Apple Tries To Convince Trademark Board That App Store Really Means Apple Store

from the there's-no-app-for-that dept

Thu, Mar 10th 2011 7:31am — Mike Masnick

I haven't been following too closely the ongoing trademark fights concerning whether or not Apple can trademark the rather descriptive and generic term "app store," but I do find it interesting that the company has brought on a "linguist" to declare that "App Store" is really the "proper noun" of "Apple's online store." Microsoft, in fighting this trademark, has noted that app store is totally generic... and even pointed out that Steve Jobs himself has used the phrase when talking about app stores from Amazon, Google and others (oops!). Amusingly, though, Apple then mocks Microsoft by pointing out that the company shouldn't be pointing fingers on attempts to trademark generic terms:

"Having itself faced a decades-long generic challenge to its claimed Windows mark, Microsoft should be well aware that the focus in evaluating the mark is on the mark as a whole and requires a fact-intensive assessment of the primary significance of the term to a substantial majority of the relevant public."

Of course, it's easy to mock both Apple and Microsoft here. In the end, this whole thing is silly. Stop fighting over trademarks on silly things, and focus on actually competing in the marketplace.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: app store, trademark

45 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

smelly dog, 10 Mar 2011 @ 7:43am

There are whole teams of people whose job relies on them finding things to squabble over. It's not going away soon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fogbugzd (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 7:59am

Passing yourself off as a trademark bully: There's an app for that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
iamtheky (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:01am

there's an apple for that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:08am

Its impossible to compete without a trademark
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:09am

Re:
Yes! Plus, I think I'm gonna go buy a whole bag of green apps at the grocery story after work...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jesse (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:10am

Yes. Microsoft trademarked a generic term. However, Apple is doing more than that: they are trying to change the accepted meaning of a generic term. An equivalent scenario would be if Microsoft had defended trademarking Windows by claiming that it was really short for Windowsbymicrosoft (obvs!).

Also, and importantly, hardly anyone else in the field was using that term at the time for anything other than Microsoft's Windows. With the term App store, as Steve Jobs himself recognized, many other companies have "App[lication] Stores."

I say: let Apple have their "App[le] Store" so long as they can't block the "App[lication] Stores" of others. Apple implicitly acknowledges the dual meanings so they shouldn't be allowed to complain.

Side note: might I remind everyone that the shortcut "App" was popularized by the language norms in the world of illegal downloading. It is a term used to refer to "useful" programs (as opposed to games). Just throwing that out there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jesse (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:11am

Re:
Those teams should have playoffs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pixelation, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:14am

If someone were to start the MicroAppStore, it would be fun to watch the fallout.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DS, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:18am

Well, if it means App(le) store when they use it, and App(lication) store when everyone else does, what's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:19am

Stop fighting over trademarks on silly things, and focus on actually competing in the marketplace.

Uh... they are. And they have been at it for a while. How come you missed it?

Now let them have their pointless wars, it entertains all of us. Plus it keeps the lawyers busy so they don't harass their users.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:19am

Re:
Pshaw! The Fallout brand name is owned by Bethesda Software.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
johnny canada, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:20am

The judge rules that 'App' does mean Apple.

And the rights to the phrase belongs to the Beatles :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:23am

Re:
And the rights to the phrase belongs to the Beatles :)

I dunno about that. Johnny Appleseed might have a prior claim.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:26am

Re: Re:
That would be fun and the team who loses the final game has to follow a rule created by the winning team for the next year.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:28am

Re: Re:
"I dunno about that. Johnny Appleseed might have a prior claim."

Does any of this mean we can prosecute Apple's App-store for 3rd party enabling of original sin?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wiggs (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:28am

Re: Re:
Wasn't Sir Isaac Newton the first one to patent the apple? I mean, if I got hit in the head with an apple, I'd patent the hell out of it... as a WEAPON!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:29am

I wish I had a Cortland right now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:29am

Re:
So Apple supports piracy!

If they do try to block the use of App Store then start using "App Cashe"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fogbugzd (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:31am

Re: Re:
>>I dunno about that. Johnny Appleseed might have a prior claim.

But Johnny Appleseed never registered a trademark on the name.

It's too bad he decided to do something useful with his time instead of protecting his IP. He would never survived in the modern environment with those type of priorities.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:41am

Re: Re: Re:
Does any of this mean we can prosecute Apple's App-store for 3rd party enabling of original sin?

Probably. But we would need to get ICE/DOJ involved so they can twist it into a criminal charge.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Frosty840, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:42am

Re:
"There's an Apple's Online for that", if their claims are to be believed...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:47am

Application->Applet->App

I defy Apple to prove that "Application" doesn't start with "App".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steve, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:54am

Re:
"It's impossible to compete without a trade mark."

Go to your grocery store and look at the puffed rice cereal bag. Go to Walmart and look at the cotton swabs. It is not impossible to compete without a trademark. It's almost impossible to build a brand without one though. I think that's what you meant to say.

If Louis Vuitton didn't have a trademark on their name they could not have built the brand equity necessary to charge so damn much for a purse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:55am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Jobs would never have approved the App Tree.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mike, 10 Mar 2011 @ 8:57am

What some of you guys call "generic" terms are routinely protected as strong trademarks --- Tide (detergent); Camel (cigarettes); Apple (computers)

This is arguably different b/c the alleged mark is potentially generic or descriptive of the service the mark represents. About 5 minutes of Wikipedia quality research would show you that truly generic marks are never protectable but descriptive marks can be (think American Airlines).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sneeje (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 9:13am

Re: Re: Re:
Stop it! Weaponized apples are making me hungry!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Danny, 10 Mar 2011 @ 9:14am

Re:
Looks like the problem is that Apple is trying to say that it actually means App(le) Store no matter who uses. Meaning they think people with Android phones go to the Android Market to buy apples not applications.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 9:28am

Re:
But they aren't doing very well.

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/security-bullet-in-10000166/safari-ie-browsers-hacked-in-pwn2o wn-contest-10021959/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul Hobbs (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 10:10am

God I hate App. Every day I find another reason to despise App. My children, on the other hand, love eating Apps. In fact, they are my son's favourite fruit, along with Straws and Bans.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 10:14am

Re: Re:
Yeah... after Google closed "the winning" exploit days before it... can't really use any of those single articles for granted though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JTO (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 10:17am

Fine. "App Store" refers to "Apple Store". Then "app store" refers to "application store".

So I'd like 5 bushels of Rock Gold and a couple bushels of assorted bittersweets, please. Oh, you don't *actually* sell apples at the Apple Store? That's kind of misleading, isn't it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 10 Mar 2011 @ 10:29am

Changing reality to suit your favorite corporation.
Also, and importantly, hardly anyone else in the field was using that term at the time for anything other than Microsoft's Windows.

Are you kidding?

Did you just fall off the turnip truck?

"Windows" is a (descriptive) term of art that has been in use since before any Microsoft GUI ever came into existence. This even includes their pathetic early versions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
vivaelamor (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 10:36am

Re: Changing reality to suit your favorite corporation.
'"Windows" is a (descriptive) term of art that has been in use since before any Microsoft GUI ever came into existence.'

But, AFAIK, no one else named an operating system (or any other similar product) after it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 11:10am

Dammit, someone already registered appville.com :(
[ link to this | view in thread ]
xs (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 11:38am

Re: Re: Changing reality to suit your favorite corporation.
By the same token, no one else named a store selling applications "App store" before Apple did either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Mar 2011 @ 11:42am

Re:
Huh?

Tide is not generic for detergent. Camel is not generic for cigarettes. Apple is not generic for computers.

"App store" is completely generic for "a store that sells applications". It's the same reason I can't trademark "gas station" for a "station that pumps gas".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PandaMarketer (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 12:36pm

No he di'n't
An apple didn't fall on Newton's head. He merely saw one fall from the tree.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 10 Mar 2011 @ 12:47pm

What A Boring, Sleep-Inducing Thing To Fight Over
Luckily, there�s a nap for that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chuck Lorrie, 10 Mar 2011 @ 1:04pm

Re:
Charlie Sheen is passing himself off as a trademark bully. No one's complaining about that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Any Mouse (profile), 10 Mar 2011 @ 5:24pm

Re: Re:
That's because most people don't give a shit about Sheen, these days.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Doug, 10 Mar 2011 @ 11:55pm

Compare apps to apps, dude
Comparing App Store to Windows isn't quite accurate.

App Store is a store for apps.

Windows is a computer operating system.

Tell me with a straight face that "App Store" and "Windows" are equally (un)deserving of trademark.

It would be one thing if Microsoft were to try to assert ownership over the term "window" when applied to a particularly common user interface metaphor. That would be dumb. Microsoft doesn't do that.

On the other hand, Microsoft would probably complain if a company were to use the term "Windows" as part the name of an operating system. And I would probably sympathize with their complaint, as it probably would cause actual customer confusion.

Compare with Apple, who is asserting that they own the term "App Store" when used to refer to ... a store for applications. For this, I have no sympathy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 11 Mar 2011 @ 12:25am

Re:
Toilet paper..

not only does it not require trademarks to sell to nearly everybody on the whole planet, it also cleans up bullshit too
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 11 Mar 2011 @ 12:36am

Re: Changing reality to suit your favorite corporation.
Your showing your age there;)

These youngens dont know that the grandaddy of the word processor Wordstar 5.0 had Windows, and the best O/S of em all at the time called GEM by Digital Research (Did you use DR-DOS like I did?) was rife with them

And lets not get into how Windows 1.0 and beyond was/is a complete ripoff of so many O/S shells at the time like umm.. GEM, IBM OS2, Atari OS, or even Arthur for the Acorn Computer (RISC)

:)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 11 Mar 2011 @ 12:50am

Re: Compare apps to apps, dude
X-Windows, OpenWindows, MicroWindows are all GUI Windowsing systems for computing and are all able to trade with that name becasue of Windows not being trademarked specifiically to Microsoft other than as "Microsoft Windows (tm)"

If Apple would like to call there store "Apple App Store (tm)" no body will raise an eyebrow and good on them, though as all programmers or anyone who has been in the ICT Industry for the last 30yrs, the word App is absolutely generic, abbreviated, and has been in prior use in all the ways Apple hate for more years than Apple has been a going concern.

The real reason Apple in its normal stupidity and chest beating is doing this is simple. EGO. They hate the Android market, they hate the idea that people can create a product similar to their own (anyone else remember the Orange Computer... a real Apple clone in late 80s?), and as anyone who knows anything of the history of Apple Inc will tell you it has NEVER been about the product, it is all about the prestige and honour *tries not to scream with laughter* of owning the brand that is Apple.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dwg, 9 Jun 2011 @ 12:13pm

Particularly awesome
I had a bunch of customer-service problems with Apple recently. In response, I asked for a credit at the "App Store." Apple told me that that was impossible, but that I COULD HAVE A CREDIT AT THE "APPLE STORE."

Admission against interest? Yep.
[ link to this | view in thread ]