Slashdot Mirror
Apple Granted Trademark For Its Stores
walterbyrd sends this news from ZDNet:
"The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office approved Apple's request to trademark the design and layout of its stores last week, according to patent office records. ... Apple has requested that no store be allowed to replicate various features, including 'a clear glass storefront surrounded by a panelled facade' or an 'oblong table with stools... set below video screens flush mounted on the back wall.'"
At least you can't say that Apple doesn't learn from their own mistakes.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
That's a whole load of coffee shops going to have to close then.
HMV, Game, Debenhams, JJB, DW, JD... just a few stores i can think of now that have the all glass front, the table and stool layout, currys use it, comet used to use it, asda use it in their electronics departments... seems prior art doesnt count for anything anymore, neither does "your patent cant be completely fucking retarded".
portfolio
An oblong table? Any idiot could think of that. But an oblong table with stools and screens nearby? That's the genius of Apple.
The bowing to the excesses and insanity of capitalism has reached bizarre extremes. This is how little kids act. "Mommy! Jimmy is COPYING me! Make him stop!"
We've given MS a lot shit over the years.
That might be understatement of the day. ;)
Lately, though, MS seems tame (as they are not a serious player in the markets that matter) compared to some of these companies of today.
Believe it or not, they're doing quite well for themselves.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/01/microsoft-fails-to-notice-the-death-of-the-pc-posts-record-revenue-figures-instead/
I should have known nobody wants to hear that, before I submitted it. I'm a dummy.
No ... no patent was asked for, and none was given.
They trademarked (not patented) a particular set of features, which is fairly common. It only prevents people in the same trade from incorporating the same combination of distinctive features and leaves the enforcement up to Apple's expense to detect and pursue.
Car examples:
Much like Jeep trademarking vehicle's with a "7 vertical slot grill between a pair of round headlights" or Harley Davidson trademarking the sound of their V-twin motorcycles.
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
I guess at this time next week every bar/pub will be getting a cease and desist letter.
In this case the trademark is defined by the illustration, which is basically a line drawing of an Apple Store minus the logo. The text in the summary is drawn from the "description of mark" field, which is just a description of the image and does not define the trademark. Further, the summary suggests that Apple is individually claiming trademark protection on various features of its store design ('clear glass storefront...' or an 'oblong table with stools...'). This is not the case. The trademark claims the entire design as a whole.
I was wondering where the next "innovation" would take place. I suppose the next "innovation" in their store will be that it is 10% smaller and allows voice commands.
Everyone will complain, but if I asked you to name one consumer tech company that does things most differently than any other, you'd say Apple. Why should Apple not enjoy the protection of these differences--which clearly make them very successful? I don't have a solution in particular here, but it's hard to claim that Apple has nothing to pursue here.
Scorta futuere amo!
No, they didn't patent anything. They did obtain a trademark, though. Something completely different. You failed at reading comprehension in school, didn't you?
look exactly the same...
so thats going to be fun for them !
picture of a windows store next to apple store
regards
John Jones
But Microsoft trademarked their store design too, and had it granted in 2011. This looks much like return fire, and not an opening shot.
http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=85194406&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch
s/vehicle\'s/vehicles/g
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
Nor does it "grant" them. It registers them. They are created by use.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
The summary makes this sound much worse than it actually is. To be infringing, a store would have to:
1. Have the same arrangement of windows (not just the single large panel mentioned in the summary, but also the smaller side panels), *and*
2. Have cantilevered shelves, *and*
3. Have multiple rectangular tables, *and*
4. Have flush-mounted video screens on the rear wall.
It's possible a court *might* hold that something hitting 3 out of 4 of these was confusingly similar, but by no means certain. Courts aren't stupid.
The summary gives the impression this is a patent, but the /. article title says trademark. Actually, according to the linked USPTO file, it's a service mark.
I had once considered applying for a registered trademark for the FreeDOS Project, just to protect the name. To be clear, a registered trademark is R not TM. But the Apple file is a service mark, or SM. To simplify, a SM is basically the same as a TM, but the understanding is a SM will be for a short term use, for various definitions of "short term" (usually a SM is applied to an advertising slogan, like Walmart's "Save money. Live better.")
First of all, to apply for either mark in the US, you need to pay a fee to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). But even if you file, there is the issue of diligence. If there's a violation (someone uses that trademark or service mark without permission) the mark holder fails to prosecute or take action, the mark can be found in a court to be unprotected and open for use. There are other ways to lose a mark as well.
However, it is not necessary to register a mark with the USPTO in order to claim it as a trademark or service mark. The USPTO says any time you claim rights in a mark, you may use the "TM" (trademark) or "SM" (service mark) designation to alert the public to your claim, regardless of whether you have filed an application with the USPTO.
Owning a mark registration on the Principal Register does give you several things:
So really what Apple is doing here is registering the layout and design of their store as a service mark (an identity) so that if someone else comes along and uses the same layout and design, Apple can make a stronger case to sue them. The legal theory is that you could have looked up the service mark to see if someone else was using it so it's harder to defend yourself if you are found to be infringing. Not impossible to defend, just harder.
Companies do this kind of thing all the time. It just doesn't usually hit the news. Coke has a registered mark on the shape their bottle, for example.
This isn't an Apple patent, it's not an abuse of the patent system. It's just a service mark.
Those extreme yogurt places [...]
Different field. Has nothing to do with computers.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
practice in the restaurant industry. Lots of times you can tell exactly what fast food place they are building just by the shape. MS would just need to change one or two cosmetic things to not violate if they do already anyway. Not much to see here.
If for some reason you can't be troubled that much, the Headline should be in your window's title bar. Unless you're using one of those browsers that's way too cool for a title bar.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
In the US, patents and copyrights are clearly enabled constitutionally by the "copyright clause" - article 1, section 8, clause 8, which in its entirety states:
Trademarks are not so enabled per se. Lawmakers saw an open door in the "commerce clause" - article 1, section 8, clause 3, which in its entirety states:
It's pretty intellectually clear to many of us that the clause was not intended as an excuse for the staggering load of crap hustled into federal law under its supposed umbrella. There is absolutely nothing there which suggests that trademarks are the valid concern of the federal government, in the same way that clause 8 clearly supports patents and copyrights.
But time marches on. An argument can be made that 50 separate states with a forest of 50 different policies on trademarks (and the other stuff questionably justified under the commerce clause) would not be a good thing. I don't make that argument, but I recognize that it has merit.
Be that as it may, the trademark system is subject to legislative tuning in the same way as the patent system and the copyright system. Even if one accepts that trade names and product names should be subject to trademark protection, there is no reason to fall into the absurd black hole of allowing STORE DESIGN AND LAYOUT, and god knows what else, to be subject to trademark. This should be reformed legislatively, the same way the choking absurdity of software patents and ornamental design patents (not technical design patents), and today's almost eternal duration of copyrights, should be reformed legislatively.
Obviously, letting some Authority or Bureau or Commission, answerable to no one, and in the thrall of special interests, weave a repressive forest of regulation does not cut it.
Apple deserves to be boycotted for a dozen reasons, at least.
I stopped buying Apple years ago, couldn't be happier about my decision.
Now that Android has caught up with iOS, and you can get a $250 Chromebook, who needs Apple?
I can see golden arches being a trademark, but not a glass storefront.
Name me a restaurant that has trademarked something like a glass storefront? And tell me how common that is.
Apple doesn't have much longer I think. They are going to lose with all this Android battling in the end. There are simply too many device makers out there and Google is simply smarter. The fan base of Apple iDevices has been shrinking and people stopped celbrating each new thing long ago. I haven't seen a line outside of an Apple store in I don't know how long.
Steve Jobs died of his own stupidity. Thinking different, he tried unconventional attempts at beating a treatable form of cancer. Not all of his ideas were pure gold I suppose. There may be a few other product plans left over from when he was alive, but Steve was pretty good about adjusting course with the changes in market conditions and with new technologies as they emerge. Since he's not here to make those adjustments, Apple's best hope for the next few years are that nothing significant changes and everything Steve planned on is still applicable.
I just don't see Apple at levels such as we've seen for much longer. It's more likely Apple will shrink down to near-death as it did before without Jobs... and will likely die. Apple has lost its way by going all-consumer in my opinion. They had a strong following in the design and production markets but their versions of Mac OSX seem far too consumer oriented and not so much focused on getting work done. It had been those professional users which kept Apple clinking along through the years before iPhone. But since they have pretty much let that side go, what are they going to do?
Hope they don't try to enforce this here in Australia.
The Setup of the Apple store is the general way mobile phone stores have been setup here for several years. Colors and textures might be different - however the layout and form (of the tables / displays) of the stores are pretty much identical.
I am still amazed some of the patents are handed out in the USA.
Glass Storefront is just the start. In a few years Apple will have invented glass!
This signature is false.
Now we need to do a trademark search every time we design a desk layout: is square monitor with square table taken?
Tears formed in your eyes and you had to stop?
The patent processing fees are probably in the millions per month.
The only reason for patents to exist, is the processing fee that gets paid to bureaucrats. They encourage the companies to file more patents by approving all of the possible ones and rejecting them, if anybody complains later on.
This bureaucratic money making system is beautiful.
~ Best man at your service.
Did they also patent their quality customer service where an employee tells you to wait in front of a display so it looks like you're a customer rather than someone who's been waiting over fifteen minutes just to talk to someone about your broken iPad?
One thing I've learned since my first computer (Vic-20) is never bet against Apple. Or at least don't make stupid predictions about them. Comments like "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame." were lame at the time and on the wrong side of history.
So Apple has gained another government granted 'right' to something that shouldn't be granted. That's their entire MO. Oh, you use telephones in your business to call suppliers? We have a trademark on that.
Steve was a shrewd business man, a smart man, a genius, a visionary he was not. He was just able to play the heartless CEO game with the best.
Who cares! I have yet to visit an Apple store where they answer my Mac and Apple related questions. When I see an Apple store I basically see a big box full of morons who are under trained and under qualified for a job. For instance one of my questions had to do with the audio chipset used in the new Mac book line up, not a hard question for someone who works at Apple but a very important question for someone considering what notebook to buy next. Other questions I've asked have had to do with audio driver impudence, type of hard drives support in devices and others. In all cases I get the same answer, "I don't know, were not trained with that kind of information", or in other words, "Were the dumb face of a tech company who doesn't care".
It would seem someone from Apple Retail took a walk through one of the many shopping malls their stores are located in, and got a load of this: http://content.microsoftstore.com/home.aspx I walk in, and know I'm in a Microsoft Store, not an Apple Store, but my gosh does it reek of being a blatant rip-off. Higher fidelity to the original than most Microsoft rip-offs, too...
No ... no patent was asked for, and none was given.
They trademarked (not patented) a particular set of features, which is fairly common. It only prevents people in the same trade from incorporating the same combination of distinctive features and leaves the enforcement up to Apple's expense to detect and pursue.
Car examples:
Much like Jeep trademarking vehicle's with a "7 vertical slot grill between a pair of round headlights" or Harley Davidson trademarking the sound of their V-twin motorcycles.
All of that is true, but what is the trade this trademark is applied to? It is not computers and technology. The trade in question is a storefront, so technically, any retail store front that has those features come into conflict with the trademark regardless of whether they sell computers or not.
Don't believe me? Ask those involved in the model train industry what happened when the real railroads started to enforce their trademarks on the toys that were being produced.
Apple was awarded a trademark for a retail store layout that includes a front glass display and counters with stools. Do you really believe they won't enforce their trademark against any and all infringers?
Actually, Steve lived a lot longer than would have been expected. His cancer was not an easily treatable type at all. Guess you can make stuff up and feel all pompous, "I know better than Steve jobs" and you feel better. Good for you.
All of that is true, but what is the trade this trademark is applied to? It is not computers and technology. The trade in question is a storefront, so technically, any retail store front that has those features come into conflict with the trademark regardless of whether they sell computers or not.
Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, consumer electronics and related accessories, and demonstration of products relating thereto
Apple doesn't have much longer I think.
I agree. Or, rather, they'll be around for decades, but the Apple we know is already fading. Already, they've lost the cutting edge coolness factor, which was their greatest asset. Their corporate behavior is being recognized as atrocious. Their marketing strategy has lost its focus, and has become scattershot. In ten years they'll be a Nokia.
I've been visiting Slashdot for quite a number of years now, and I don't agree with this assessment. Slashdot used to be a bunch of cranky Linux / Open Source guys, mixed with some unix graybeards. Now the place is overrun with foaming-at-the-mouth Android fans, intent on berating anything that isn't Android.
I realize that this sounds ridiculous when applied to Slashdot, but truth be told, the quality of discourse around these parts has gone into the shitter in the last two years or so.
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
I wonder if they've also accidentally given Microsoft a perpetual license to the look-and-feel of their stores?
I doubt it reading the summary suggests that this might be Apple's revenge:
Apple has requested that no store be allowed to replicate various features, including 'a clear glass storefront surrounded by a panelled facade'
In other words they have managed to trademark windows! ;-)
Nah. Life is too short to spend time listening to the rantings of a lunatic.
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
He did have the advantage of being rich enough to buy medical treatment and a transplant organ that most people in his situation could expect. Even with all that, he wasn't particularly far outside the statistical norms.
In any case, whether Steve Jobs possessed amazing marketing/business acumen, or just a cult of personality, Apple's fortunes seem to have risen and fallen based on whether or not he was at the helm. As he's no longer at the helm, Apple could potentially be in trouble in the mid to long term. They could always bring back Gil Amelio...
He might be... But I wouldn't be surprised if Apple eventually hits the very profitable, yet minority, share in mobile, that they have in desktops. Apple will have a nice 10% of the market, and make 25% of the cash, and the various Android manufactures will own 80%, with the rest (MS, RIM, whatever else) will sit with an a small minority.
Apple only really dominates a single market (the US), and has been falling in the the global share for awhile now.
Apple probably won't die. And probably won't stop making good profits. But they probably won't be #1 after short while.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
Exactly. The stupidity burned his eyes.
Or do you honestly think there's a snowball's chance in hell that "Apple doesn't have much longer". They've just sold more iPhones and iPads than ever, had their best ever profits, and have something like $130+ billion in cash. The idea that they're on their way out is amazingly absurd.
The sad thing is, going back 2-3 years, you'll find no shortage of Slashdot commenters making that very claim, over and over, all the while the exact opposite has been the norm over that period of time.
No doubt, such a scenario is technically possible, but the only evidence to support it actually occurring is fervent delusional Apple-hatred, nothing more.
http://blogs.webmd.com/breaking-news/2011/10/steve-jobs-pancreatic-cancer.html
According to this and others, when he first learned of his condition, it was early and treatable. He went with alternatives.
I would say fewer than that. The mobile phone device market requires a lot of change and turnover. People rarely keep their devices for more than a coule of years. So people are expected to get a new one in a fairly short time. While Apple is in decline, what will the next one be?
One could argue that computers aren't much different, but I think the PC market has matured to the point where we see people using older and older machines, using those machines less and less at home.
Apple was dying without Jobs. They will likely return to that state again. There are some things people can learn from Jobs. But how to be like him requires a special kind of thing and I don't think it can be emulated.
..fucking-believable.
Captcha is 'Circus' - quite appropriate for how I feel about the US patent system.
Based on the astonishing quality of the comments here, it should be "never go full-retard".
Sadly, it would never work. If commenters here could read, they'd notice simple facts like that this is a trademark, not a patent.
All of that is true, but what is the trade this trademark is applied to? It is not computers and technology. The trade in question is a storefront, so technically, any retail store front that has those features come into conflict with the trademark regardless of whether they sell computers or not.
Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, consumer electronics and related accessories, and demonstration of products relating thereto
But, you just descirbed Best Buy and almost any electronic boutique. I am prety sure that if somebody opens a juice bar (maybe calling it the Orange Store) and designs it to look like an Apple Store, Apple will enforce there trademark (or try to) even though Orange Julius doesn't sell computers or electronics.
Trademark enforcement goes a lot further than the actual product or trade it was given for. McDonalds agressively went after other businesses named MacDonalds, even though that was the name of the family run business. Mars (M&M) went after plenty of unrelated businesses over the use of their trademark. Trademarks are about protecting corporate identity (such as the apple on Apple computers). It protects the corporation from others using their identity in their own products and services. Trademarking a retail layout in a store goes far beyond what that store may or may not be selling.
I've been visiting Slashdot for quite a number of years now, and I don't agree with this assessment. Slashdot used to be a bunch of cranky Linux / Open Source guys, mixed with some unix graybeards.
I beg to differ.
Dude, apple didn't just invent the clear glass storefront.. nor even just clear glass. No sir - apple invented the storefront!
If commenters here could read, they'd notice simple facts like that this is a trademark, not a patent.
Maybe they just don't give a fuck? One form of intellectual serfdom is not that much different from other forms of intellectual serfdom.
I guess the Mall will have to shutdown. And all the storefronts in hotels and at the airports... That makes me wonder, what does everyone have that no one's trademarked yet. I'm going to get a trademark for an elongated and storable organ for use in reproductive situations, and make everyone pay me a few bucks for getting a woodie.
Yes, this is a strategic move to sue all stores located in rounded corners.
I defer to your four-digit ID. What do you think Slashdot was like five years ago. What do you think of it today? Do you think it's better, or worse?
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.