Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sues Over iGasm Ads
funkeymonkeyman writes "Apple is less than pleased with an interesting new peripheral for the iPod which promises to 'take your appreciation of music to a whole new level.' Legal action has been taken against Ann Summers, the manufacturers of the new device, specifically for the similarity of the iGasm advertisements to the iconic iPod silhouette ads. The CEO of the adult retail chain replied to the threat cheerily, 'Perhaps I can send them an iGasm to put a smile back on their faces.'"
And suddenly she's going to make a shitload of money because of the lawsuit.
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
Have any of you slashgals tried it yet? Does it work, or is it just a gimmick?
Table-ized A.I.
Commercial speech doesn't have the same protections as other kinds of speech. Parody isn't a "get out of jail free" card in any case, but "parodying" another company's commercial, AND for a related product, that's a guaranteed losing move.
Well, I guess that's because its marketed to women, not men. Surprisingly, women tend to regard sex from a female perspective and if they are going to buy a sex toy in general terms they would be more interested in themselves. They do not have "Rods" and probably think of similar terminology as immature guy-slang. But they do have orgasms. I say the name was well chosen.
+Raider of the lost BBS
The ad is not a parody
She called the thing an "iGasm"! If you don't see the parody there, consider yourself officially humor-impaired.
If she is taking Apple's "sillhouette ads" and copying them to advertise her "device", it is copyright infringement, pure and simple.
True. But she didn't just take Apple's ads and copy them - She took the style of Apple's ads (remember Apple losing that suit 15 years ago to Microsoft?) and parodied it, albeit for the purpose of promoting her own product.
Would it be too much to ask for you guys to stop applying American law to a British legal case? Parody is not a defense for copyright infringement in the UK. Parody is "fair use" in the US due to the difficulty of reconciling copyright law and the first amendment, but there is no first amendment in the UK, so the only opt-outs in UK copyright law are specifically legislated concepts called "fair dealing", and pretty much 90% of what is considered fair use in the US is not legislated as "fair dealing" in the UK.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Last time I was in NYC, I stayed in the 'Pod Hotel' (which I'd recommend to someone looking for a cheap place to stay). They had silhouette people dancing on screens in the foyer, and seemed to be using the iPod association to strengthen their brand a lot.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Uh, unless apple now somehow has copyright over every possible combination of a silhouette on a colored background, this is false, and what happens when people start thinking of "intellectual property" instead of the separate patent, copyright, and trademark fields.
Unless the iGasm ads are traces or otherwise exactly like the iPod ads, then I think it's fairly clear that the ad isn't "copied" (not a copyright infringement) and is either use of a trademark to indicate compatibility or a product being sold in an entirely different field from iPods and therefore not confusing (not a trademark infringement).
Ok so it doesn't apply in this case, but that must be one of the saner laws I've heard from the US lately. Trademarks exists to not create confusion in the marketplace, and copying the name and the ad style... yes, it does sound like Apple's adult line accessories. Or that it's some variation of "in cooperation with Apple, Inc.". Every company should have to create their own identity, not be "identity leeches" of other companies (at least not without permission). How exsctly is rather immaterial to the issue IMO, starting at "What does the consumer see as characteristic about this product/producer?" is just the right question.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I think I agree with you. I someone copied the Geico Gecko, that would be trademark violation and/or copyright infringement. But if someone has a cute little talking animal advertising their low-price insurance, that isn't. This is the second case, not the first.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop