macmaniac Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 http://blogs.itworldcanada.com/sharktales/...ss-lawyers-eye/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dies Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 That's just sad. Does say a lot about the kind of company Apple really is though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hecker Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Hmm, thats sad. The logo is quite similar though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I think I will buy the oldest apple-cider/juice/farm factory in the world, and sue apple for they logo use... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmacintosh Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 ...founded by The Beatles in 1968, as a division of Apple Corps Ltd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lithium06 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 LOL @ superhai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxintosh Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Does say a lot about the kind of company Apple really is though. This is NOT Apples fault. If you knew anything about trademark infringements then you'd know that (in this case Apple) has to enforce ownership or they risk loosing their trademark. Did you know that "Elevator" "shredded wheat" "aspirin," and "cellophane" were all once unique trademarks? The companies that owned them did not protect them, and they were used so often that they became synonyms for the products themselves - rather than brand names, and then after that those companies lost their trademark protection. Apple has no choice in the matter but to follow trademark requirements, and that means they need to protect their Apple symbol or they risk losing it forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vbetts Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 That's {censored} imo. That's like saying only Apple is allowed to have a logo that looks like an apple, which I don't like at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxintosh Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 That's like saying only Apple is allowed to have a logo that looks like an apple No it doesn't say that at all. There are obviously other companies with apples in their logo. Apple just needs to protect logos that look similar to theirs, and the one in this case does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vbetts Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 You can't reallymake one apple logo look all that different from another besides angles and colors. Apples only come in certain colors and shapes anyways. It's not like Apples come in all shapes and sizes now. So then if these 2 logos look alike, then when I see Hyundai cars I'm gonna complain to them because it looks like Hondas logo with the big H. Personally to me, that makes no sense. Now, say that it was the same exact shape, same exact logo with words put on it, I could completely understand. But it's not. It's just an apple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Apple just needs to protect logos that look similar to theirs, and the one in this case does. I disagree on the similarity. The only thing similar is it that it is an apple. And the stylized leaf is somewhat, but still different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dillon31292 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 No it doesn't say that at all. There are obviously other companies with apples in their logo. Apple just needs to protect logos that look similar to theirs, and the one in this case does. Um, no. It looks absolutely nothing like Apple's logo. There is no way people could mistake these two logos as being the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomazzzi Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Apple if you can read this : This time you suck !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dies Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 That's {censored} imo. Of course it's {censored}. And any normal person of even moderate intelligence would agree that the way patents and trademarks are issued and abused is in desperate need of reform. How the freak could any reasonable person think that trademarking a freaking apple or the phrase "I'm loving it" is OK ? "shredded wheat" ?!? Even if you do hold the trademark on something, it doesn't mean you have to go after every single "infringement". But as is usually the case, arguing with a hardcore fanboy for whom the party in question can do no wrong is completely pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwithDrawn Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 That logo is hideous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Mills Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 ...founded by The Beatles in 1968, as a division of Apple Corps Ltd And licensed by Apple Inc to use the name.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dillon31292 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 And licensed by Apple Inc to use the name.... Um, Apple Inc probably hadn't even been thought of during in 1968. :B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idividebyzero Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 And licensed by Apple Inc to use the name.... after getting sued Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts