“Almost all all of the pro-Apple comments are coming from the non-legal iFans”… as if to suggest therefore, the anti-Apple comments are coming from the legal non-iFans?
“Can’t you see that Apple hasn’t stated why/if” they are right?” I bet the first thing their legal team said was, don’t say squat. That’s the usual advice when you’re facing litigation. (Though, in fact, Apple has made a statement of sorts: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6149285.html ) It’s actually notable that Cisco has chosen to take their case public. It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out (but, in the end, I still hope they change the name…)

Ed Burnette is NOT a legal professional! Can’t you see that Apple hasn’t stated why/if they are right? Almost all of the pro-apple comments are coming from the non-legal iFans! Don’t assuming that having a legal team = success (unless you believe that everything that is associated with apple will “just work”).

Until this is settled in a court, let us all just stop speculating and grasping at straws! If apple had any innovation, they would use a different name for the stupid device and move on!

Don’t quit your day-job – legal issues isn’t your thing!

Cisco has all rights to the iPhone trademark, it was renewed in 2006 at the appropriate time. http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=75076573

Do you think that Cisco will go to court without concrete evidence to win their case? Do you think this is the OJ Simpson / Michael Jackson trial we’re dealing with?!?!

It’d be nice if Cisco were treated fairly as this plays out. Companies are allowed to own whatever they want until the expiration date and use (or not use) them as they see fit.

Doesn’t matter if it sits on a shelf gathering dust, they still own it.

What I think will happen is Apple is trying to force Cisco’s hand by creating negative PR against them. As Scott said above, people will think it is Cisco being unfair because they won’t let their beloved Apple use the name and will buy the line about Cisco “sitting” on it just to get money out of Apple.

I am not lawyer or American so I cannot comment on how Cisco’s claims might play out in court but I am worried about patent “squatting” that Apple appear to use to stifle development of competing technologies. This is bad for the industry and ultimately for the consumer.

To me Apple’s creativity seems to extend out to all areas of the company. Their lawyers who are always innovating to protect or enhance the company’s position.

That iPhone sticker on their last minute of the grace period trademark paperwork was more than a bit lame for a company as large as Cisco.

And frankly the only reason the trademark is worth fighting over it because of Apple’s efforts with promoting IThis and iThat, not because of any effort on Cisco’s part with the iPhone trademark.

I don’t think their law suit is going to play out the way Cisco is hoping.

It seems that if Steve Jobs had to be a leader of a country, we can expect dictatorship and totalitarianism beyond Hitler, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein or Castro!

I had zero respect for apple fans, but this just takes it into the negative numbers.

Expect reading between lines standard filter essential for Apple sales assualts.

Unbridled promise and “reality distortion field” already coined a decade ago as term for the syndrome will only expand yet further enboldened by wider public acceptance intoxicated by glitz. Windows users, you’re fresh meat.

Shamefully, even tech-saavy tablet luminaries now perpetuate iPhone’s leap-of-faith, illogical convergence crowning, sophmoric myth-building unsuitable for supposedly high-level forums and blogs audience.