, please.

1
0
Coat

S'il vous plaît excusez-moi, mais

App Le Store?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: S'il vous plaît excusez-moi, mais

Nope, that's Franglais, which is punishable by smelly cheese torture, overseen by the Academie Francaise.

L'app magasin, might pass muster, if they'll allow "app" at all.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: S'il vous plaît excusez-moi, mais

Perhaps if Apple had argued that App was short for Apple they might have had a chance.

1
0
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: S'il vous plaît excusez-moi, mais

Our Baguette-munching continental cousins prefer their abbreviated forms to end on a vowel sound. For instance, "an amplifier" un amplificateur is abbreviated not as un amp, but as un ampli. By analogie, une application deviendrait une appli. And the app store is certainly more like une boutique than un magasin. So "app store" probably would become la boutique d'applis.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.