WebProNews

Tag: Trademark

  • The iWatch Doesn’t Exist, But Apple’s Getting Sued Over It

    Apple is getting sued over its iWatch.

    You may have not noticed anything wrong with that sentence, and to be honest it’s hard to fault you if you didn’t. Apple’s smartwatch is actually called the Apple Watch, but hey – it should’ve been the iWatch, right?

    Anyway, the iWatch doesn’t exist. But Apple is still facing legal action over it.

    Probendi, an Irish software firm has filed legal documents against Apple claiming its use of the term iWatch in Google ads is a violation of trademark.

    “Apple has systematically used iWatch wording on Google search engine in order to direct customers to its own website, advertising Apple Watch,” says Probendi.

    In other words, Probendi is miffed that Google searches for “iWatch’ return results for the Apple Watch. Of course, companies buying ads that direct customers to their products when related queries are entered is nothing new.

    Here’s what Probendi has to say on its website:

    The recent public announcement of “Apple Watch”, the new wrist wearable device/smart watch by Apple Inc., has been preceded and followed by persistent rumors identifying said product with the name “iWatch”.

     

    Probendi Limited hereby informs to be the exclusive holder of the Community trademark “iWatch” No. EU007125347, registered for computers and software effective as of August 3, 2008.

     

    Consequently, Probendi Limited is the sole entity lawfully entitled to use the name “iWatch” for products such as “Apple Watch” within the European Union, and will promptly take all appropriate legal actions to oppose any unauthorized use of “iWatch” by whomever for that kind of products.

    According to Bloomberg, Probendi is currently working on a product called the iWatch, but it doesn’t exist yet. The company has held the iWatch trademark since 2008, and according to an audit commissioned by Probendi that trademark is worth nearly $100 million.

  • Amazon Search Results Could Be ‘Confusing’ Says Court

    Amazon Search Results Could Be ‘Confusing’ Says Court

    If you head over to Amazon and search for MTM watches, you’ll find plenty of results … for Casio watches, Luminox watches, and Suunto watches. Amazon doesn’t sell MTM watches, yet it returns over 50 results for that search.

    According to MTM (Multi Time Machine Inc.) and now an appeals court, this could constitute a trademark violation.

    MTM, makers of military style watches, sued Amazon over their “misleading” search results and a federal judge ruled against them. Now, a US Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned that decision and says that the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed.

    From Reuters:

    MTM Special Ops are a military style model of watches which are not sold on Amazon’s web site, according to the court ruling. If an Amazon shopper searches for it, however, Amazon the site will not say it does not carry MTM products.

     

    Instead, Amazon displays MTM Special Ops in the search field and immediately below the search field, along with similar watches manufactured by MTM’s competitors for sale.

     

    MTM alleged this could cause customers to buy from one of those competitors, rather than encouraging the shopper to look for MTM watches elsewhere.

    The court agreed in a 2-1 decision. The dissenter who side with Amazon said that “no reasonably prudent consumer accustomed to shopping online would likely be confused as to the source of the products.”

    Indeed, Amazon clearly labels the maker of all products listed. But there’s no distinct indication that Amazon does not carry MTM products. In the watchmaker’s eyes, its brand value is being used to sell its competitor’s products.

    Amazon has faced this claim before. In the UK, cosmetics company Lush made the same argument and won. Now, when you search for “Lush” on Amazon, the company displays a big notice at the top that reads “We don’t sell Lush cosmetics.”

  • I Can’t Breathe: Rapper Offends Many With Phrase; Woman Tries to Trademark It

    When Eric Garner of New York died in July after being placed in a chokehold by police, he never could have imagined that his last words would end up being a marketed phrase.

    I Can’t Breathe.

    After the police officer who choked Eric Garner to death was not acquitted, many people took up the phrase as a rallying cry, a banner to wave as protest against what they perceive to be unjustified and unaccounted-for police brutality, especially against black men in America.

    The phrase has been printed on banners, t-shirts, protest signs, and cried aloud at protest marches.

    And now at least one woman is looking to funnel the money from merchandise with that phrase to herself. Catherine Crump of Waukegan, Illinois filed an application on December 13 for trademark of the phrase “I Can’t Breathe” for “clothing, namely hoodies, T-shirts for men, women, boys, girls and infants.”

    Crump says she has been using the phrase on commercial items since August. she included the required photos to show that she has used the phrase, and she paid the required filing fee of $325.

    But some law professionals say she may have more of a battle securing the phrase than simply filing an application for trademark.

    “If she’s not the first person to make these t-shirts, she’s going to be out of luck,” University of Chicago law professor Jonathan Masur said.

    If Crump can prove that, then show may be able to get a trademark giving her exclusive rights to license the use of the phrase on clothing items. This means that anyone else who wants to print shorts with the phrase will have to pay a licensing fee to Crump to be able to do so.

    But the trademark rights stop at clothing. Cynthia Ho, a law professor at Loyola University in Chicago, explains that no one can grab a phrase and completely rule its use in public. “You don’t get absolute monopoly rights over the words you trademark,” Ho said, “because that would violate the basic premise of free speech.”

    More recently, after two New York police officers were assassinated in what appears to be retaliation for the Garner killing and others, rapper The Game used the phrase in a way that offended many.

    I guess y'all "can't breathe" either. #RIPEricGarner #AllLivesMatter #ShitHasToChange #Now

    A photo posted by The Game (@losangelesconfidential) on

    The Game’s post was quickly denounced by many.

    But The Game responded by saying he was misunderstood.

    “… you simple minded fucks skipped right over the real message to pull whatever negativity you could from my post…”

    The comment in my last post was a DIRECT RESPONSE to the picture above: I didn't say it was cool that 2 cops were murdered senselessly while sitting in their car. These weren't the cop(s) that killed ERIC GARNER so it wasn't necessary they die in that manner the same as it wasn't AT ALL necessary ERIC GARNER die in the way he did. My comment also suggested that #AllLivesMatter & #ShitNeedsToChangeNow but you simple minded fucks skipped right over the real message to pull whatever negativity you could from my post… As expected. One thing about me is, I'm ME. I'm not running from my views or opinions & I'm standing firm on anything I say.. So while all of you trying to find the HATE in my post, there is NONE. What their is…. is an opinion of a man that believes the deaths of innocent people are never OKAY. Never has been !!! It just so happens, that I'm BLACK. It just so happens I grew up as a minority & have been a victim of racial profiling & police harassment in my youth the same as many so I can relate to the continuous STRUGGLE to change the way the GOVERNMENT deals with it's own employees when they're supposed to be highly trained professionals who loosely abuse the right to them wearing the badge given to them. "PROTECT & SERVE" does not mean "CHOKE & KILL" an innocent un-armed man…. Retaliating for Eric Garner's murder the way the MEDIA portrays it happened wasn't the answer either but it happened…. SO WHAT NOW… Do police KILL more civilians ??? Or do civilians KILL more police ??? Y'all can't see what's happening to our country ? Or all YALL still too focused on an iPhone app to get off of it to take a REAL LOOK AROUND ??? & you ask me, do I like police: NO !!! Do I hate police: NO !!! Have I experienced more police abusing their authority than not: YES !!! So that's why "I" say FUCK THE POLICE !!! That's "MY OPINION"…. Does that mean I think it's dope that 2 innocent cops were murdered: NOPE. But does it change my view on crooked police: NOPE !!! So… You can hate me, not like me, say FUCK GAME or UNFOLLOW or never support my MUSIC again because I have an opinion… SO WHAT, I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK !!! [To Be Continued..]

    A photo posted by The Game (@losangelesconfidential) on

  • Pitbull Sues Spirits Company Over Vodka Recipe

    Pitbull is suing the E. & J. Winery & New Amsterdam Spirits Company for naming their new vodka recipe the ‘Pit Bull.’ The rapper trademarked his name back in 2000 and alleges that the company has been using his trademark in their efforts to promote the alcoholic beverage. The drink is made up of 2 parts New Amsterdam vodka, 1/2 part lime juice, 1/2 part grapefruit juice, and parts lemon/lime soda.

    Pitbull endorses Voli vodka, which is featured both in his music video Give Me Everything and in the lyrics of his song Rain Over Me.

    “[Voli] gave me a great opportunity to be an owner of a brand that I really believed in,” he told the Los Angeles Times when he first became involved with the brand. “That’s why I got involved with Voli. It’s in a market where it’s needed and everybody wants it.”

    The rapper is now demanding that the E. & J. Winery & New Amsterdam Spirits Company provides him with compensation for their earnings made from the Pit Bull. He also wants them to stop using the name immediately.

    A couple of months ago Pitbull’s Voli brand was targeted in a lawsuit over a young man’s death at the scene of one of their promotional events. A boat featuring the Voli logo ran aground, prompting the captain to ask for help from the promo attendees. One of them got too close to the engine and was killed at the event.

    Pitbull’s Voli brand is a low-calorie fruit-flavored vodka line–not completely unlike the Pit Bull the defendant’s company was serving.

    In happier news, Pitbull appeared at the Billboard Music Awards on Sunday night where he performed his new song We Are One. The song debuted on Friday.

    Do you think the rapper will win his lawsuit or will lawyers argue that he doesn’t hold a trademark for the different spelling of his name?

    Image via Twitter

  • Jury Awards Apple $290 Million In Samsung Lawsuit

    Jury Awards Apple $290 Million In Samsung Lawsuit

    The AFP and the San Jose Mercury News reported an important update today on the lawsuit between Apple and Samsung: an eight-person jury from Silicon Valley has awarded Apple $290 million for Samsung’s apparent copying of iPhone and iPad designs, which it used in 13 devices.

    This latest award brings Apple’s total damages up to a staggering $900 million from the entire infringement suit against Samsung. The jury valued the Samsung Infuse 4G at $100 million, and the Droid Charge at $60 million.

    Apple’s first suit against Samsung was filed with Australian courts in 2011. Apple had requested that the country ban the Samsung Galaxy tablet computer on the basis that Samsung violated no less than three copyrights.

    Previously, Apple’s lawyer had asked for $379 million in damages for patent violations on the part of Samsung. They argued that number based on the profits Apple lost, and the profits that Samsung gained from selling the infringing devices. Samsung was portrayed as a hobgoblin that pirated Apple’s designs to keep up in the competitive smartphone and tablet markets.

    Across the aisle, Samsung’s lawyers argued that Apple was portraying their patents as more valuable than they are, and that Apple is overestimating their importance to consumers.

    Where a consumer might buy an Apple iPhone for the brand, Samsung argued, a Samsung smartphone may be purchased for: the larger screen; Android operating system; and affordability,not because it resembles an Apple product. Samsung placed the damages at $52 million.

    The dueling tech-giants are far from finished with one another. Another trial is scheduled in March over more patent violations on Samsung’s part. Unfortunately, by the time that suit goes to court, the case will have fallen even further behind the releases of new devices from both companies.

    Regardless of how the appeals get resolved, Apple and Samsung will continue to battle for their chunk of the smart-device market. According to an IDC survey, Samsung currently has the bigger market share at 31.4 percent while Apple’s share slipped from 14.4 percent to 13.1 percent.

    [Image via Wikimedia Commons]

  • Half-Life 3 Trademark News Turns Out To Be A Hoax

    Maybe one day, we can look back on these developments and laugh as we start our umpteenth playthrough of Half-Life 3. Until that time, the safest approach is to take every piece of news concerning Valve’s seminal game with the biggest grain of salt you can get your hands on, even if the news comes from directly from Valve (see the HL3 t-shirt hubbub for further details). With that in mind, the news of the Half-Life 3 European trademark registration resulting in a hoax should come with absolutely no surprise.

    Sure, the effort is valiant, and it undoubtedly worked in relation to generating renewed hype for those four words the gaming community longs to hear–“Half-Life 3 confirmed”–but it was all for naught. PCGamesN.com has the details:

    We reported that the Half-Life 3 trademark registered a week ago was the work of Valve, but that now seems highly unlikely. The mark has now lost its page on the EU site – and come to think of it, was made in suspicious proximity to a similar mark for Portal 3.

    A quick search of the trademark database in the link confirms the “Unsuccessful search: Found 0 trade marks” of status of Half-Life 3, at least in Europe. This moves players back into a square one status. Almost, anyway. While the trademark hoax is a thing, there’s been no denial/retraction concerning the story that appeared in RockPaperShotgun.com, perhaps the best PC gaming blog on the web. As a refresher, their post indicated the following:

    There is a thing called Jira that Valve uses for project management. Everything they do is tracked on it, and last night it accidentally went publicon the NeoGaf forumand OHMYGOD THERE’S A HALF-LIFE 3 TEAM ON IT! No Ricochet 2 team, however.

    Perhaps that can be the ray of hope for people to lean on. Until the time Half-Life 3 is really confirmed and/or released, the following Twitter account is probably your best resource for Half-Life 3’s release status:

    [Lead image courtesy of Valve]

  • Reddit’s Gaymer Community Wins Trademark Fight

    Reddit’s Gaymer Community Wins Trademark Fight

    After a months-long legal fight involving a site owner, one reddit community, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the term “gaymer” is no longer trademarked.

    The reddit community r/gaymers has won their fight against a “gaymer” trademark, held by gaymer.org operator Chris Vizzini. Back in August, 2012, Vizzini sent a cease and desist letter to reddit’s r/gaymers requesting that the subreddit change their name to no longer associate with the “gaymer” trademark.

    Soon, r/gaymers had the EFF and law firm Perkins Cole on their side. The EFF claimed that the trademark was faulty from the get-go and never should have been granted.

    “Gaymer is a common term that refers to members of this vibrant gaming community, and we are happy to help them fight back and make sure the term goes back to the public domain where it belongs,” said the EFF at the time.

    Gaymer, a terms referring to members of the LGBT community who happen to also be avid gamers, has been around since the early 90s, according to the EFF.

    And today, the EFF has announced that they have won the fight.

    “In a big win for gay gamers around the world, a blogger has surrendered his bogus trademark claim on the word ‘gaymer,’ freeing online forums, conventions, and others to use the descriptive term without fear of legal threats and interference,” says an EFF blog post.

    Vizzini has shut down gaymers.org, and if you go there now you’ll see a lengthy letter explaining why. Vizzini says that when the EFF and Perkins Cole threw their weight behind the folks at r/gaymer, he was just outmatched.

    I…had to be realistic though. I’m just a regular person with a normal job and make a modest salary. Basically, I’m up against a huge law firm with unlimited resources plus the EFF was in on it. Some chick that works at the EFF said, “This registration isn’t being used to protect consumers – it’s being used to threaten free speech.” Which was ridiculous so I knew there was at least one moron at the EFF and hoped there would be some at Perkins Coie.

    My legal Hail Mary play was to file a motion to dismiss their motion to cancel the trademark. If that went my way then this would all be over with and I wouldn’t have a big lawyer bill. Well filing a motion to dismiss a motion is way more expensive than it sounds and I have the bill to prove it.

    Plus, it didn’t work. The trademark board denied my motion.

    I’m letting go. I’d just be outspent if I pushed the case forward. Closing the site might seem like a case of sour grapes but it’s really not.

    “Trademark is supposed to protect consumers from confusion, not to shut down discussion spaces and the names they have rallied around,” said Zack Karlsson, the r/gaymer community’s representative in the trademark challenge. “We were shocked that anyone would try to assert ownership rights in ‘gaymer’ and felt the term belonged to the public, not Mr. Vizzini.”

    Vizzini claims that he was ready to let the whole thing go after the redditors agreed to puts a disclaimer up denying affiliation with gaymers.org, and that’s when he was hits with the legal challenge to void his entire trademark. He claims he never wanted to shut down r/gaymers.

    “The reason I’m closing the site is because the goals were accomplished but also because I feel disconnected from gay gamers having seen their ugly side though all of this. I know it’s not all gay gamers from the members of my site but its was enough of them saying hurtful things so loudly that it has put me off. What was once a source of passion has now become a source of pain and it’s time to walk away and say goodbye. I hope the passion comes back one day because if it does, the site will come back up,” says Vizzini.

    “It’s good the greater community ‘won,’ says r/gaymer poster feedle, “I know the guy who ran gaymer.org meant well, but I don’t think he completely understood the implications of sending a trademark ‘cease and desist’ letter. First off, just the act of sending such a letter was a ‘thermonuclear’ option, and I don’t think he understands that when you start getting ‘the law’ involved, the gloves come off. The greater community had every right to go seeking legal representation. You don’t launch the only nuke you have and then cry when the retaliatory strike is swift and decisive.”

    [Image via reddit]

  • Facebook Doesn’t Want Third-Party Apps Using ‘Insta’ Or ‘Gram’ In Their Names

    Instagram is no longer allowing third-party apps that provide additional functionality to its product to have the words (or partial words) “Insta” or “Gram” in them. The Facebook-owned company has changed its brand guidelines to reflect this mentality.

    An Instagram spokesperson tells WebProNews, “All uses of the Instagram brand need to be in accordance with our branding guidelines.”

    Here’s the full list of “Don’ts” from the guidelines:

    • Use the Instagram brand in a way that implies partnership, sponsorship or endorsement
    • Combine any part of the Instagram brand with your name, marks, designs or generic terms
    • Use trademarks, names, domain names, usernames, logos or other content that imitate or could be confused with Instagram
    • Present Instagram in a way that makes it the most distinctive or prominent feature of what you’re creating
    • Use any icons, images or trademarks to represent Instagram other than what is found on this page
    • Copy the Instagram look and feel
    • Assert rights over the Instagram trademarks whether by trademark registration, domain name registration, username or anything else
    • Feature Instagram on materials associated with pornography, illegal activities, or other materials that violate the Instagram Terms
    • Modify Instagram brand assets in any way, such as by changing the design or color

    There are a bunch of apps that violate Instagram’s guidelines, which are not going to be happy with this change of heart. Webstagram, Gramfeed, Instagallery and Statigram would be a few.

    TechCrunch shares an email another, Luxogram, received from Instagram:

    We appreciate your interest in developing products that help people share with Instagram. While we encourage developers to build great apps with Instagram, we cannot allow other applications to look like they might be official Instagram applications or endorsed or sponsored by us.

    As we hope you can appreciate, protection of its well-known trademarks is very important to Instagram. For example, it has always been against our guidelines to use a name that sounds or looks like “Instagram” or copies the look and feel of our application. Similarly, as we have clarified in the new guidelines, use of “INSTA” and “GRAM” for an application that works with Instagram is harmful to the Instagram brand. It is important that you develop your own distinctive branding for your applications, and use Instagram’s trademarks only as specifically authorized under our policies.

    We have to assume the bigger Facebook is really behind this crackdown. We’ve seen the company get pretty stingy with other parties using words “Face” and “book,” which are much more widely used terms than “insta” or “gram”.

    Remember when Facebook sued a teacher resource for using the word “book”? Yeah, that happened.

    “We were unaware the Facebook owned the Internet or the term ‘book,’” Teachbook Managing Partner Greg Shrader told us back in 2010.

  • Sweden Axes the Word ‘Ungoogleable’ After Google Intervenes

    Google has successfully pressured the Swedish Language Council to remove a new word because it risks turning “google” into a generic term.

    It’s a testament to Google’s dominance that most people simply say “google it” when they really mean “search it.” Because of this market domination, it’s completely understandable that a word like “ogooglebar” would emerge in the Swedish language. “Ogooglebar” translates to “ungoogleable,” as in “that was so obscure that it was ungoogleable, man.”

    The word, which was added to the list of new Swedish words back in December, has officially been removed.

    Google exerted pressure, asking the council to amend the definition to mean searches unable to be unearthed by Google only, not just any search engine. But instead of amending the definition, which the council said would go against their values, they decided to ax it altogether.

    But just from the official list. It’s not like Swedes will stop using the word “ogooglebar.”

    “If we want to have ogooglebar in the language, then we’ll use the word and it’s our use that gives it meaning – not a multinational company exerting pressure. Speech must be free!” said Swedish Language Council head Ann Cederberg.

    Of course, the problem for Google is that the term “Google” is constantly toeing the dangerous line of falling into generic territory. Sure, it’s nice to be such a dominant force in your area of expertise that your company’s name becomes synonymous with the product itself.

    Think Kleenex, Band-Aid, or Xerox? Those are actually trademarked names that people have gradually turned into the common name for the products they represent – tissue, bandages, and copy machines, respectively.

    But it’s not so nice when your trademarks are in jeopardy of being declared generic – which is what can technically happen in situations like this. And it’s not like Google hasn’t had to deal with this before.

    “It would go against our principles, and the principles of language. Google has forgotten one thing: language development doesn’t care about brand protection,” said Cederberg.

    [The Local via The Verge]

  • Google Updates AdWords Trademark Policy

    Google Updates AdWords Trademark Policy

    Google announced some updates to its AdWords trademark policy. Beginning on April 23, AdWords keywords that were restricted as a result of a trademark investigation will no longer be restricted in China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Brazil.

    “While we will not prevent the use of trademarks as keywords in the affected regions, trademark owners will still be able to complain about the use of their trademark in ad text,” Google says, adding, “Google’s goal is to provide our users with the most relevant information, whether from search results or advertisements, and we believe users benefit from having more choice. Our policy aims to balance the interests of users, advertisers and trademark owners, so we will continue to investigate trademark complaints concerning use of trademarks in ad text. In addition, this change means that the AdWords policy on trademarks as keywords is now harmonised throughout the world. A consistent policy and user experience worldwide benefits users, advertisers and trademark owners alike.”

    Google won’t prevent advertisers from selecting a third party’s trademark as a keyword in ads targeting the specified regions. The policy change does not impact the usage of trademarks in ad text. Google will continue to restrict use of trademarks in ad text for those in the affected regions that have already filed existing complaints about keywords and ad text.

    Keywords that were restricted as a result of a trademark investigation may start triggering ads in the affected regions. If you don’t want this to happen, you can remove the keywords from the campaigns or add them as negative keywords.

    You can read the FAQ here.

    The changes bring Google’s policy in the affected regions in line with its policy in the rest of the world.

    Hat tip to Ginny Marvin

  • This ‘iphone’ From Brazil Runs Android, Much To Apple’s Chagrin

    Most of us know the iPhone to be Apple’s prized smartphone – the device that ushered in the current mobile era we’re experiencing. Unfortunately for Apple, a different company has the rights to the “IPHONE” name in Brazil.

    That company is IGB Eletrônica SA (Gradiente), and it applied for the “IPHONE” trademark all the back in 2000. Apple released its first iPhone in 2007. The Wall Street Journal reports that the agency who oversees patents in Brazil said that it denied Apple’s trademark application because of IGB’s rights to the name. Matthew Cowley and Loretta Chao report:

    Marcelo Chimento, spokesman for Brazil’s National Institute of Industrial Property, or INPI, said Apple is contesting the decision, charging that Gradiente failed to make use of the trademark within a five-year window, as required by Brazilian trademark law. An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment.

    Apple Defends Proxy in Response to Greenlight Suit Unlike in the U.S., Brazilian trademark regulations stipulate that registrations be rewarded on a first-come, first-served basis, regardless of which party used the trademark first, or which party brings more value and recognition to the brand.

    The company, according to the Journal, only utilized its “iphone” power a few weeks before the deadline for when it was required to actually use it to keep the trademark. They used it to put out a device running Android, called the “iphone neo one”. Here’s a look:

    iPhone Neo One

    iphone neo one

    Apple released its iPhone 5 in Brazil in December.

  • Facebook Goes to Trial with Timelines.com this April, Thinks Defeat Is Improbable

    Facebook will go to trial to defend their “Timeline” in April.

    Facebook’s Annual Report filing with the SEC revealed that the case, Timelines, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., will go to trial on April 22nd of this year. In 2011, Timelines Inc., owners of Timelines.com, sued Facebook over the “Timeline” name. At that point, Facebook was just coming off of the f8 conference and beginning to roll out the new profile to more and more users.

    A couple of months after Timelines, Inc filed suit, Facebook countersued. Facebook’s argument all along is that the term “timeline” is generic. In their filing, Facebook listed dozens of instances of “timeline” being used in a generic capacity in the past, and made the point that a Google search of “timeline” yields over 196 million results.

    Timelines.com allows users to record and share historical events.

    “Given the generic or at least merely descriptive nature of the term ‘timeline’ when used to identify chronologies of events and related information (or tools for their creation), as well as the prior and widespread use of the term by third parties, Counterdefendant does not own exclusive rights in the term ‘timelines’ as used in connection with timeline creation and collection services,” claims Facebook.

    In their Annual Report, Facebook tells investors that they don’t see defeat as very probable in this case:

    In the Timelines case, the plaintiffs allege that Facebook infringes a trademark held by the plaintiffs…We believe the claims made by the Timelines plaintiffs are without merit, and we intend to continue to defend ourselves vigorously. Although the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain, we do not believe the possibility of loss…is probable. We are unable to estimate a range of loss, if any, that could result were there to be an adverse final decision, and we have not accrued a liability for either matter.

    “If an unfavorable outcome were to occur in the…Timelines case, it is possible that the impact could be material to our results of operations in the period(s) in which any such outcome becomes probable and estimable,” says the company.

    [via Chicago Tribune]

  • Apple Bans “Memory” from App Store, Cites German Trademark [REPORT]

    If you’re currently developing an app for Apple’s App Store, you may want to refrain from including the word “memory” in the title. It may save you a major headache down the road.

    According to a report from Gamasutra, Apple is sending out notices to some app developers that let them know that their games or apps with the word “memory” in the title have to be changed or they have to go.

    Apparently, Apple is sending these requests at the behest of a German game maker called Ravensburger, who claims that they hold the trademark on the word “memory” in many European countries (and some in other parts of the world).

    Those countries include: Armenia, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Equador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and Venezuela.

    Of course, their trademark (granted it’s legit) doesn’t pull any weight in the United States. But any app in the App Store that is available to an international audience would be affected by it.

    And there are plenty of apps that fit the bill. If you search the App Store for apps containing the word “memory,” you’ll find that it’s a fairly popular term within the ecosystem. I was able to spot over 50 without really diving too deep into it.

    Ravensburger offers a card game simply called “Memory,” which is similar to the paired match game that we’re all familiar with. They also offer branded versions of the game included Toy Story Memory, Winnie the Pooh Memory, and Hello Kitty Memory.

  • Apple Sues Online Grocery Store Over Its Logo

    Apple is ridiculously protective of its trademarks and patents. That much should be clear by now. The company will drag you to court if you so much have a single element in common with its own devices. One could argue that Apple was within their right to sue other electronic companies like Samsung, but their latest legal assault might be going a tad bit too far.

    Reuters is reporting that Apple is suing an online Polish grocery retailer named A.pl. The Web site’s name is an obvious pun on the word “apple.” Apples are a fruit and, as such, belong in a grocery store. Surely Apple wouldn’t be angry over a grocery store using a pun. They aren’t even in the same market.

    Apple says that the lawsuit isn’t about the name, but rather the logo. The company’s main logo isn’t infringing in the least, but their offshoot company, fresh24, may be the cause of the suit.

    Apple Suing Grocery Store

    The logo does bear a resemblance to Apple’s iconic logo, but is it really worth a lawsuit? Apple says that A.pl is using its logo to attract customers. In essence, Apple says that a grocery store has copied its logo, which is associated with electronics, to sell fruits and vegetables.

    I don’t even know what to say about this so I’ll just let A.pl’s CEO Radoslaw Celinski take over:

    “The accusation is ludicrous”.

    It’s so simple, yet gets the point across so well. Apple’s lawyers must have gone insane. Anything that even remotely resembles an apple (or a rectangle) is apparently fair game for the lawsuit happy lawyers over at Apple.

    Once again, it’s perfectly fine for a company to defend its trademark. Nobody would care if Apple was going after an electronics supplier that was using an Apple-like branding to sell their products, but this is a grocery store. I guess they could just change their logo to that of an orange or a pear, but the apple is most commonly recognized as the king of all fruits.

    Anyway, A.pl is currently reviewing the case being brought against them. It will probably reach the trial phase and A.pl will probably win. Apple’s legal escapades have not been met with the same kind of success that they have seen here in the U.S. If Apple does win, however, we can say goodbye to any kind of common sense that was left in the world.

  • Microsoft Ditches “Metro” Name For Windows 8 UI

    Ever since Microsoft revealed Windows 8 to the world, we have referred to the new interface as “Metro.” It was assumed that the name would stick since we’re this close to launch and Microsoft haven’t announced a change yet. That assumption has turned out wrong.

    The Verge got a hold of an internal memo that said the Metro name would be replaced this week. It seems kind of abrupt since Windows 8 has gone gold so it remains to be seen if any references to Metro will be removed from the final product shipping out on October 26.

    So why the sudden change? As it turns out, the Microsoft ran into a little trademark problem with the name. In the memo, Microsoft says the change came about after “discussions with an important European partner.” All signs for now are pointing to that partner being Metro AG, a German company.

    Microsoft is sticking to the line that Metro was always just a code name. In the same vein of Project Natal being later named Kinect, Microsoft has relied heavily on code names for their products. What makes this change so strange is that it doesn’t seem premeditated. Microsoft was using Metro in advertising and encouraging developers to use the name in apps. Why change it for any reason other than a trademark dispute?

    As for now, it seems that Microsoft is scrambling to come up with a new name for the interface. Employees have been told to use the name “Windows 8 style UI” until they can come up with something better. A new name should be revealed this weekend, but I think I have a few ideas. How about “unnecessary” or “keep it off of desktops?” They might not be as catchy as Metro, but I think they clearly express the nature of the UI.

  • Anonymous Announces #OpAnonTrademark In Retaliation To French eBay Store

    Anonymous Announces #OpAnonTrademark In Retaliation To French eBay Store

    Well, that didn’t take long. Earlier today, we brought you a story of how one French retailer had trademarked the Anonymous logo for his own use. He is using the faceless man logo and the slogan on a variety of t-shirts at the moment, but that could expand to other products. I guessed that it wouldn’t be long before Anonymous caught wind of it and took to action, but I didn’t expect it to take off so fast.

    But take off fast it did. Anonymous just announced Operation AnonTrademark via the group’s French branch. The original video detailing the operation was in French, but it has now been translated into English by the U.S. branch to start a global campaign against Early Flicker.

    Here’s the transcript of their message to Early Flicker:

    “Anonymous logo and slogan has been defiled and registered through the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). An online t-shirt company online called “Early Flicker” or “E-flicker” has registered the anonymous slogan and logo and passed it on as their own. Now under French law the company owns the rights to the anonymous logo and slogan.

    In a response the National Institute of Industrial Property said that “the conditions seem fulfilled since the mark is registered and it does not seem to have made ​​use.”

    Their arrogance and ignorance of what they have done will not go unpunished. Anonymous will take down any business they have going on the internet and the ninety-nine percent will not stop until the registration has been revoked and a public apology has been made.

    The name of Anonymous will not be the whore of the world.”

    I haven’t seen Anonymous this angry at a single entity in a while. They have already started posting the personal details, including phone number, address, personal email address, and Google+/Facebook accounts of the man behind Early Flicker, Apollinaire Auffret. There also seems to be plans to launch a massive DDoS campaigns against Early Flicker’s Web sites.

    I spoke to some members of Anonymous on the matter and they said that they would have no problem if Early Flicker was just selling Anonymous t-shirts. Their problem is that Anonymous has already registered the logo and slogan under a Creative Commons license. For Early Flicker to trademark it as his own creation is illegal. That being said, they still love the people that make Anonymous merchandise using the CC license.

    It looks like this operation isn’t going to be over anytime soon. It will be interesting to see how Early Flicker responds. If its found that they have trademarked a Creative Commons licensed image, that could spell trouble for him.

  • Will Anonymous Allow Their Logo To Be Trademarked?

    Will Anonymous Allow Their Logo To Be Trademarked?

    The Anonymous logo is one of the defining images of our generation. Whether you agree with them or not, Anonymous has had a profound impact on the Internet. That’s why it’s interesting that Anonymous hasn’t tried to monetize their image. Of course, it could be that a French online retailer beat them to it.

    Twitter user @asher_wolf spotted a trademark filing from earlier this year that seeks to claim the Anonymous logo for their own. You know the one – the suited man with a question mark for a head standing in the front of the globe. It’s more synonymous with the Anonymous movement than the Guy Fawkes mask. Variations of the question mark man have been appearing since Anonymous was just some guys trolling the church of Scientology from 4chan’s /b/ board.

    The lengthy history of the logo is what makes this news odd. Why trademark it now? The person behind the trademark is a Frenchman named Apollinaire Auffret. He works for the retailer Early Flicker and they have begun selling Anonymous merchandise via their eBay store.

    What’s interesting is that Auffret did not only trademark the logo, but he also filed for the slogan – “Anonymous. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.”

    The man responsible for the trademark is obviously a peddler of suspect quality graphic T-shirts. You can see from his store that all of the t-shirts have graphics taken from various popular Web sources. He probably thinks that Anonymous is popular enough to warrant t-shirts.

    Unfortunately, he may be only inviting attacks on his store and Web site. Anonymous has been traditionally against the use of copyright and trademark for any reason. Some within the group may feel that the trademark is an offense to their beliefs. Of course, it could also be somebody within Anonymous hoping to make a few extra bucks off the brand. The openness of the group makes it hard to pin down members or their motivations.

    If you feel like you must have an Anonymous t-shirt, you can grab one from the store for €19.90. You might want to grab one now before Anonymous starts to attack the poor guy.

    [h/t: Wired]

  • Anthony Davis’ Unibrow Gets Trademarked

    Anthony Davis’ Unibrow Gets Trademarked

    During the last season of college basketball, Kentucky’s Anthony Davis made the unibrow popular with sports fans, so much so, in fact, it went well beyond Kentucky fans. In fact, some might say the Player of Year in college basketball took shame out of such facial hair and made it socially acceptable, at least judging by all the “Brow Down” t-shirts that were popping.

    Now, not only has Davis brought the unibrow back, he’s trying to make it his, and his alone after trademarking the following phrases: “Fear the Brow” and “Raise the Brow,” according to a report filed by CNBC’s Darren Rovell. And what is young Davis hoping to receive with his newly-granted trademarks? Money. Nothing more, nothing less:

    “I don’t want anyone to try to grow a unibrow because of me and then try to make money off of it,” Davis told CNBC. “Me and my family decided to trademark it because it’s very unique.”

    Does this mean Davis is the only one in the world to have a unibrow? Of course not. The phrase existed long before he set foot on UK’s campus. He is, however, smart enough to trademark the phrases that have been born out of these mega-eyebrows. Apparently, the fact that t-shirts were being sold during his one season at Kentucky turned him onto the idea, thanks to the efforts of UK’s athletic department:

    “We sent a half a dozen cease-and-desist letters,” said Jason Schlafer, the school’s associate athletic director for marketing. “But towards the end of the season, people were getting really creative.”

    An example of this creativity:

    (image)
    The shirts were so popular, fans from other teams apparently purchased them. Apparently, Davis has become fiercely protective of his eye hair, so much so, in fact, that when asked about shaving it, Davis says no:

    “I might have a commercial where I’m acting like I’m shaving it and then throw I’ll the razor down.”

    While Rovell says this crosses Gillette and Schick of off Davis list of potential endorsers, it does pave the way for tolerance movements because connected eyebrows are not a joking matter. If Davis is involved, it’s clearly serious business.

  • London Olympics Protesters Suspended From Twitter

    As you might expect, not everyone in England is welcoming the Olympics with open arms. So much so, in fact, there’s an official protest movement which can be found at ProtestLondon2012.com. This “Official Protesters” collective is overseen by a group called the Space Hijackers. For those who are unaware, the Space Hijackers refer to themselves as anarchitects, and their state goal is as follows:

    Our group is dedicated to battling the constant oppressive encroachment onto public spaces of institutions, corporations and urban planners. We oppose the way that public space is being eroded and replaced by corporate profit making space.

    A noble cause, unless your on the side of the corporations.

    Considering the group’s perpsective, it should come as no surprise that the Space Hijackers are firmly against the London bending over backwards to welcome the Olympics. You can read a lot more about why the group is against the London Olympics here, but suffice to say, it has little do with the athletic events and more to do with stuff like this, from the awesomely-named Tumblr, Nipplelick (the link is SFW, but its index page may not be).

    The Official Protesters even have t-shirts:

    Official Protester T-Shirt

    The group is also incredibly active in the world of social media, including an active Twitter account. Their tweeting, however, was temporarily suspended the other day due to a trademark complaint by the “Locog,” aka, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The Space Hijackers were informed by a polite email from Twitter’s team, emphasizing the trademark complaint, as opposed to making this a free speech issue:

    Twitter Suspension

    That, however, did not erase the stink of censorship, or, as the Space Hijackers so eloquently put it:

    Twitter, the beacon of free speech which so vocally lent it’s support to the Arab Spring did, of course, what everyone expected and immediately curtailed to the interests of big money and business. We, The Official Protesters, were immediately locked out of our account, losing access to thousands of followers, in a move designed to silence our dissent.

    From there, reaction exploded at an exponential rate across the Internet newsreel, which, in part led to the restoration of the Space Hijackers Twitter account. Apparently, however, they had to return their Olympic medals:

     

    @FeelingTheBlues We appealed and the ban was lifted, still had to give the medals back though. http://t.co/ViQQNKJc
    43 minutes ago via web · powered by @socialditto
     Reply  · Retweet  · Favorite

    While the speech blocking aspects cannot be ignored, the fact that Twitter was slick wise enough to go trademark confusion as their reasoning no doubt absolves them of any wrongdoing, at least to them. That, however, does not reflect the Space Hijackers’ point of view, who made this known on their Twitter description:

    We reject any ‘Trademark Connection’ or ‘Brand Affiliation’ Locog tries to make to us. Seriously guys it’s getting embarrassing, stop trying to make friends.

    With that in mind, how does it feel knowing that Twitter acquiesced to the requests of a group clearly trying to silence any outspoken protest against the London Olympics, especially when the protest group does a great job of pointing out the hypocrisy involved in hosting these celebrations of athletics? Granted, the power was turned back on soon enough, but the fact that Twitter suspended the account in the first place is troubling.

    But then again, perhaps we should’ve seen this coming.

  • Legal Concerns Loom with ICANN’s Upcoming gTLDs

    ICANN’s controversial decision to open up the market for domain name endings is about to get even stickier as the registration process nears its deadline. According to numerous analysts, there will be an outburst of legal issues after the new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants are revealed to the public.

    The application window was scheduled to close April 12th, but it was extended after a technical glitch was detected in the TAS system. In an effort to take “the most conservative approach” to protect its applicants and their data, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) shut down its TAS system last Thursday when the issue was found. It was scheduled to reopen today but has since said it needs more time. An update is expected to be announced no later than Friday, April 20th.

    Once the application process is over, as many as 1,000 new domain name endings could be introduced. ICANN’s decision to open the floodgates on gTLDs has gone down in history as one of the most dramatic shakeups the Internet has seen, since it could greatly increase the existing 22 or so extensions that consumers are currently accustomed to.

    Do you see ICANN’s move as a positive or a negative for businesses? We’d love to know.

    Joe Luthy, Global Marketing Director at Melbourne IT Joe Luthy, the Global Marketing Director for Melbourne IT, told WebProNews that the new gTLDs would cover many different industries. He assisted more than 150 applicants through the registration process and said the diversity of the applications was unexpected.

    “It’s gonna be surprising, we believe, whenever the full list is revealed in May,” he pointed out.

    Although ICANN’s “Reveal Day” isn’t scheduled until the end of this month, Luthy said companies should already begin preparing for the news. He recommends that businesses start identifying their own brands and trademarks to see not only what rights they have, but also what they want to have in the future.

    “Right now, companies – whether they’ve applied or not applied – really need to start thinking about what’s important to them going forward,” he said.

    One issue that could pose a problem for a company is if an applicant has filed a name 
“confusingly similar” to its own. Another potential problem could be in the applicant’s intent of use.

    If a problem does arise, ICANN has allowed for a 60-day window, in which concerned parties can comment or object to an application. With infringement issues, a company has 7 months to file a formal objection to stop the application from going forward until the concerns are addressed or the application is withdrawn.

    “There’s going to be probably a lot of contention because there’s a number of companies out there applying for the same generic,” said Luthy.

    As he explained to us, several companies are fighting over the .eco domain ending and are looking at legal action even before the applicants have been released. Other similar issues are expected since endings such as .ritz could be used in a variety of ways.

    These concerns, and others, have brought ICANN’s move a lot of criticism, especially from the advertising community. In the below interview, Dan Jaffe, the Executive Vice President of Government Relations for the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), told WPN that ICANN’s move was both “reckless” and “premature.”

    “Unfortunately in the existing system, there are serious problems of cyber squatting, typo squatting, phishing, the placement of malware, [and] the inability to find out who, in fact, really owns Internet addresses,” he said. “We’re afraid unless these types of problems are resolved that suddenly opening the top-level domains to as many as 1,000 new top-level domains, which is a thousand percent increase over the existing systems, it would be very, very dangerous both to businesses and consumers. ”

    While Luthy believes legal conflicts will ensue after ICANN’s “Reveal Day,” he said most of them would come from the generic side since it is very competitive. Most brand owners, on the other hand, are simply trying to promote internal brands and services.

    ICANN has said this move would offer more opportunities to both consumers and brands. While time will tell whether or not this will, in fact, happen, Luthy is confident in ICANN’s decision.

    “Every innovation we’ve seen on the Internet has opened up a lot of opportunities [and] created a lot of new businesses,” he said. “I think we’re gonna see the same thing with the new TLDs.”

    The new gTLDs are expected to begin appearing late next year. ICANN has also said it will have future application windows, although it has not given any specific dates for them.