 
TechieZero
Tools Are Using Me
Premium
join:2002-01-25
Wesley Chapel, FL |  Cisco's iPhone
| |
|
 | IanR
join:2001-03-22
Madison, NJ
| Hypocrisy Apple sues anyone who uses a supposedly Apple owned word. Like going after little old Ladies with a small business which uses. for example, the word "POD".
Cisco has owned the name iphone for half a dozen years, or so. Then while still in discussion with Cisco Apple makes the formal announcement of their new product using the name iPhone w/o any agreement from Cisco.
Apple locked horns with tiny Creative over patents and had to back down and PAY $100mm to settle out of court.
Apple Execs award themselves favorable backdated Options, at a cost to Sharehlders and sometimes w/o a Board Meeting for approval.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
We are getting a clear case of Apple's hypocrisy and arrogance.
Appple is a superbly innovative company. Even if their "iphone" is similar to other products already announced (LG etc). They design and package functionality superbly and market brilliantly. They are lead by one of the best visionaries in the electronics and entertainment industry. But, IMHO, they must drop the arrogance and hypocrisy b4 they get slammed. If they admit some "fault" I am sure that everyone would be extremely relieved and happy. If they continue down their current path it leads down one slippery slope IMHO. | |
|
| | matrix3D
join:2006-09-27
Deep River, CT | Re: Hypocrisy Steve Jobs brings the arrogance with him. | |
|
| | 
djtim21
It's all good
Premium
join:2003-12-22
Buffalo Grove, IL
clubs:
| The reason I believe that Apple went public before setting a deal with Cisco, they wanted to see what it was worth first.
I think they will go back at Cisco and say - "Look how much free publicity you just got from us, now drop the fee a little, or we'll drag it on for a while."
In the mean time, Apple will still distribute the iPhone, and Cisco will still cry.
Either way, Apple will pay for this some way. Weather it's a little or a lot has to be determined.
--
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” - Edmund Burke | |
|
| | | 
verolom
join:2002-03-23
Eagleville, PA
 ·Comcast
| Re: Hypocrisy Except that by bringing the lawsuit Cisco is not going after publicity, they are doing it to protect their investment in a product named iPhone. The lawsuit was not the initial path chosen by Cisco to resolve the conflict, it was Apple who decided to pull out of negotiations behind closed doors and make this a public matter.
Cisco does not need publicity of this sort. | |
|
| | | | 
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| Re: Hypocrisy Apple was also sued by the Beatles.
It is funny a lot don't see Apple has ARROGANT as Microsoft. In fact, Steve Jobs's ARROGANCE at not licensing Apple's OS MADE Microsoft into what it is today.
iTunes is ARROGANT at not allowing other MP3 players to play it.
Mac is ARROGANT in new OS, new Mac required almost.
Apple apparently knew it was using someone else's trademark or why would they have been in negotiations with Cisco in the first place?  | |
|
taar
join:2000-11-21 | Its all about who was first......... Bottom line, Cisco had the name first for a communications device. Apple needs to PLAY nice or PAY UP! | |
|
Warez_Zealot
Rural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan
| How can they trade mark such a word? That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words?
Cisco should have this trademark reviewed than rejected...
--
The meek shall inherit the earth but don't forget the poor are the ones who inherit the debt. | |
|
| 
brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS
 ·AT&T Southeast
1 edit | Re: How can they trade mark such a word? said by Warez_Zealot  :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked.
Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. | |
|
| | 
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| Re: How can they trade mark such a word? said by brandon :said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked. Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. I'm curious about your take on the trademarked name of "windows"...
--
| |
|
| | |
brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: How can they trade mark such a word? said by kamm :said by brandon :said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked. Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. I'm curious about your take on the trademarked name of "windows"... I would venture to say that if Microsoft were actually selling windows (as in those things with glass in them) then they wouldn't be allowed the trademark. As it stands with Windows being completely different from the standard use of the word, it is allowed.
My opinions are often worthless however!  | |
|
| | | | 
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Re: How can they trade mark such a word? It took Microsoft many, many years before Windows gained secondary meaning enough to be registrable. | |
|
| | | | | 
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | Re: How can they trade mark such a word? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the trademarked term is "Microsoft Windows", not just "Windows" | |
|
| | | | | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: How can they trade mark such a word? It's just Windows. It took them almost 12 years before they were given a registration number for the OS.
-----------------------------------------
Word Mark WINDOWS
Goods and Services IC 009. US 038. G & S: computer programs and manuals sold as a unit; namely, graphical operating environment programs for microcomputers. FIRST USE: 19831018. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831018
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Design Search Code
Serial Number 74090419
Filing Date August 20, 1990
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition June 21, 1994
Registration Number 1872264
Registration Date January 10, 1995
Owner (REGISTRANT) Microsoft Corporation CORPORATION DELAWARE One Microsoft Way Redmond WASHINGTON 980526399
Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)
Affidavit Text SECT 8 (6-YR). SECTION 8(10-YR) 20050407.
Renewal 1ST RENEWAL 20050407
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE | |
|
| | | | | | |
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | Re: How can they trade mark such a word? Thanks for the correction. | |
|
| | | | | 
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Even then, it's not 100% clear on the trademarking of Windows. Back a few years a company called Linspire came out with a Linux distribution that ran some Windows applications called Lindows. Microsoft sued because the trademarks were sufficiently similar that it could cause confusion to consumers. While the case was ultimately settled out of court before all appeals were exhausted, it was quite a ways down the path of Microsoft losing the case because Microsoft had used the term "windows" in describing the GUI prior to Windows (the product) from ever being released. Apple and Xerox had also implemented the idea and used the terminology prior to Microsoft telemarketing it as well. It would be similar to me trademarking the name Phones and then suing any company that used the derivative of that.
Trademarks are used to product product name recognition in the market place. Multiple companies can own the same or similar trademark as long as the use of the trademark is in different areas and would not be commonly confused by the lay person. My company has a trade mark of "Do it Best" (the hardware store). Nike has the trade mark "Just Do It". They are fairly similar, but it's not likely someone would confuse a hardware store and a sports clothing company.
--
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? | |
|
| | | | | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
1 edit | Re: How can they trade mark such a word? said by cdru :Even then, it's not 100% clear on the trademarking of Windows. Back a few years a company called Linspire came out with a Linux distribution that ran some Windows applications called Lindows. Microsoft sued because the trademarks were sufficiently similar that it could cause confusion to consumers. While the case was ultimately settled out of court before all appeals were exhausted, it was quite a ways down the path of Microsoft losing the case because Microsoft had used the term "windows" in describing the GUI prior to Windows (the product) from ever being released. Apple and Xerox had also implemented the idea and used the terminology prior to Microsoft telemarketing it as well. It would be similar to me trademarking the name Phones and then suing any company that used the derivative of that. Trademarks are used to product product name recognition in the market place. Multiple companies can own the same or similar trademark as long as the use of the trademark is in different areas and would not be commonly confused by the lay person. My company has a trade mark of "Do it Best" (the hardware store). Nike has the trade mark "Just Do It". They are fairly similar, but it's not likely someone would confuse a hardware store and a sports clothing company. Microsoft's registration for Windows is very clear. What was not clear was that Lindows was sufficiently similar to cause confusion. Microsoft losing the case would have had zero impact on it Windows mark relating to the OS.
Establishing secondary meaning trumps prior usage as a generic term. So, I can't agree with your comparison of the trademark Phones. I think you're missing the point.
This is a good primer that you can read to learn more about trademarks. »www.registeringatrademark.com/pr···rk.shtml | |
|
| | | | | | 
nklb
Premium
join:2000-11-17
Ann Arbor, MI
clubs:
1 edit | "Linspire" is the new name that is the end result of the lawsuit; the original name that provoked the suit was "Lindows"
Edit: Oops, my eyes skipped right over where you said this, sorry | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Common words can serve as trademarks as well. You just have to establish a secondary meaning for the word. It took MS almost a dozen years to do this for their operating system. | |
|
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | Cisco had secured the patent for the name 10 years ago.
Source | |
|
| |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: How can they trade mark such a word? said by Maxo :Cisco had secured the
patent trademark registration for the name 10 years ago. Source | |
|
| | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by Maxo :Cisco had secured the patent for the name 10 years ago. Source Actually a company called InfoGear that Cisco bought had secured the trademark. | |
|
| 
GilbertMark
Premium
join:2001-05-02
Gilbert, AZ
·Cox HSI
| said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? Cisco should have this trademark reviewed than rejected... iPhone is not a common word you will not find it in a dictionary.
--
Got a V3 or a V3i or an L7? Want to get the most out of them? Check out my sites »hacktheV3.com and »hacktheV3i.com and »hacktheL7.com
| |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
| Apple's defense: VoIP is different? Thanks for the research, Karl. You can also look at the text of Cisco's trademark - it's for a networking device, no mention of cellular
some more public information:
What Cisco/Linksys said yesterday on lawsuit: "Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand,"
Apple's response on CNBC (paraphrasing): Their trademark is for IPhone as in IP(internet protocol)hone and they sell a VoIP phone. However, our product is a cell phone and is called "i"Phone to be similar to our "i"Pod.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. | |
|
| 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? Redmond Lawyers, start your copiers!
This one will generate a mountain of paperwork.
Or PDF's..... | |
|
| | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27 | Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? Or .doc documents...
Or proprietary .MSxml files...
(Should be called the "iCost+" as it ain't cheap...) | |
|
| | | gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? said by cableties :(Should be called the "iCost+" as it ain't cheap...) Cars are not cheap either, but I see plenty of them being driven around.
--
Have fun, enjoy. | |
|
| | | |
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? Um, what does a car analogy have to do with the high cost of legal fees? (as in it's going to cost Apple now for it's premature dance)
OMG!!! You..you aren't one of those Apple Zealots, are you???  | |
|
| | | | | gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? said by cableties :( Should be called the "iCost+" as it ain't cheap...) said by cableties :Um, what does a car analogy have to do with the high cost of legal fees? (as in it's going to cost Apple now for it's premature dance) Interestingly enough, I thought your iCost reference was in relation to the iPhone itself, not the legal fees. The wording used was not clear enough to make that distinction.
What Should be called the "icost+"?
Not a Mac Zealot as much as a frustrated Windows Developer.
--
Without data, it is just an opinion | |
|
| lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | Isn't this like Ford making a new sport/utility truck and calling it a Camaro? | |
|
| | 
raw
War Eagle
Premium
join:2001-01-17
Pasadena, MD
clubs:
| Re: Apple's defense: VoIP is different? said by lesopp :Isn't this like Ford making a new sport/utility truck and calling it a Camaro? Yeah, and claiming it's different because it's designed to work on interstate highways only.
--
[BBR]raw
America's Army
BBR Enemy Territory clan founder | |
|
| 
Dezbend
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-20
| If I were to post "I am going out this afternoon to buy me an iPhone" and by iPhone you assume I am talking about the Apple product then Cisco has a case. What Apple needs to show (and I don't know how they will do it) if they want to fight this (and not just pay up which is what they will do) is that the word iPhone has become so widespread in general usage that the trademark is meaningless... sort of like the word "klenex" may be applied in general to a generic brand.
--
If it is not recorded, it simply does not exist. | |
|
| |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| |
| 
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| said by SD6 :Thanks for the research, Karl. You can also look at the text of Cisco's trademark - it's for a networking device, no mention of cellular some more public information: What Cisco/Linksys said yesterday on lawsuit: "Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand," Apple's response on CNBC (paraphrasing): Their trademark is for IPhone as in IP(internet protocol)hone and they sell a VoIP phone. However, our product is a cell phone and is called "i"Phone to be similar to our "i"Pod. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Then it would be IPPhone....Since IP would leave just hone and Internet Protocol Hone would make no sense  | |
|
| emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX
| Where do they find these attorneys?
The idea that Apple could just usurp the trademark because they wanted the iPhone "to be similar to our iPod" is one of the most preposterous assertions I have ever heard. There is no way that they can use someone else's trademark just to make the name of your products similar. Absolute rubbish.
wig
--
Sometimes a paradox is just a paradox | |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Ther are so many ways to look at this I think the comment "Lawyers start your copiers" sums it up. Technically Cisco looks more correct, historically Apple looks more correct. Could be 'fun' unless cooler, wiser heads prevail (right, and I have a bridge for sale, made of gold, in San Francisco)
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Ther are so many ways to look at this said by RayW :...(right, and I have a bridge for sale, made of gold, in San Francisco).. OOOH OOOH I'LL TAKE ONE, I'LL TAKE ONE!!
--
Never ask what sort of a computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him? -Tom Clancy | |
|
| Shark_615
join:2006-01-17
Pickering, ON
| What?
Historically Cisco OWNS the trademark. Historically Cisco has used said trademark in conjunction with a Phone. Historically Apple did not use iPhone before it was trademarked by Cisco.
There is no technicalities. Cisco has a product called iPhone and has owned the trademark for almost 6 years or more. | |
|
| | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs: | Re: Ther are so many ways to look at this Could be, they probably should have said iPod was too close back then. A lawyers pot o'gold
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|
| | | Shark_615
join:2006-01-17
Pickering, ON | Re: Ther are so many ways to look at this True but different industries so that claim would be invalid. | |
|
cwilliams194
join:2006-12-04
Hamilton, ON
| play nice Apple is just quoting semantics here, "our product isn't the IPhone it's the iPhone" what's the freakin difference.
it's still the word phone with an "i" infront of if, Apple in lower case Cisco in upper case.
Oh btw I'm starting a new computer company I'm calling it aPPle, but it's ok because the the 2 upper case "p"s stand for "Personal PC" ya I don't think that would go over so well.
--
You want a piece of me? Well come and get it!-Prof. Farnsworth | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
AppleSucksAgain
@comcast.net
 from:
BillRoland
| You can bet Apple will pay for this blunder As if to demonstrate how clueless Apple is... Not only have they raised the price they will now pay for the rights to use the expression "iPhone", - if they even get too, they also forgot to get the phone approved by the FCC so they can't sell it in the U.S. anyway. In the PC industry this is known as the blind leading the clueless. Apple fanboys will still be lined up to pay thru their arse for such foolishness, but Cisco will make Apple pay heavily for their indiscretions. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| And Cisco is right "It wasn't about the money" I believe that. At this point Cisco is probably mad Apple went ahead gung-ho calling it the iPhone when they were still negotiating, that usually has a tendency to piss the other side off, but it shouldn't be a surprise, its just Apple's true character coming out to play. I see a number of reasons the iPhone could potentially be a non-starter, this is just another one, as Cisco could slow this down for a while and I think Apple is too pig-headed to admit they stole somebody else's trademark and change the name. Silly, but you would expect nothing less from Steve Jobs.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
|
| gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| Re: And Cisco is right said by BillRoland :...Silly, but you would expect nothing less from Steve Jobs. Interesting thought. Do you mean to imply that Steve Jobs has stolen so much, that it is expected behavior for him?
Links to back up your point of view, please.
--
Have fun, enjoy. | |
|
| | 
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..
| Re: And Cisco is right said by gateguy :said by BillRoland :...Silly, but you would expect nothing less from Steve Jobs. Interesting thought. Do you mean to imply that Steve Jobs has stolen so much, that it is expected behavior for him? Links to back up your point of view, please. Mr. Jobs, while being partly(but greatly) responsible for one of the most creative and dynamic companies ever, does have a little problem with arrogance. One need only return to the days of the sad and nasty CHRP debacle to get a good sense of the man and his ways.
This latest incident is blatant and egregious, especially when taken in light of Apple's defenses of its own trademarks, IP, and product information and plans. And no, I am hardly some frothing Cisco or Linksys enthusiast. That would not unlike being a toaster oven fanboy.
It's just kinda diverting to see a company that goes after small websites and startup companies with trade agreements and technology licenses getting hoist on their own petard.
Not unlike the ubiquitous monkey and bowling ball scenario. | |
|
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
·Bright House
| Don't understand I don't understand why in some cases not all that a company needs to explain why they are suing. Is Cisco expecting people to feel sorry for them and get public approval? I don't think a company needs public approval, they can sue whenever they feel like.
Cisco's lawyers say it's not about money but it is. A licensing agreement will be signed and Apple will pay compensation to Cisco. Apple hasn't paid the money so that's what the stink is all about. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
dcaponegro5
join:2005-07-22
New Hope, PA
| I think this says a lot The lawyers claim the agreement wasn't hung up on money or royalties, but a desire for "an open approach" and platform interoperability. One has to wonder why cisco wants platform interoperability. They make network gear that transports open protocols. I don't see where there is a problem. I think there is more to this than we are hearing. I am sure it will all shake out over time. | |
|
| disc
join:2005-12-31
Raleigh, NC
| Re: I think this says a lot said by dcaponegro5 :The lawyers claim the agreement wasn't hung up on money or royalties, but a desire for "an open approach" and platform interoperability. One has to wonder why cisco wants platform interoperability. They make network gear that transports open protocols. I don't see where there is a problem. I think there is more to this than we are hearing. I am sure it will all shake out over time. Read one of the followup posts on cisco's blog:
By insisting on "interoperability" of the products as your price, Cisco was attempting to use an asset it didn't create (i.e. the name "iPhone") as a means by which to leverage access not only Apple's design and technological advantages but also its obvious marketing savvy.
In short, this is not about "openness" and "transparency" -- it's about promoting your company's products by plugging into Apple's innovation and "buzz".
Again, I have no problem with Cisco calling Apple out on its power play. You have the right to protect your property. But please don't patronize us by trying to sell it as a noble blow for "openness".
| |
|
| | degauss1
join:2001-07-02
Hillsboro, OR | Re: I think this says a lot Even easier - they wanted the 'i' part of the iPhone to be their VoIP stuff. | |
|
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | of course if Cisco loses They can just hardwire their routers to send all traffic with Apple MAC addresses to various porn sites.
--
"WHEN THE LAUGH TRACK STARTS THEN THE FUN STARTS!" | |
|
| 
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| Re: of course if Cisco loses said by inteller :They can just hardwire their routers to send all traffic with Apple MAC addresses to various porn sites. ROFLMAO!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
iphonex
@pacbell.net | hrmm... cisco's name make sense iphone as in internet/wifi phone ... wonders what i in iphone stands for.... trying to use same name scheme as ipod ... probably the same reason they changed from apple computers to apple inc... | |
|
| Shark_615
join:2006-01-17
Pickering, ON
| Re: hrmm... cisco's name make sense said by iphonex :
iphone as in internet/wifi phone ... wonders what i in iphone stands for.... trying to use same name scheme as ipod ... probably the same reason they changed from apple computers to apple inc...
RTFM - iPhone was registered before Apple used iAnything let alone iPod, iMac or iPhone | |
|
LordBritish
join:2003-08-02
Marina Del Rey, CA | . Durn it, iphone.com is taken.
I could have sold a domain name like than for millions !!! | |
|
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Re: . no, you would have been sued by Cisco until you handed the name over to them.
--
"WHEN THE LAUGH TRACK STARTS THEN THE FUN STARTS!" | |
|
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by LordBritish :Durn it, iphone.com is taken. I could have sold a domain name like than for millions !!! Registrant:
The Internet Phone Company, LLC
3856 Willowview Court
Santa Rosa, California 95403
United States
Created on: 24-Aug-95
Jeez, you'd think Cisco would have sued them if they're interested in protecting that trademark.
I'm so on the fence. I own stock in both. It should help push both up, so I guess I win either way. | |
|
odreian615
join:2006-01-18
Chicago, IL
1 edit | This is why I LOVE BBR no one-sidedness like fratboy sites like digg and slashdot
oh and IMO I think Cisco wants in on Apple's router business it wouldnt be bad for Apple fanboys b/c Apple's airports are like 200$ while similar ones from Linksys are around 60$ | |
|
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Re: This is why I LOVE BBR no, the white plasic housing is $140, the insides of airports have the same broadcom guts as Linksys units.
--
"WHEN THE LAUGH TRACK STARTS THEN THE FUN STARTS!" | |
|
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Open Approach? Fundamentally we wanted an open approach. We hoped our products could interoperate in the future.
That idea probably made Mr. Jobs wet himself. Because, the Mac platform is after all the epitome of interoperability and openness.
--
Use the OS tool for the job. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Seriously... They are in negotiations and Apple just goes ahead with it. LOL Please, what arrogance.
Back a number of years ago when Chevrolet introduced the Baretta, they were sued by the Baretta gun mfg citing that GMs use diluted their brand.
As I recall, GM won that argument at least in part because the two products are no where near close in function, and the liklihood one would buy a car when they meant to buy a gun is, well, just dumb.
Here Apple is trying to split hairs. The basic function of both of these devices is as a PHONE. Cisco has the trademark on it, Apple knew it but went ahead anyway.
Stupid. Of course I could be remembering that GM thing all wrong at which point add it as more example of stupidity in the interpretation/application of law.
K.
--
Race season is over, now what?!? |
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap | |
|
dmeyer
join:2002-08-14
Austin, TX | Simple Solution Apple should rename their iPhone to iFone, or something else that isn't trademarked. Duh. | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Simple Solution Agree... not to mention.. isn't it more than just a phone? pick another word and place the letter 'i' in front of it..
iBox
iPDA
iGadget
iEverything
iToy
iOverPriced&UnderPowered
iThing
iComm
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
Aubrey, TX | Who was first? All that really matters is who copyrighted "iPhone" first.
--
-Corona | |
|
theeinstein
Premium
join:2003-07-31
Fernandina Beach, FL | Huh Cisco
Get EM!! | |
|
|
|
|
Cisco Explains iPhone Lawsuit
