Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sued Over Use of iCloud Name
tekgoblin writes "iCloud Communications is suing Apple for the use of the iCloud name which they have the rights to. According to the lawsuit: 'The goods and services with which Apple intends to use the “iCloud” mark are identical to or closely related to the goods and services that have been offered by iCloud Communications under the iCloud Marks since its formation in 2005. However, due to the worldwide media coverage given to and generated by Apple’s announcement of its “iCloud” services and the ensuing saturation advertising campaign pursued by Apple, the media and the general public have quickly come to associate the mark “iCloud” with Apple, rather than iCloud Communications.'"
Do they not realise that Apple own the letter 'i'?
Exactly! If you want to protect it, trademark it. Did they name their company with an "i" post iPod or pre "ipod" though?
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
please also consider what you would have said if Apple had been selling a product for the last 5-6 years, and somebody now came along and bought a website, and claimed that it now owned that trademark.
The analogue is in somebody buying ipad.com (which AFAIK Apple doesn't own). Just because Apple bought icloud.com doesn't give them a trademark, otherwise the trademark system should just be shut down in favor of the domain name system.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
I hope Apple gets spanked for this. It was their lack of due diligence, and even if Apple was aware of this other company, it chose to engage this "Imma show you whose boss" mentality. Apple decided to play the game, so too damn bad if they lose.
Apple Music. The Beatles label.
------
beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
Reading fortune's coverage, it seems there was no record of cloud communications having a trademark. Is this another instance of suing someone just because they have cash, I wonder...
And maybe it's just my innate cynicism showing through, but when anyone introduces criticism of anything by saying "I can honestly say...", it leads me to believe they are inherently biased against the thing they're complaining about, and whatever they say ought to be treated appropriately. What they're really saying is "even though I in fact loath the thought of (insert XXX), I would still be criticizing them if I were neutral on the matter". Bias, like truth, will out.
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
Just checked out iCloud Communications' website (http://geticloud.com/)... From the looks of the front page, at least, they're in the VoIP market. How is that related to Apple's iCloud? (I would actually be happy if Apple had to ditch the iCloud name, but it won't happen. It would be nice to see them move away from iWhatever; it was annoying when they introduced the first iMac, and it's annoying now.)
If you can't convince them, convict them.
Then why didn't they apply for a trademark?
Because they're not just 'iCloud' - they're 'iCloud Communications'. They think the name Apple picked is too close to their own name. Kind of like 'Apple Computer' is similar to 'Apple Music' and one might think they are two subsidiaries of the same company, like 'Sony Computer' and 'Sony Music'.
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
That said, there is an argument to be made that iAnything means Apple. Legally, it would be impossible to enforce, but culturally, it's very much the case.
You did hear this before - the iPhone was a similar situation, with Apple launching and Cisco already owning a product called the iPhone. They settled it amicably (in other words, Apple bought Cisco off).
I guess iCloud Communications should be introduced to the USPTO. I did a quick search on the trademark iCloud and came up with 12 filed by Apple and one owned by Xcerion AB CORPORATION SWEDEN (registered in 2010). If you want to protect a trademark then register it.
It's the cloud, dude. You can call whatever number you want and reach them.
Haida Manga
The only currently registered trademark is this one. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:67i706.2.13
It seems that iCloud Communications did not register the trademark.
Apple has 100 applications in to the USPTO right now for iCloud
Rainbow Cloud (RCloud) Jessy Jackson will sue them. Singing Cloud (SCloud ) Music Cloud (MCloud . ) McLoud public schools will sue them FCloud (FriendCloud) GCloud No Cloud (NCloud) I hereby copyright all permutations on non used [a-zA-Z0-9]*Cloud.
Except for iPlayer.
Because you don't have to apply for a trademark to have it legally protected. It helps, sure, but it isn't required. If the report is true, and iCloud has been operating under that name since 2005, then Apple is in the wrong.
Apple bought the trademarks for iCloud from Xcerion, which owned them for almost two years. iCloud Communications had lots and lots of time to do something about Xcerion and didn't. Now that Xcerion got 4.5 million dollars for the trademark they want to get in on the deal. It's too late.
Did Apple pay them off separately for ios?
That one is particularly annoying, as it has been around for a very long time and well established, and now we have all these technical illiterates that would never be able to configure a router running around gushing about ios. WTF?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Of course they did. Probably some junior intern in the Legal department did the search and reported his findings to his boss. That boss commissioned a legal secretary to find out what iCloud Communications is and draft a memo. Then he gave the memo to his boss. That boss sat in one or meetings with senior legal staff where one of the items on the agenda was iCloud Communications. Based on the memo, and perhaps a phone call or two to iCloud Communications, the senior legal staff figured that paying off (I mean, negotiating a settlement with) iCloud Communications would be cheaper than getting the rights up front and so decided to go ahead and start using the iCloud name.
After all, Steve wanted to use the iCloud name and it was their job to make it happen. Apple can, if necessary, throw a few hundred thousand at iCloud Communications. That's chicken feed in the whole iCloud thing.
Let me be clear: I'm not saying this is evil or anything like that. It's just how things work. Any settlement with iCloud Communications will be just a part (and a negligible part, at that) of the cost of doing iCloud business.
What the OP means that iCloud Communications has not filed for a trademark for either "iCloud Communciations" nor the tradename "iCloud." At least none that can be found.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
So I guess you're typing your message using Lynx browser running in a terminal? I guess not, so you're guilty of using a dumbed down computer interface. Real men use the command line, using a mouse you're avoiding learning a zillion keyboard shortcuts which requires skill.
Computers used to be reliable, simple to use and required very little technical skills. Microsoft and Intel ruined this with their lousy inferior designs (Amigas, Atari STs and Acorn Archimedes computers were much nicer to use).
So far from dumbing down computers, Apple and others are trying to get us back to where we were before Microsoft and the junk that is the PC architecture ruined computing. The fact that everyone seems to be investigating the use of ARM is a good thing as the ARM series of processors can be traced back to Acorn in the 80s so it is at least a decade newer in concept than x86.
Mere registration does not establish priority, you must actually be using the name in commerce. Objecting to an application is possible, but not required. If iCloud Communications _actually_ used it first (or _possibly_ if they continued to use it when Xcerion did not), iCloud Communications wins. (I have no idea if this is actually the case here, though.)
That said, I expect the lawyers on both sides are currently wrangling over exactly how many zeros will be involved in quietly dropping the case.
How trademark law is actually defined is:
If you use a mark in trade, you have the trademark right.
Then there are a bunch of criteria about whether the type of trade is sufficiently similar to cause confusion in the buying public.
So iCloud Rainmakers Inc. would be ok because not a computer or internet related business.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
That is what this whole gulf war was really about.
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
Legality aside, you would think that if they had been using a name legally for 6 years, they have a right to keep using it.
Something is broken if a larger company can buy a trademark of a smaller company and claim ownership and prevent the smaller company from using it.
Of course the legal system is not designed for common courtesy or justice, it's for rent seeking legal professionals.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
That said, there is an argument to be made that iAnything means Apple.
No there isn't. iPaq. iPlayer. iOS (not the new version), iMail, IHOP, iCloud...
Facetime is VOIP surely? And you can run Skype and various SIP clients on the iPhone.
Below are some useful phrases that I have learnt on Slashdot over the past year or so that will help you translate Fanboi-speak to English, and vice-versa:
English: iCloud sues Apple over iCloud name usage.
Fanboi-speak: It's iCloud's fault for not registering the name properly.
English: Apple sues iCloud over iCloud name usage.
Fanboi-speak: It's iCloud's fault for not registering the name properly.
English: Steve Jobs kills puppies.
Fanboi-speak: Steve Jobs takes positive steps on problems of dog littering and potential spread of rabies.
English: Steve Ballmer kills puppies.
Fanboi-speak: Steve Ballmer kills puppies due to anger at number of viruses in Windows.
English: iPhone 4 has antenna problems.
Fanboi-speak: iPhone 4 has enhanced "Do Not Call" and privacy features and less viruses than Windows.
English: Android outsells iOS.
Fanboi-speak: Did you count the iPod Touch?
English: The iPad is too expensive.
Fanboi-speak: The iPad is no more expensive than a reasonable laptop computer.
English: The iPad is too locked down.
Fanboi-speak: The iPad is not designed to replace a reasonable laptop computer.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Then why didn't they apply for a trademark?
Because they're not just 'iCloud' - they're 'iCloud Communications'. They think the name Apple picked is too close to their own name. Kind of like 'Apple Computer' is similar to 'Apple Music' and one might think they are two subsidiaries of the same company, like 'Sony Computer' and 'Sony Music'.
The name Apple picked as being "too close" to iCloud Communications' name was already picked by another company, years ago. Apple bought it from the people who actually registered it.
So, why is it only just *now* that iCloud Communications cares? And why is it just *now* that so many Slashdot nerds care? It's certainly not about the law or the principle, as those haven't changed. It's about one and *only* one thing: Apple.
When suing for trademark violation, a company is asserting that its brand is so valuable that it needs protecting. How valuable can iCloud's name be if they didn't bother to register for a trademark? Remember iCloud isn't a new company; they've been around long enough to register the name. That's the point. According to the USPTO while a trademark does not need to be registered, it should be registered especially if the mark is intended to be used nationwide. Before using the iCloud name, Apple themselves appeared to search for the trademark and register it. Apple also appeared to buy the domain name iCloud.com and perhaps the trademark from Xcerion. At a minimum Apple can argue that iCloud cannot claim a trademark.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Naivete about trademarks [check] (A trademark need not be registered to be enforceable, just clearly marked)
Apple fanbois saying that apple can do no wrong [check]
Apple anti-fanbois saying apple can do no right [check]
GNUtards expressing blanket anti-IP sentiments [check]
My take:
Apple is clearly not a historical good player, where it comes to the blatant co-opting of trademarks, case in point: OS9 vice MacOS9 (OS9 is a trademark of microware for a TRS-80C operating system, built for the 6809 chipset), the iphone/ios thing (the only reason any settlement at all was proposed was IOS was so entrenched that Apple was guaranteed a court loss), and many other trademarks Apple just steamrolled without checking. I suspect they didn't do due diligence at all, just because it seems that they never have before. I submit that the first "look and feel" lawsuits that Apple started were naught but an extension of this, given that the look and feel that apple was litigating was actually developed by Xerox at PARC, which both Microsoft and Apple liberally ripped off. While I doubt iCloud was much more than a shell company built as a IP landmine, Apple has yet to prove that their due diligence is much more than asking around the offices at Cupertino if anyone's ever heard of a given name. I predict that unless iCloud finds some deep pockets (I heard that there's a few deep pockets around that don't like Apple, some in Redmond), Apple will just keep raising the ante until iCloud's basically forced to settle.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you