Whenever I read apple and cybersquatting in the same sentence I automatically think of a cyborg crapping in a vat of cider.
*mine? it's the coat matey, not the mac!
Apple has finally taken control of the internet domain name apple.co.uk, which has been in third-party hands since at least 1996. The change of ownership, which appears to have occurred on 6 July, means visitors to the URL are now bounced to the UK version of the official Apple website at apple.com. Previously, the domain was …
Yes, the Lord doth smile down upon the Appleites, for no sooner has the court of law deigned that they shall provide a retraction of claims that Samsung copied them on their website, then they reveal a brand spanking new ownership of a different url that would work just as good.
What are the chances that suddenly apple.co.uk will become the new home of Apple UK on the internet, and the site which Judge Birss ordered to carry the notice will be isolated, thus eliminating all the traffic to it and significantly lessening the impact of aforementioned court order?
Oh, please! Judge Birss gave Apple a very, very obvious "out" here:
APOLOGY TO SAMSUNG AND SAMSUNG CUSTOMERS.
We hereby apologise to Samsung and their customers for any suggestion on our part that Samsung's Tab product was a copy of our own iPad.
According to UK law, we were wrong to imply that Samsung's tablet device was as cool as our own iPad. Judge Birss himself declared, in his ruling on the matter, that Samsung's products clearly did not copy the iPad as they 'do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool.'
Apple make cool products. Samsung's product is officially uncool. Therefore, Samsung did not copy Apple's products. QED.
This legal ruling means our own product is therefore too cool to be confused with Samsung's less cool product and that Samsung therefore were not copying our product. Any customers who inadvertently purchased Samsung's Galaxy Tab product in the—clearly mistaken—belief that it was as cool as our own iPad should therefore contact Samsung customer services directly for a refund.
This will probably become a bit redundant when they get the ".apple" GTLD under ICANN's plans.
Actually, Apple would be doing ICANN (or at least the other registrants) a huge favour if they immediately switch to their new GTLD exclusively. It will take one of the big actors (Apple, Google...) to do so before the world starts to take the new GTLDs seriously.
"Apple is notorious for not particularly caring about domain names. The company has a habit of launching products and brands before it owns the appropriate domains or even trademarks."
For us youngsters, which products (incl. domain name and trademark) did Apple previously release which demonstrate to this "habit"
While they probably ended up paying handsomely for the domain, I'm sure they could've come to some arrangement where the US gets apple.co.uk in return for the UK getting next.com. It turns out that "warmed-over UNIX" workstations aren't as successful a business as chav trousers.
"Their record company is called Apple Corps although it was often shortened to just Apple which is where the trouble started."
"The computer company was called Apple Computer although it was often shortened to just Apple which is where the trouble started."
The best way they can apologise to Samsung on the front page of their website is to just rerun that picture they had when Steve Jobs died, but turn it 45 degrees then have it rotating constantly.
“I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”
In pre-internet days, oil behemoth Exxon famously paid a large sum of money (as in, enough to retire on) to the owners of the pre-existing Exxon Strip Club in Southampton, just because they wanted worldwide exclusivity on the name. Maybe the slightly seedy association is why they kept the old "Esso" brand for their UK petrol stations.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019