Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sued over Tiger, Injunction Sought

An anonymous reader writes "Online retailer Tiger Direct has reportedly sued Apple over the use of the Tiger name just one day before the Mac maker is scheduled to roll-out its next-generation Mac OS X 10.4 'Tiger' operating system, according to an article at AppleInsider. TigerDirect, which owns trademarks on the names Tiger, TigerDirect and TigerSoftware, has requested an injunction that could prevent Friday's launch of the Tiger OS. Tiger Direct is also seeking damages and legal fees. 'Apple Computer has created and launched a nationwide media blitz led by Steven Jobs, overwhelming the computer world with a sea of Tiger references,' Tiger Direct's attorneys wrote in the lawsuit." While the suit may have some merit, it is odd for them to wait until now to try and halt such a heralded product.

24 of 1,075 comments (clear)

  1. Are they kidding? by nizo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    First of all a trademark search shows something like three other companies who have just the word "Tiger" trademarked in the first page alone (with 1759 records total with tiger somewhere in the name). Second, why did they take so long to bring this up? Certainly Apple has some version of Mac OS Tiger trademarked, isn't it past the time to complain already? The real reason seems to be:

    At the root of the issue appears to internet search results. Tiger Direct contends that Apple's use of the name has adversely affected its ranking amongst the Internet's largest search engines....

    So does that mean they plan on taking on some non-profit who appears above them on google, because hey everyone knows I might get confused while searching for "tiger" instead of "tigerdirect" (which shows them ranked first btw). This whole things stinks of a "get rich quick by settlement" scam.

    1. Re:Are they kidding? by Kaimelar · · Score: 5, Informative
      At the root of the issue appears to internet search results. Tiger Direct contends that Apple's use of the name has adversely affected its ranking amongst the Internet's largest search engines....

      So does that mean they plan on taking on some non-profit who appears above them on google, because hey everyone knows I might get confused while searching for "tiger" instead of "tigerdirect" (which shows them ranked first btw).

      http://www.google.com/search?q=tiger:

      1. http://www.5tigers.org/ -- group dedicated to the animal
      2. http://www.tigerdirect.com/ -- company suing over trademark due to loss of rank on search engines
      3. http://www.tigerhaven.org/ -- more animal people
      4. http://www.apple.com/macosx/ -- Apple's new version of OS X
      5. http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger -- Apple's new version of OS X

      What are they complaining about, again? And why did they wait so late to file this complaint? We've known the name of this version of OS X for how long now?

  2. Money grab by Raindance · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a grab for quick settlement money, no questions about it. Clever and slimey-- Apple can either take their chances fighting it (with a small chance to be hurt big) or pay TigerDirect cash. Blackmail, essentially, and the timing of this suit is proof.

    I sincerely hope they'll fight it, not only because I believe the lawsuit is meritless and one should never give into blackmail, but also...

    Apple has taken the "we defend our legal rights" stance when they've sued Tiger leakers. Fair enough. If they reverse their stance on that now when up against someone with lawyers, I think that'd be quite hypocritical.

    So, sock it to them, Apple.

    1. Re:Money grab by radish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple has taken the "we defend our legal rights" stance when they've sued Tiger leakers. Fair enough. If they reverse their stance on that now when up against someone with lawyers, I think that'd be quite hypocritical.


      I don't think it's at all clear cut that Apple are in the right here. Sure, TigerDirect could have been more friendly than waiting until release day to slap on the suit, but if they own the trademark, they own it. Apple could (and should) have done a search before picking that name.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    2. Re:Money grab by Clinoti · · Score: 5, Informative
      Not necessarily the case, and from what I know of trademark laws there has to be more to the story than what we are seeing here.

      For those in the know companies spend hundreds of thousands on trademark research with companies such as Namprotect and Thomson and Thomson who make millions from clients who research Trademarks, Service Marks, and Copyrights years (sometimes minutes) before they even plan on utilizing the mark. So that they can avoid situations like this.

      Now who really wants to bet that Apple did not do their due diligence by using a trademark research firm?

      --

      Let's keep in mind that patents are in place to keep lawyers employed and keep them litigating. -CatGrep

  3. Re:Why did they wait so long? by man_ls · · Score: 5, Informative

    Trademarks are applied in specific domains. Tiger, as used by your local zoo, is not the same Tiger as the computer companies are using, or as a textile company, or a shipping company, or an airline, would use, despite them being spelled the same way.

  4. Break out the magic markers by CatGrep · · Score: 5, Funny

    Jobs: "OK I need about a million volunteers: 1) Cross out the 'Tiger' on the box 2) Write 'Big Orange Cat with black stripes' "

  5. Yeah by pancake_lover · · Score: 5, Funny

    I heard Tiger Woods is pretty pissed too.

    --
    Homer no function beer well without.
  6. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by fredistheking · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gimme a break. Just like Apple sued Mac Mall and Club Mac, huh? This is just a grab for funds by Tiger Direct. They are allegedly being investigated for their rebate practices and their reseller rating has gone to shit. I wouldn't doubt it if this is a last ditch attempt to remain solvent.

  7. Not odd at all. by dillon_rinker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    it is odd for them to wait until now to try and halt such a heralded product.

    Not odd at all, for a few reasons. Only upper management (let's call them the CxOs) would have the corporate clout to initiate a lawsuit against a big-name corp like Apple. Consider the following hypothetical scenarios:

    1. Prior Apple products have had internal code names that were used in a semi-public way. (The Sagan/BHA saga comes to mind.) The CxOs thought Tiger was just such a code name, and, being clueless as only management can be, didn't realize until this late that it was not the case.

    2. The CxOs, being clueless as only management can be, hadn't heard of Apple's "Tiger" until now.

    3. The CxOs, realizing that this was an open-and-shut case, figured they'd give Apple enough rope to hang themselves. They're all expert blackmailers - sorry, "negotiators" - and know that Apple is now facing a time crunch. Apple has a hard deadline and must settle on Tiger Direct's terms.

    Don't know about you, but #3 strikes me as really plausible. I don't know if that makes me cynical or just experienced, but I don't see Tiger's behavior as odd, in the sense of "statistically unusual".

  8. Wait a minute.. by Conan+D.+Librarian · · Score: 5, Funny

    If this is true, then Jaguar has standing to sue as well.

    "But your honor, these shysters have a prior history of this conduct!"

  9. it's so confusing by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've ordered several things from TigerDirect. Now, thanks to Apple, I don't know if I should enter purchases into a web page or just send it directly to the operating system.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  10. They do???? by Holi · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to a search on USPTO.gov using Tiger Direct on the owner name as my search parameters I don't see them having a trade mark on Tiger.

    They have 11 entries almost al with the word Tiger in them but not the word Tiger alone. In fact all of their trademarks with tiger in them are one word entries.
    XCONNECT
    TIGERPC.COM
    TIGERTV.COM
    TIGE RSYSTEMS
    TIGERDIRECT
    TIGERDIRECT
    TIGERDIRECT.CO M
    there are all the live trademarks.

    See for your self.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    1. Re:They do???? by All+Names+Have+Been · · Score: 5, Informative

      Check out the listings for Systemax, the parent company of TigerDirect. They own a "Tiger" trademark.

  11. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by Baricom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am not a lawyer, but I can see Tiger Direct's point here. Tiger Direct certainly isn't guaranteed a position in the search engines, but it's reasonable to argue that if another company in the same sector (computer sales) infringes on a trademark they claim, hurting their search ranking in the process, then they've been injured by trademark infringement.

    On the other hand, I don't see how filing the suit the day before the product launch could be anything but a stunt.

    I'm rooting for Apple on this one.

  12. Specific domain? Tell that to the WWF. by Llama_STi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    WWF was having battles with the other WWF for years about the name. The World Widelife Fund finally won a few years back over the World Wrastlin' Federation. Are they in the same specific domain? Maybe, they both have to do with animals...

  13. I felt a disturbance in the force... by rbochan · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... as if millions of geeks suddenly added "0.0.0.0 tigerdirect.com" to their hosts file and a web server suddently went silent.

    --
    ...Rob
    The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
  14. Some points for TigerDirect by lawyerguy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I just read the complaint and memorandum of TigerDirect. They have some legitimate beef:

    1) Apple only announced the April 29th launch date publicly on April 12, 2005. That's critical in asking "Why only now?" -- there was nothing imminent prior to that.

    2) Apple tried registering "Tiger" as a trademark (with intent-to-use) in July 2003, but was denied b/c of possible confusion. Apple won the Tiger trademark by agreeing to limit its use to computer operating software.

    3) Tiger attempted to settle, and then filed an opposition to Apple's mark in December 2004.

    4) Tiger has six registered marks, and several other common-law marks.

    Much of this wouldn't matter (IMHO) if Apple wasn't a reseller itself. But since they do sell many of the same products as TigerDirect, there is a beef. Tiger makes a good case that Apple is using the Tiger mark more broadly that it is entitled, to venture into other sales areas than just operating systems, and that that can affect Tiger's revenues. Here's a quote from their court memorandum:

    "Apple Computer's use of its infringing family of Tiger marks to expand sales of products besides its operating system software is already evident -- for example, Apple Computer is offering free iPods and laptops as part of its Tiger World Premiere giveaway. In short, notwithstanding its representation to the PTO that it would only use Tiger in connection with their unique computer operating system software, Apple Computer has in recent weeks used a family of Tiger marks in connection wiht a substantially broader group of products and services, including the very products and services currently offered by Tiger Direct under its famous family of Tiger marks."
    Personally, I don't think this passes the "likelihood of confusion" test, but that's for a court to decide. If I were in TigerDirect's shoes, I'd similarly be upset.
  15. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by killjoe · · Score: 5, Informative

    I just typed tiger into google. The first link is about the animal, the second link is for tigerdirect, the third link is about the animal and the fourth is for apple.

    I don't see what they are bitching about, they are the second link on google above apple.

    --
    evil is as evil does
  16. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by loraksus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Based on BBB files, this company has an unsatisfactory record with the Bureau due to a pattern of complaints and unanswered complaints.

    Specifically our files show a pattern of complaints alleging dissatisfaction with product quality, failure to deliver promised goods, service issues, misrepresentation in advertising and marketing practices and the failure to address and overcome the basic cause of complaints brought to their attention by the Better Business Bureau.

    Complaints allege customers are led to believe they are buying new, Brand Name computer systems, parts and other products with either a 90-day, or 1 year warranty. Complainants allege they are receiving generic, defective and refurbished items and only a 30-day warranty with the option to purchase the 1-year warranty. Customers who purchase the warranty also experience difficulty in getting return phone calls to get the problems fixed or replaced. Customer are told they may return the items for replacement, but they will need to pay again for the replacement and will credited back when the item is returned and received by the company.

    Some of the complaints have issues with the advertised rebate, both the catalog and web site have numerous offers for items with a mail-in rebate. Upon receiving the products the rebate application is not included in the package. Customers are told the rebate application is on the website and customers are required to comply with the program and submit paperwork that they never received. Many are denied because the product they have purchased does not have the advertised rebate, the rebate has expired, and some rebates are only good if the item is purchased with a computer. Many customers feel they have been victims of bait and switch, and are unable to return the products because the package has been open. Customers who have contacted customer service with concerns have problem with getting return calls, emails, and experience unresponsiveness and unconcerned customer service staff.

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  17. Re:Tigger by milimetric · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news, Apple turns right back around and sues the actual Tiger animal (panthera tigris). Apple is claiming that the animal misled them to name their product after something occuring in nature and did not notify them that twenty million other companies out there have used the name Tiger to suggest a powerful sleek product.

    In other shocking news, joining in TigerDirect's "Lawsuit" is a conglomeration of six hundred thousand Chinese Restaurants who also feel wronged by Apple's use of the word Tiger.

    To only add to the confusion, the actual Apple fruit (malus pumila) is suing Apple for their misleading representation that the Apple fruit is always bitten out of.

    *&#@^( you! you crazy, money hungry, insane, can't do business bastards who sue for stupid ass reasons.

  18. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by damiangerous · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Wasn't Microsoft turned down when they tried to trademark "Windows"?

    No, Microsoft owns several trademarks on just the word "Windows" in various categories, the oldest active one being from 1992 (#74274174).

    Apple couldn't trademark "System"

    Most likely because it was already in use or just because the word "System" is a fairly integral part of what the product is. You couldn't trademark the term "truck" in relation to selling pick-up trucks because it's not a unique name for your product. At the time Windows was registered windowing operating systems certainly existed, but no one marketed/sold them as that until Microsoft did. Calling your operating system "Windows" was a unique idea. At the time Apple would have tried to trademark "System" people would have been selling items called operating systems for easily a decade or more and calling your product "system x" would not have adequately differentiated it.

  19. A little poking about the USPTO... by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 5, Informative
    A quick search of the USPTO reveals two trademarks:

    Tiger, owned by Systemax Inc. (owners of TigerDirect.com) and first used in 1987, filed in 2000 and registered in 2002. Serial no. 75915934

    and

    Tiger, owned by Apple Computer Inc. Not yet registered, but filed in 2003 with publication for opposition in August 2004. Serial no. 78269988

    While this seems the end for Apple's Tiger, a closer look reveals the important bits. Apple's Tiger has been filed for "computer operating system software", while Systemax's Tiger was registered for "Mail order catalog services featuring computers and computer related products; and Retail store services featuring computers and computer related products."

    They are two very different uses for the trademark. I'm sure Apple's lawyers will pounce on this fact. TigerDirect does not have much of a chance of pulling this one off.

    On top of this, waiting until the day before the product launch was not the best plan for TigerDirect. Apple's tradmark was published for opposition last year. Given all the publicity, TigerDirect's management would definately have known about this long before now. Any decent judge would see TigerDirect's real intentions in filing this late.

    I suspect that TigerDirect's managment are hoping that Apple's lawyers are stupid and will settle immedaitely. If this is the case then I think TigerDirect's management are in for a rude awakening. Steve Jobs will fight this one.

  20. Re:pre-emptive lawsuit by MikeFM · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked for Tiger for about a year and am (distantly) related to the owner. Trust me, they're dirtier than what they're being blamed for. Their policy is to make every customer buy an extender warranty but to never honor them. When I worked there they didn't even have a framework setup to make it possible to honor them. Oh yeh - good customer service there.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.