3 ms·

Characterizing a trademark opposition as "a routine piece of paperwork" isn't exactly doing the issue any justice, either. Apple have opposed the registration o

Characterizing a trademark opposition as "a routine piece of paperwork" isn't exactly doing the issue any justice, either. Apple have opposed the registration of the Prepear trademark, because they believe that it infringes on their own. The manner in which that was carried out at Apple, e.g. by routine, is irrelevant. If instead of calling it "breaking out the big guns to stomp all over a tiny business" or a "routine piece of paperwork" we could describe things as they are (like the article does) and be less confused over what's happening. > This story is that “they’re taking the fight to Canada”, which begs the question that there’s even a fight. Do you disagree that there is an obvious sense in which one might call this kind of dispute a fight?

kstrauser 6y ago
To me, “fight” implies that the knives and guns are out. I’d characterize this as a disagreement. As far as has been reported, the parties haven’t even directly talked to each other. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think Apple’s in the wrong here. It seems very likely that Prepear will win their trademark applications. I just don’t think what they’ve done is as dramatic as the headlines make out. If I called you a jerk, I’d be in the wrong. If someone reports that as you and I are in a life and death struggle, they would also be wrong.
- boomlinde 6y ago
  > To me, “fight” implies that the knives and guns are out. Then you have yourself to blame for being confused, because most people would understand given the context that Apple and Prepear aren't engaged in a knife fight. I have a hard time believing that you are making this argument in good faith.
  - kstrauser 6y ago
    I think you’re making too much of this. OK, then frankly, no: I don’t see this as a fight. I see this as paperwork flying back and forth, with nary a courtroom or judge or battleground to be found. This is just some routine filings that don’t IMHO raise to the level of a fight. I, too, feel like you’re trying to deliberately misunderstand what I’m trying to say.
    - boomlinde 6y ago
      > I don’t see this as a fight. I see this as paperwork flying back and forth, with nary a courtroom or judge or battleground to be found. Again, the simple view that this is "paperwork flying back and forth" is not very useful and serves only to dilute the matter of those papers. You might as well say that robbery is just particles exerting force on one another. The defendant will be given time to prepare a case and procure evidence to present to an appeal board, of administrative trademark judges. The only way it won't is if Apple withdraws their opposition, or if they decide not to offer any evidence for their case. In any other case, it's going to involve trademark lawyers, which costs money. From the article it seems that they have already spent "many thousands of dollars" in costs. Whether or not they are lying is not a matter of opinion, nor in any case a mischaracterization by the author of the article. > This is just some routine filings that don’t IMHO raise to the level of a fight. Okay. I can't really argue with what your opinion on what constitutes a fight is. To you, a fight involves guns or knives. That said, I don't think that your opinion is a very solid basis for saying that the article mischaracterizes the issue by calling it a fight. Some other person might say that it's only a fight if the participants are wearing boxing gloves, but an author can't possibly account for every literal-minded interpretation one in a thousand might make. Instead, the author thinks highly enough of the readers to assume that they will understand that a "fight" in the context of a trademark dispute doesn't usually come to literal blows or even harsh language.

kstrauser 6y ago

To me, “fight” implies that the knives and guns are out. I’d characterize this as a disagreement. As far as has been reported, the parties haven’t even directly talked to each other. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think Apple’s in the wrong here. It seems very likely that Prepear will win their trademark applications. I just don’t think what they’ve done is as dramatic as the headlines make out. If I called you a jerk, I’d be in the wrong. If someone reports that as you and I are in a life and death struggle, they would also be wrong.

boomlinde 6y ago
> To me, “fight” implies that the knives and guns are out. Then you have yourself to blame for being confused, because most people would understand given the context that Apple and Prepear aren't engaged in a knife fight. I have a hard time believing that you are making this argument in good faith.
- kstrauser 6y ago
  I think you’re making too much of this. OK, then frankly, no: I don’t see this as a fight. I see this as paperwork flying back and forth, with nary a courtroom or judge or battleground to be found. This is just some routine filings that don’t IMHO raise to the level of a fight. I, too, feel like you’re trying to deliberately misunderstand what I’m trying to say.
  - boomlinde 6y ago
    > I don’t see this as a fight. I see this as paperwork flying back and forth, with nary a courtroom or judge or battleground to be found. Again, the simple view that this is "paperwork flying back and forth" is not very useful and serves only to dilute the matter of those papers. You might as well say that robbery is just particles exerting force on one another. The defendant will be given time to prepare a case and procure evidence to present to an appeal board, of administrative trademark judges. The only way it won't is if Apple withdraws their opposition, or if they decide not to offer any evidence for their case. In any other case, it's going to involve trademark lawyers, which costs money. From the article it seems that they have already spent "many thousands of dollars" in costs. Whether or not they are lying is not a matter of opinion, nor in any case a mischaracterization by the author of the article. > This is just some routine filings that don’t IMHO raise to the level of a fight. Okay. I can't really argue with what your opinion on what constitutes a fight is. To you, a fight involves guns or knives. That said, I don't think that your opinion is a very solid basis for saying that the article mischaracterizes the issue by calling it a fight. Some other person might say that it's only a fight if the participants are wearing boxing gloves, but an author can't possibly account for every literal-minded interpretation one in a thousand might make. Instead, the author thinks highly enough of the readers to assume that they will understand that a "fight" in the context of a trademark dispute doesn't usually come to literal blows or even harsh language.