Others Claim To Hold The Trademark On iPad. Is There An App For That?

from the steve-jobs-doesn't-waste-time-on-petty-things-like-trademarks dept

It really was just about three years ago when Apple announced the iPhone and was quickly told that Cisco actually owned the trademark on the word iPhone. A lawsuit followed, but it was quickly settled with some cash changing hands and all was good. So you would think that Apple would take care of such things in advance these days. Apparently not. mrharrysan alerts us to the news that there are a few other companies with various iPad trademarks and Fujitsu in particular is claiming it has no intention of giving its name up. Of course, it’s a bit more complicated than that since Fujitsu only has a pending trademark (and earlier it had been considered abandoned before the company re-opened the file). Then there’s another company called Mag-Tek that does have a trademark on iPad for PIN-entry keypads, though that might not be considered competitive at all. Still, Fujitsu is posturing about how it doesn’t want to give up the name. Apple has an application in for its own trademark and is disputing Fujitsu’s right to the trademark and chances are, once again, eventually some money will change hands and forever forward the iPad name will be Apple’s to control when it comes to tablet-like devices.

Filed Under: ,
Companies: apple, fujitsui

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Others Claim To Hold The Trademark On iPad. Is There An App For That?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
32 Comments
Jerry Leichter (profile) says:

There are only so many possible reasonable trademarks. Most trade used to be local, so most trademarks were also local, allowing them to be “geographically multiplexed”. No more. Also, of course, everyone is so much more litigious about “*their* IP” these days.

With trademarks, we don’t see the resulting conflicts very often because most companies choose to pay “behind the scenes” to avoid them. (We see big guys going after little guys – Olympics, I’m looking at you – because the little guys aren’t in a position to stay out of the way.)

Apple has clearly decided that this situation is untenable for them. They have marks they want to use – I’m sure the decision on the *right* mark is Steve Jobs’s – and if they took their lawyer’s risk-averse advice, they’d never be able to use them. So they just go ahead, obviously aware that a fight will likely ensue – and relying on their ability to outspend pretty much anyone to force a reasonable settlement. Hell, if they can get Cisco to settle, who’s likely to stand up to them? Besides, since trademark law doesn’t have treble damages based on bizarre valuations and rarely produces prospective injunctions, the downside isn’t that terrible: Change the official product name, knowing full well that if the product was a wild success, people will keep calling it what you want anyway.

It’s an easy prediction that all the legal complaints about the name will be quietly settled. Apple will pay some unspecified amount for the rights, and that will be that.
— Jerry

Rooker (user link) says:

Re: Re:

Reminds me of the itunes.co.uk domain theft. Someone bought it and started some sort of business there before Apple ever came out with iTunes. After iTunes was released and they started the music store, Apple and their $1,000/hour lawyers just rolled right over the guy with a false complaint to WIPO and stole his domain.

It was pretty sickening to watch.

Michial Thompson (user link) says:

I would think

I would kinda think that Apple would have a pretty safe arguement about iAnything really. Their entire product line is iSomething, and they have take iThis or iThat pretty much to a world wide level of recognition.

I know that’s not really how it works, but honestly does anyone hear iSomething and not have Apple as the first thing to come to mind seriously?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: I would think

Except of course, the iSomething predates the Apple iPod. To go out and say “Well, okay, since you came along iBlank makes people think of the iPod, so we are revoking all Trademarks and giving them to you, and barring any future trademarks with the letter i pronounced as eye in the first letter.” It just wouldn’t be right.

Remember, apple was no more the first with a digital audio player then they were the first to use i as a prefix. Just cause they get known for it, does not mean we should heap it all on em.

Freedom says:

Fujistu money grab...

I frankly find this fairly funny. Fujistu has been one of the major companies that has had niche tablet/slate like products for years but haven’t been able to make any real in-roads/sales of them.

Now that Apple has come out with a version of their own, they want their pay day. To me this is just another example of a tax – in this case on Apple. I was going to say a tax on innovation, but I have a hard time saying that anything Apple did with the (cough) iPad really was innovative. Add in that they locked down the darn thing and I really want to say a tax on stupidity, but a tax nonetheless.

Freedom

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

No, cause apple wouldn’t have to identify what they are looking into the name for. I am not sure they even have to identify themselves (or a specific trademark) to look at existing and pending trademarks.
So for those keeping track of Trademark problems
Apple Computers : Apple Corps – Apple Computers settle with a payment to use the name, and a condition not to do anything in the music business. They then push with adding MIDI and Sound System, ignored the spirit of the Trademark by going forward with iTunes and iPod skirting the settlement that said apple was barred from selling media with music on it. Eventually, Apple Computers got a settlement that stripped Apple Corps of their trademarks, but agreed to license it back.
Apple iPhone : Cisco iPhone – Once again, after the suit came forth, Apple went to the nitpicking of the exact wording. They argued that a cell phone, a VOIP phone, and a POTS phone were all different, thus no trademark infringement. They settled, and time will tell what happens.
Apple iPad : Fujitsu iPad – We will have to see.

John (profile) says:

Who needs to clear copyright?

Isn’t this the same Apple who tells small companies to change the name of their products so Apple won’t sue them?
Yet Apple itself doesn’t clear potential names? Why not call this thing the iNetPad or some other “innovative” name? Why do they need to steal the name from Fujitsu or any other company?

And like one of the posters said, as long as Apple’s product is more popular, the general public will associate the name with Apple and Apple will basically win the copyright: it doesn’t matter what a court says if a “moron in a hurry” thinks an iPad is an Apple product… or that “Apple music” means buying music on iTunes for the iPhone.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...