Apple Orders Technicians to Feign Ignorance About Mac Malware

[IPD]

It shits me to get involved in another apple debate, but if you want to talk lawsuits, your country in fucking vented them! Do we really need to go there?

Here in Australia, lifeguards have apparently patented the term "lifeguard". Beach warfare as Surf Life Saving Australia trademarks the term 'lifeguard' | Courier Mail

It's called life kids. You need to get over it.

Inp - again, you really have a hate for apple yet you wont stop going on and fucking on about the company. Like I said before, did they hurt you as a child or do you really not have better things to do with your time?

Scotty

scooter, why do i get the feeling that if i wanted to castrate steve jobs, all i'd have to do is kick you in the chin?

[GTO Assassin]

First of all, I'm pretty sure you WANT to castrate Jobsy. There's no if or buts about that. Second of all, go back and quote me where I've stated that Apple is better than a pc. You'll find that the only part where I've said anything close to that was where I was talking about MY profession (in a public sense), Mac's are considered the best option. (video editing using Final Cut)

Scotty

[stealthify]

Uh oh, here comes the attack on Final Cut Pro X.

isdain:

[BigTyla]

Tyler, you don't need to get so fussy. I'd love to discuss this with you if you'd hear me out, even if you don't agree.

I can tell you which one doesn't belong: App Store. Want to know why? Because that is a trademark infringement, not a patent infringement.

And on that note, do you want to hear another ridiculous trademark? The word 'face' in websites. And guess who owns it and has sued others for using it? Facebook. Now that's a wild one.

While the term 'app' and 'store' and very generic and commonplace words, 'App Store' together, while being the first to trademark it and make it a household name, is a different story. And on that note, even words like 'Apple' and 'Amazon' are fairly generic terms as well - but they have essentially become brands. Brands will association, brands that each company has spent millions to market and to keep associated with their company.

Before mid-2008, did you ever refer to anything as "The App Store"? I doubt you did. Hardly anyone did:

Google Trends: app store

Apple, while they didn't invent 'apps' or 'stores', was the first to really publicize and push the term 'App Store' into households and have it catch. Before long, when I said to someone: "you can find that in the App Store", they automatically knew I was talking about the store belonging to Apple.

And THAT is why Apple is defending it. They're not saying Amazon can't have their own store to sell applications, and even put a slogan under it saying that they specialize in selling apps, but that they essentially want to create their own sub-brand called the 'App Store' (or rather, 'Appstore') as well. And that might lead to confusion, and leeches off the marketing that Apple has already done to push the 'App Store' trademark.

In the end, Apple might lose this battle. They might have gone too far and mainstreamed a term that was too general. I suppose we'll see.

Basically your argument means that Microsoft should sue any company that sells windows for homes and references itself as the Windows Store.

See how easy it is to refute your argument? I just did it in one sentence.

Admit it, attempting to trademark "App store" is just as ludicrous.

[stealthify]

Basically your argument means that Microsoft should sue any company that sells windows for homes and references itself as the Windows Store.

No, because window makers (as in the physical piece of glass that you put in your house or cars) are not in the same business as, nor is it a competitor of, Microsoft. This is why Apple can't go after Apple Apartments and Amazon can't go after Amazon Industries.

If I released a software product named 'Office Word Processor', you best believe Microsoft would hunt me down. They own the trademarks for both 'Office' and 'Word', and my product would be leeching off their name and marketing to boost my own. We'd be in the same market, and I would be a competitor... and I'd be sued up the wazoo.

See how this works now?

Admit it, attempting to trademark "App store" is just as ludicrous.

Alright, alright. I will admit that it's ludicrous now, but (always a but) it wasn't in mid-2008 when Apple was actually granted the trademark.

You must admit - they scored big time, predicting that the word 'app' would be popping out of the mouths of everyone from age 5 to 95 within the next three years. Amazon and, in case you didn't know, Microsoft, see's this now. And that is why both of them are working very hard to get that trademark nullified.

[IPD]

then explain why world wildlife foundation successfully sued world wresting federation for trademark? i mean, after all, these aren't even remotely in the same market.

(and for the record, the term "app" was used well over a decade ago. so a store to buy "apps" from is hardly a trademark-able name).

[stealthify]

From what I understand, that actually had to do with the World Wide Fund for Nature (also trademarked WWF), and that the trademark dispute actually took place in Europe courts as opposed to U.S. ones. I'm not sure what they do differently over there. Plus they had some sort of odd agreement back in 1994, and I believe someone violated the terms:

Agreement - WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature and Titan Sports Inc.(Jan 19, 1994...

Theoretically they should have been able to co-exist without stepping on eachothers toes. Others claim that the World Wide Fund went back on their word and tried to do a shakedown on the wrestling group to get some extra money out of them:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/x3773144899.pdf

In the end, the World Wrestling Federation changed their name to avoid the hassle. But this should have never happened to begin with. Especially not between two U.S. based companies (which this particular case wasn't).

Back on track though, about the app thing. I never said the term 'app' wasn't around long before Apple grabbed ahold of it and made it as mainstream as can be, you and I both know that. Apple knows that. We all know that. But it was one of those border-line slang terms and I bet that is exactly why they were granted the trademark before EVERYONE started calling their applications 'apps'. If they tried to register a trademark for 'Program Store' instead, I'm pretty sure they would have been denied.

[BigTyla]

You must admit - they scored big time, predicting that the word 'app' would be popping out of the mouths of everyone from age 5 to 95 within the next three years. Amazon and, in case you didn't know, Microsoft, see's this now. And that is why both of them are working very hard to get that trademark nullified.

Surely the marketing of the term required some deal of foresight, but the fact that the word "app" is used so widely in the software industry means they should have also had the foresight to know that trademark would never fly.

[stealthify]

By 'used so widely in the software industry', you can see the comparisons for yourself:

Google Trends: program, application, app

[BigTyla]

By 'used so widely in the software industry', you can see the comparisons for yourself:

Google Trends: program, application, app

The fact that you resort to Google Trends to make a point shows me that you don't have a thorough understanding of the issue. Allow me to inject some insight.

"Application" is a term used to describe an interface used to perform a certain task. "App" has been used as shorthand for "application" throughout the software industry even before the days of FORTRAN. To put this in perspective for you, that is over half a century ago. So for over 50 years, software engineers have used the term "app" in discussion as well as official documentation of their applications. Use of the term became even more widespread with the advent of operating systems like Windows, which introduced apps like Microsoft Word, Internet Explorer, etc. These have historically been referred to as "apps" in shorthand.

Now, Apple decides to come out with an "App Store" which contains mobile applications for their customers. This has increased the popularity of the term beyond just the software world within the past couple of years, which explains the jump in searches for the term "app." You contend that this is justification for Apple's attempt at trademarking the term. That is silly. Just because Apple has made the term more popular does not mean they own exclusive rights to it. The term is just as standard now as it was before Apple even existed. Hence, your argument is invalid.

By the way, Google Trends is not a measurement tool for an industry standard. You should know better.