Comments on: Apple digs in to protect ‘app store’ name http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/ Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:04:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Raf http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-898417 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:52:26 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-898417 People don’t violate a trademark because there isn’t one. It’s been filed for trademark and has been opposed.

]]> By: pedro http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-871730 Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:52:07 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-871730 last time i checked app means application the form of using some thing on something else to enhance a sertin product not apples store

]]> By: Joseph http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869784 Sat, 28 Jul 2012 00:03:20 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869784 Jeff, you’re right. Everyone is entitled to an opinion even if uninformed. In fact, many lawyers don’t understand intellectual property (law is a very specialized field just like medicine).

Let me clarify. I have no problem with blog comments. Let people say whatever they want. However, I often find that journalists (not just on GigaOm) often fail to understand legal issues. Does this mean reporters should get a law degree? No. But every reporter who writes about IP issues should have a source at an IP law firm so they can write more informed articles that better serve their readers.

Regarding this particular dispute, how about an article about secondary meaning, which can overcome a claim of genericness? I bet your readers would find that helpful to understand. Frankly, given Amazon’s weak earnings, one has to wonder why it didn’t just come up with another name for its store. Microsoft’s lawsuit makes more sense — it has deeper pockets so spending $1-2 million is no big deal.

]]> By: Jeff John Roberts http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869720 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:19:03 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869720 Hey Joseph, thanks for your comment. I’m not sure that non-lawyers should be excluded from legal debates, especially as the outcome of such debates can ripple far beyond the legal community. Moreover, I think we have to be careful about reinforcing notions that lawyers are someone smarter or more rarified than other people.

As for our legal coverage, you’re right that people like to read about Apple and big tech companies and so that is what we typically report on. It’s not just a question of pageviews (though that is part of it). The other reason we cover Intellectual property issues is because they shape the development of innovation as a whole.

Our legal coverage may not be as granular as some sites — but I guarantee it is accurate (and readable!).

]]> By: Ledking http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869710 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:08:12 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869710 Thank you for the correction, I inadvertently used the wrong term. Time for some more coffee…

]]> By: Joseph http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869681 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 20:30:53 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869681 Trademark, not copyright. Only lawyers should be permitted to debate these topics as non-lawyers don’t understand that this sort of stuff is routine. GigaOm is just reporting it because it concerns Apple. Anything Apple generates page views. There are many trademark disputes every day involving thousands of companies, including in the tech sector. GigaOm reports on none of them because GigaOm doesn’t report on legal issues — except when Apple is involved. Take a look at Law360′s daily coverage of trademark lawsuits files to get a sense of how garden variety such disputes are.

]]> By: Ledking http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869665 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 20:08:51 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869665 App store is a generic term, a compound noun. No company should be able to copyright it. Also, Apple is not the first to use the term nor the only to apply for a copyright of it. Sage netWorks applied in 1998, and there are others leading up to 2006, before apple used it.

Apple has NOT and been granted a copyright of this term.

]]> By: Engineer http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869585 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:15:16 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869585 That only makes sense if you’re the one who coins the term. Apple coined the Appstore term.

Just because a lot of people are violating this trademark does not make it a generic term like “Grocery store” is.

]]> By: Sohrob Tahmasebi http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869517 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:40:20 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869517 Perhaps you wouldn’t agree if you were an executive at Apple or an Apple shareholder. True that it’s disappointing to see so much litigation amongst ALL companies in the tech space recently (not fair to blame only Apple) but the fact is they have a right to protect their brand as well as their IP. Apple singlehandedly revived the smartphone market and honestly speaking created the tablet market (yes there were tablets before Apple but nothing substantial).

]]> By: Dino http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/apple-digs-in-to-protect-app-store-name/#comment-869274 Fri, 27 Jul 2012 05:13:12 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=546915#comment-869274 I tend to agree..

]]>