If App Store's Trademark Is Generic, So Is Windows'

Toe, The writes "In response to Microsoft's attempt to dismiss Apple's 'App Store' trademark application, Apple references Microsoft's claim to the Windows trademark. 'Having itself faced a decades-long genericness challenge to its claimed WINDOWS mark, Microsoft should be well aware that the focus in evaluating genericness is on the mark as a whole and requires a fact-intensive assessment of the primary significance of the term to a substantial majority of the relevant public.'"

Comments

Are they kidding?

[Jumperalex]

It *is* generic because I was using the term well before Apple. In fact I was using it in a PC environment. At my job, which is a fairly large government agency, if we wanted to install software on our computers then we were told to "look in the appilcation store" to see if it had been approved. If it was then we could "order" the app and it would either automatically install at boot, install pending license validation, or hold for technician assistance. And often times amoung the more savy folks it would just be called the app store.

So suck it Apple.

Re:Are they kidding?

[bunratty]

But Microsoft does sue companies that make products with names similar to Windows. They sued Lindows. If Microsoft can successfully sue over the Windows trademark, why can't Apple successfully sue over the App Store trademark?

Secondary Meaning

[shentino]

Windows, in its literal meaning, implies a hole in the wall, often filled with glass, for the purpose of providing visual penetration or airflow.

Windows, in its secondary meaning, refers to an operating system written by Microsoft.

"App Store" has no secondary meaning as far as I can see, as its literal and "secondary" meanings are identical.

Now, losing a trademark on grounds of genericness, aka "being adopted by webster", is something else.

For examples, I see "xerox" and "google" in danger in this way.

Re:Secondary Meaning

[andrea.sartori]

On the other hand, "Apple" implies a fruit of the apple tree (Malus domestica L.), generally used for the purpose of nourishment.
Ok, trolling, I just couldn't resist. And I see your point.
However it always surprises me when people (Apple, Microsoft, you name it) waste time in scolding each other on such trivialities. (To anybody who is going to say trademarks are not trivialities as lots of money are involved etc... I am aware of all that. I just find it all meaningless.)

Re:It's still different

[halber_mensch]

"App Store" by itself is inherently generic. It literally just means "place where apps are sold." Trademarking it is as ridiculous as trademarking "shoe store" or "electronics store." Windows, used in the context of a computer product, is not generic. Rather, it's a specific, well-known product.

"Window" is a graphical user environment concept, predating MS Windows by a good many years. X Windows predates Microsoft Windows by one year. Microsoft trademarking the term "Windows" forced the X Consortium to change the name to "X Window System". Pot, kettle, dark color, etc.