Slashdot Mirror


The Apple Name Game

Apple Core sent a link to an article running in Australia about Apple fighting for their name with some little telco called Apple Communications. Well, they were called that. Now they are Green.

13 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Well... by Lshmael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know at least one person is going to bash me for this, but if you were founding a company, wouldn't you try to come up with an original name? I mean, there are a telecommunications company, so it is possible that they could be mistaken for Apple.

  2. Re:sheesh... by thegrommit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's funny is that Apple Computer had to cut a deal with the Beatles record (called Apple) to keep their name.

  3. Re:is it just me... by NineNine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MS is trying to get software manufacturers to stop using "Windows". Apple is going after completely unrelated businesses. Big difference.

  4. Love/Hate... screw it, I love my Powerbook. by TellarHK · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We love Apple, we hate Apple... Argh, why must this company be so fucking schizophrenic in how it treats people? C'mon, Apple! Make up your mind, are you an asshole megacorp-wannabe or a company that tries to do What's Right(tm) by people? I just... don't... get it.

    Steve. Seriously. Are you a real prick or do you just play one in the courtroom?

  5. WHY so much of this lately? by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This sort of thing seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon--particularly cases in which big corporations go after small local companies in totally different businesses.

    What has changed that suddenly makes it important for big companies to go around breaking butterflies on the wheel?

    Is it just that the Internet makes it easier for big companies to search for and locate small companies with similar names?

    (Anyone remember Infocom having to change the name of their game newsletter, "The New Zork Times" because the New York Times' lawyers said people could confuse the two?)

    1. Re:WHY so much of this lately? by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The growth of the Internet also makes it possible to hear about stories that otherwise might not have been reported stateside. I mean, this was a rather minor case that happened half the world away from the USA, yet it's being reported on a USA-centric site. Just like other news events, we seem to think that the frequency an event happening is the same as the frequency of the media reporting the event. Last year's "increase" in child abductions was such a case, actual cases did not increase, but the rollout of the Amber Alert system in many states gave police a process that notifed all of the local news outlets. Suddenly, child abductions went from a story in segment B of the newscast to a breaking story that disrupted programming. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all have deals with groups of local stations take from their coverage, so a local special report can quickly go national on a slow news day. The public sees several reports on child abductions in a short time frame and thinks there's a crisis going on, when really the risk of the tradegy hasn't changed or is being driven down because a once ignored problem is getting so much attention.

  6. I am not a lawyer but by sg3000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple is only obligated to go after trademark infringements by companies that are in similar industries. So, of course, they're not going to go after your local grocery store, carpet cleaning services, towing companies, maid services, or whatever else stuck "Apple" in their name so they'd be in the front of the phone book.

    But a telecommunications company is fair game since Apple does telecommunications. With the convergence of computers and traditional telephony (e.g. VoIP, modems, 2.4 GHz wireless, DSL), the two industries are becoming basically the same thing these days.

    Remember that Apple has one of the top 10 most recognized trademarks, and there are a lot of companies that wish to make some money (through name recognition) off that trademark. At the same time, they hope to mount a sympathy defense by citing how small they are.

    I think he certainly knew what what he was doing when he named his company. I wouldn't be surprised if he hoped that Apple would buy him out to settle the naming rights in Australia (much the same way Microsoft did with "Internet Explorer), but they already had the global naming rights. After that didn't happen, he probably figured a $100,000 settlement is pretty cheap to get nationwide publicity for his company. He gets a newspaper article about him, and the sympathy of misguided trademark-haters around the world.

    --
    Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
    1. Re:I am not a lawyer but by MacAndrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You never heard all the proposals for an Apple branded ISP? (I don't remember where that went; maybe they realized they didn't want to be AOL.) .Mac has all the features of a typicals ISP account except the connectivity. And, there's always future expansion to protect.

  7. Re:Hmm... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Actually the connection is both are in the IT industry

    I think most people would regard the telecoms industry as separate to the IT hardware industry actually.

    Not to mention that the telecom would indirectly benefit from Apple Inc's advertising...etc.

    Er, how? Apples advertising is almost all designed to try and sell a very particular type of hardware. That has absolutely no repercussions on sales of bandwidth whatsoever, and assuming that 99% of people can tell the difference between their local bits'n'pieces store and their telephone company, they should also be able to tell the difference between a computer hardware company and a telephone company.

  8. Re:Apple loves your money, too... by archen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Woz was SORT of okay? I mean the guy is brilliant, yet very humble. If it weren't for him, there would be no Apple today, yet he still gets paid around $50k a year. If you read about things that Woz has done, like giving his stocks away to other apple empoyees who missed out on the IPO, and teaching computer classes for poor kids you start to realize that Woz is probably a much better guy than most of us (no "sort of" about it).

  9. Apple Auto Glass by Titusdot+Groan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Apple is well within their rights, both legally and morally to pursue this company -- c'mon they are both in the IT industry!

    Interesting to note that Apple leaves alone people like Apple Auto Glass here in Canada -- different industry!

    We should be more concerned with the ownership of generic words at the DNS level which is the real trademark travesty these days.

  10. Apple had to do it. by litewoheat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thing about trademarks are you MUST defend them or you will lose them. One instance where you could have reasonably known of the existance of trademark ingringement where you don't defend will strip you of your trademark. Its that simple.

  11. It was a good decision by Now15 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I run a discussion forum which focusses on broadband internet access in Australia.

    The previously named Apple Communications has some really competitive broadband plans, and they are discussed often. However, I have often seen people casually confusing the huge computer company and the micro-Telco.

    This was not a paranoia strike or an over-reaching hand by Apple Computer -- they were being confused. This wasn't apples and oranges, it was apples and apples. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for the previously named Apple Communications.

    Simon Wright
    http://whirlpool.net.au

    --

    Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso