223

Apple wants to claim depictions of actual apples.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] utg@mander.xyz 56 points 1 year ago

Would be funny if they can successfully counter-sue apple to stop using their logo

[-] vacuumflower@vlemmy.net 6 points 1 year ago

I mean, that's the way trademark laws in theory should work. Who got there first gets the logo. And the other side gets Jobs' mummified dick with some salt.

[-] emi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 33 points 1 year ago

It isn't even their logo, they are trying to copyright images of apples.

“We have a hard time understanding this, because it’s not like they’re trying to protect their bitten apple,” Fruit Union Suisse director Jimmy Mariéthoz was quoted as saying by the outlet. “Their objective here is really to own the rights to an actual apple, which, for us, is something that is really almost universal… that should be free for everyone to use.”

[-] Digestive_Biscuit@feddit.uk 16 points 1 year ago

They tried years ago to copyright the use of the letter 'i' and failed.

[-] Rinox@feddit.it 8 points 1 year ago

I think they tried to trademark it, like intel tried to trademark the number 86.

[-] somniumx@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

me come from a dymensyon where they succeded. Yt ys really trecky to wryte nowadays, at least ef you're not owner of an i©phone™.

[-] rowinofwin@beehaw.org 33 points 1 year ago

This reminds me of the Big Mac decision. I can't remember where but there was a burger place that had a Big Mac burger but the name was not a copy of the McDonalds one, it was iirc because the owner's name was Mac. Anyway, they lost the case and therefore lost copyright protection on Big Mac, so Hungry Jacks/Burger King started renaming all their burgers to something something big Mac, just to mess with them. Maybe Apple will bite of more than they can chew and end up losing protection for the Apple logo or similar things.

[-] Uriel238@lemmy.one 17 points 1 year ago

McDonald's is notorious for suing any food-related company with a name starting with Mc or Mac, for trademark infringement. McDonald's lost to McNally's, a steakhouse in California, but I have to assume they've won enough to persist the policy.

Although in the 2010s it was observed that copyright lawyers on retainer to movie studios and record companies were over-eager to report infringement to media platforms even when it was obviously unintentional and not useful for piracy (e.g. dancing baby videos.) And Disney has a long wretched tradition of suing daycare places for wall murals long before the internet.

So this might be a matter of retained legal teams keeping themselves busy with overvigilence, since overenforcement makes such companies look like abusive dicks who deserve to be pirated (or worse, deserve to be not pirated).

[-] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago

Leave it to "Android Authority" to throw a shit fit over a nothing story. Apple lost this application in 2017, and will almost certainly lose this appeal filed in April. Yes, it's silly, but this article makes it sound like Apple is committing some sort of unspeakable crime, which it isn't.

Calm down, everyone.

[-] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 year ago

The crime that these corporations are committing is robbing the public of it's own iconography, or trying to anyway.

[-] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

hahahahahaha, hilarious.

first of all, this isn't a crime. second, nothing has happened yet-- and, even if the Swiss government rules in favor of Apple, they would be the ones to blame for allowing it. All Apple did was ask.

[-] kresten@feddit.dk 16 points 1 year ago

hahahahahaha, hilarious.

It's fine that you disagree, but can you at least try to not be condescending.

[-] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

This seems like a big ask in this case :/

[-] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Honestly, reading this person's replies is repulsive. What a total jerk. Imagine suffering through a social event like a dinner party with someone like that. Condescending is an understatement.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 year ago

Apple is forcing another company and the tax payers to waste time and money because they think they own the entire world. They should be barred from using the courts for any intellectual property matter because they keep abusing it.

[-] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Apple is doing no such thing. What they are doing is pursuing their rights under Swiss law, and if you have a problem with that, take it up with the Swiss government for writing their IP laws the way they have and with the Swiss courts for not dismissing their appeal out-of-hand.

It's peak entitlement to call something "abuse" simply because of your grudge against apple for doing something you happen not to like.

[-] emi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago

Important not from that article:

It’s not the first time we’ve seen big tech companies attempt to trademark common terms or goods. However, a study by the Tech Transparency Project found that Apple filed more trademark oppositions over a three-year period than Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook combined.

If you think trademarking of common terms is a bad thing at all, apple seems to be the worst among big tech firms.

P.S. this "Android Authority" article put apple in the correct light in my opinion after reading it, and I use a lot of Apple products.

[-] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

this whole argument is preposterous on its face to blame apple for anything when the problem is the laws which allow it. where's the outrage for the swiss apple company with their trademarked apple logo? nowhere.

you hate apple, and that's the source of the outrage and why you blame them rather than the courts and legislatures for their crappy IP laws.

[-] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

By this logic, if there's a law somewhere that unintentionally allows them to crush orphans, they aren't malicious to do so.

Apple and other corporations lobby for this kind of crappy IP law, so they can sue people.

Apple expanded into this market recently and are pretending to be the incumbent apple themed brand in that space in the whole world.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] JiveTurkey@beehaw.org 22 points 1 year ago

Can companies just fuck off with this. Monster energy does the same thing. Also fuck Apple.

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

We're talking about Apple here. Apple is the company that tried to enforce a patent on a rectangle inside if another rectangle with rounded corners.

[-] fear@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago

This just in, Apple sues the estate of 2000+ year old man for his depiction of an apple in Genesis, the popular and riveting first book in the collaborative effort written 2 millennia ago: The Bible.

I reached out to Apple's PR representative, I'll let you know if they get back to me.

[-] pushka@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Actually Moses was VERY prudent, and strategically didn't use the exact word 'apple' only 'fruit' and 'of the tree' - because he knew apple would be a litigious bitch


Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

[-] fear@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Apple's PR representative stated:

If all apples are fruit, and all fruit are of a tree, then surely all fruit of a tree are apples. The world needs to understand that every fruit is our intellectual property now. We've earned that place with our iconic innovation. We're currently in talks with Fruit of the Loom, and our team is confident that they will rebrand as 'Of the Loom'. It's a fresh, modern take for their products that will be mutually beneficial to both parties.

I reached out to Fruit of the Loom's PR representative, nothing yet.

[-] burningmatches@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

There's some truth to this. Apple did used to mean basically any fruit. That's where we get "pineapple" in English. The Dutch call oranges "Chinese apples" and the French call potatoes "ground apples". Any new fruit or vegetable that came along was basically just some kind of apple. So I think Apple might have a case here.

[-] cthonctic@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Apple is a litigation company disguised as hardware sales. Steve "thermonuclear war" Jobs saw to this.

[-] Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago

Is it time to abolish trademarks yet?

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one 11 points 1 year ago

I hope they'll win, so everyone will understand how stupid and propriety our era is and there is nothing we can do about it, just stupid along with it.

[-] Shimmer@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago
[-] pushka@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They tried to sue Australian grocery-duopolly Woolworths for their apple/ pumpkin type W logo

wollies applied for a blanket trademark - which would allow them to sell laptops with that logo on it, which would be kind of hilarious

[-] mananevergone@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago
[-] torafugu@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Time to get my "Made for iPhone Granny Smith Apples".

[-] tyfi@wirebase.org 4 points 1 year ago
[-] OrangeCorvus@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

OK this happens in Switzerland, yeah, I don't think they have any chance. If it would have been in the US, maybe but in Europe, it's a lot harder if you want to bully another company.

[-] burningmatches@feddit.uk 9 points 1 year ago

Just to be clear, Apple isn't asking the Swiss apple growers to change their logo. And it definitely isn't forcing them.

I assmue some journalist saw Apple making a very boring Swiss trademark application and decided to call up a local company with an apple in its logo to see what they thought about it. There's zero chance the company will have to re-brand.

The US apple industry uses an apple logo without any problem: https://usapple.org/

[-] Hedup@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

In future corporations will sue farmers to force them to genetically modify their products, because they're "stealing the brand".

/c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

[-] LootGoblin42@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

I love apple products, and have been a mac user since the 80s, but this is just silly.

[-] grte@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If the article is accurate and Apple is trying to secure IP rights over, "images of apples," surely no sane judge would rule in favour of such a wide ranging and foolish claim. I'm sure there are plenty of businesses who will be able to claim prior art over a picture of a damn apple.

Incidentally I'm trademarking the sun and then going after the entire country of Japan. I hope you aren't too attached to that flag.

[-] zik@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A few years ago I tried to register a domain name which included the word "purple". I was told I couldn't because HP had trademarked the word "purple" so it was off the list of registerable words. I pointed out that my domain was in no way related to their purple laptops and I was told tough, no-one could for any reason register any domain which included the word "purple" because HP now owned the dictionary word "purple".

[-] Liz@midwest.social 7 points 1 year ago

Bullshit. They just don't want to deal with the lawsuit even though HP would be 100% in the wrong. But we don't have a justice system, just a legal system. If you got enough money you can make nearly anything the law.

[-] ngons@vlemmy.net 1 points 1 year ago

They registered this particular image https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?ID=ROM.1028240&DES=1, the rest of the story is conjecturing what might happen if TM is granted in .ch - I'm no expert, but it sounds unlikely to affect the fruit union.

[-] Quentinp@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What ever happened with Meta and the tech company that already existed called Meta? (Just remembered that now) edit: looks like they settled

[-] maniel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Btw, why Apple still didn't sue Nothing for their phone (1), the design of the LEDs on the back of the phone looks almost exactly like Apple logo

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
223 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37739 readers
730 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS