3 ms·
It seems at this point it's more or less impossible for Apple to launch a new product using the iNoun naming scheme without stepping on somebody else's trademar
by necubi 15y ago
It seems at this point it's more or less impossible for Apple to launch a new product using the iNoun naming scheme without stepping on somebody else's trademark. Even if Apple decided to convert their stores into delicious taquerias, they would find iBurrito already taken[1].
So it makes sense that they've stopped caring, announcing their products regardless of trademark status. The iPad and even iPhone [2] trademarks were owned by somebody else at the time of their announcements, and it doesn't seem to have caused any major trouble to Apple (aside from a likely lucrative payment for the other party).
[1] http://www.pancheros.com/iburrito http://www.pancheros.com/iburrito
[2] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2082362,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2082362,00.asp
- Steko 15y agoIt's strange how they just go in, get the deal done and never seem to be overpaying. You've gotta think that everyone who cuts a deal with Apple, later on when they watch the quarterly results roll in they're like "shit we shouldda held out for another 10 million".
- alexqgb 15y agoIf the payouts include stock grants I could see this not being the case.
- cmelbye 15y agoiOS was another big one as well. I was surprised that Cisco allowed another operating system (albeit one that isn't entirely similar) to use the IOS name.