mattx Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 God some companies are just soooooo pathetic...... BBC NEWS | Business | Apple challenges Woolworths logo
alexsanger Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Lets face it - if anyone confuses those two logo's then they deserve to pay several hundred pounds for a mp3 player with low capacity, restricted accessibility, and lousy support so they can show off their touch screen... Apple. iDon't. 2
tech_guy Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Yes, I saw this story about yet another iLawsuit...
synaesthesia Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 It's not even vaguely similar. How long before Apple sue Granny Smith. 1
t_h Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 I initially though it was a bit silly, but the head and tail of it is: Apple is reportedly concerned that the supermarket may start to make electronics products that would be in direct competition with its own offerings. When you consider that i.e. electronic goods with an apple logo on it, you can maybe see their point. At the end of the day you have to defend a trademark.
mac_shinobi Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 I initially though it was a bit silly, but the head and tail of it is: When you consider that i.e. electronic goods with an apple logo on it, you can maybe see their point. At the end of the day you have to defend a trademark. 2nd the trade mark thing and also also recall something about linksys or some company who made a phone called the iphone and there was a debate over that to some degree and also the palm pre who keep trying to use apples usb id to make the palm pre appear to be an ipod / iphone when they should be using there own software to do it as apple make software available to people such as palm and other companies so as to allow other devices to synch music etc as per below link MacUser: News: Palm reconnects Pre to iTunes
markcuk Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 old news sure this was in the news ages ago in NZ anyway what about Kraft calling the new vegemite isnack 2.0:confused:
mac_shinobi Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 old news sure this was in the news ages ago in NZ anyway what about Kraft calling the new vegemite isnack 2.0:confused: Was only in my mail on mac news a day or two ago as its the third or fourth time they done it:rolleyes:
torledo Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 old news sure this was in the news ages ago in NZ anyway what about Kraft calling the new vegemite isnack 2.0:confused: i hope the new decade ushers in a new era where companies don't prepend a word with the letter 'i' for anything vaguely technological. 'i' usurped using 'e' before everything, and now they'll be looking for a new letter besides 'i' once they realise apple and others have pretty much staked anything worth putting an 'i' infront of. i personally like the use of the letter 'l' becuase the non-capitalised l can be mistaken for a capital I. So hopefully someone will have the good sense to release the lphone. Not to be confused with the Iphone.
tech_guy Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Today I got up, had an ibreakfast, drank a cup of icoffee, drove to work in my icar, and spent a day doing iwork. I spent my ilunchbreak doing some ishopping and iflirting with an icolleague. I made numerous phone calls which were not on an iphone, and sent about 50 emails which were sent using a non ipc. I ate an apple which later I ipooed down the iloo with everything else I had iconsumed during the iday. I'm now waiting for an ilawsuit?
torledo Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Today I got up, had an ibreakfast, drank a cup of icoffee, drove to work in my icar, and spent a day doing iwork. I spent my ilunchbreak doing some ishopping and iflirting with an icolleague. I made numerous phone calls which were not on an iphone, and sent about 50 emails which were sent using a non ipc. I ate an apple which later I ipooed down the iloo with everything else I had iconsumed during the iday. I'm now waiting for an ilawsuit? that's a copyright infringement right there, i'd venture.
webman Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 If Apple base their logo off a piece of common fruit, then in my opinion they have no claim to the use of potentially similar-looking logos. If Apple's logo had more uniqueness about it and then Woolworths started manufacturing electronic goods (e.g. selling products in the same market) - only then should Apple start shouting foul play.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now