4 ms·

Apple takes Chinese food company to task over their logo

20 points by anderzole 15y ago

byoung2 15y ago
The logo looks more like the LG logo (http://www.lg.com/us/img/logo-lg.png http://www.lg.com/us/img/logo-lg.png) than the Apple logo
- matmann2001 15y ago
  This is exactly what I thought.
- HannibalLecter 15y ago
  I agree. It's a case of a company stealing the thunder of two real companies. Great idea if you're totally unethical, until it catches up with you. After this suit, I bet LG sues also.
- nomdeplume 15y ago
  yes; I knew when I saw it that it looked similar to a company that I could not remember. You reminded me.
sorbus 15y ago
> Seeing the Fangguo logo in a super market clearly doesn't conjure up images of Apple products, but imagine an electronics store featuring products plastered with the Fangguo logo - it stands to reason that consumers might get confused and mistake one company's product for another. I suppose that if you had never seen the Apple logo, and merely had it described to you very badly then you might confuse the two. Maybe, if it was a really bad description and you had poor eyesight. I didn't even get that Fangguo's logo was supposed to be a stylized apple until the article said so.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  How often do you see food company logos in electronics stores? I suppose if there's snacks by the checkout, but people mistaking that logo for Apple's and thinking that Jobs started manufacturing candy bars doesn't really pass the straight-face test.
  - Hoff 15y ago
    Target and Walmart are among the retailers that sell both groceries and Apple products in the same store.
- culturestate 15y ago
  I can _kind of_ see where they're coming from. I've been out and about and had folks look at my MacBook Pro (no case, no shell, no stickers) and ask me if it was a Mac. I can definitely see older folks seeing "a fruit" on a computer and assigning it to Apple. I guess you could even argue that they own "fruit" branding on electronics. This is no more out of line than that time they sued Woolworth's.
Create 15y ago
AAPL is obviously not in the music business, therefore can use the name Apple. And it doesn't sell Beatles anyway ...or isn't that the case? Are these the same people, who deliberately manipulate photographs which they submit as evidence to courts? hypocrites. and their followers. and their propagandists who pay attention to the hype.
- Locke1689 15y ago
  If you were paying attention this was an actual case and ended up with Apple, Inc. buying the Apple trademark and then licensing it back to Apple Corp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
  - Create 15y ago
    I was paying attention, and am paying attention. What you are referring to, in plain terms, is that Apple Inc. had more money than Apple Corp, meaning that it can afford to do whatever it wishes to do. (don't misunderstand: I have no empathy for the record industry either).
    - Locke1689 15y ago
      Are you seriously arguing that The Beatles are the underdog in this scenario? Also, "Apple Inc. had more money than Apple Corp, meaning that it can afford to do whatever it wishes to do" implies there was something improper, which is clearly not the case. It's not like Apple, Inc. bribed the courts to force Apple Corp. to hand over their trademark; Apple, Inc. reportedly paid as much as $500 million to Apple Corp. to control the trademark. Sounds like the real winner was Apple Corp.
vvpan 15y ago
So.... everything that has a logo that resembles an apple (the most popular fruit after banana?) violates Apple's rights?
coderdude 15y ago
I'm all for defending your IP but this is ridiculous. That logo looks nothing like the Apple logo. I mean this is from China where they wouldn't give two squirts of piss when it comes to ripping the rest of the world off, but this is what Apple decides to go after?
- ams6110 15y ago
  Recently, though, Fangguo had filed applications to extend its trademark to 16 different product categories, one of which includes "notebook computers" and "electronic-game software." In that light it's a bit more understandable. If they had stayed strictly in the food segment I doubt it would have been an issue. Trademarks have to be defended or they can be voided; companies tend to err on the side of caution.
  - coderdude 15y ago
    That makes a little more sense, but I still do not think that anyone would ever mistake Apple's "I look like an apple" logo for the Chinese company's "I don't look like anything but I have a leaf" logo. Their logo looks more like an old hand grenade.
    - stan_rogers 15y ago
      It's a "where do you draw the line" thing -- Apple has to demonstrate that, in their opinion, things are getting a little too close for comfort. LG should probably do the same. Neither, I don't think, would be launching an action with the expectation of winning (necessarily), but having a filed grievance on record for something at this level would certainly help in a case where the offending logo were a little closer to theirs.
Julie188 15y ago
It ticks me off that Apple uses its gadzillions in profits for frivolous lawsuits like this. Dear Apple, the shape of an apple belongs to the fruit, not to you ... if you can use it, so can others.
- T-hawk 15y ago
  To be fair, remember how trademark law works. Apple doesn't necessarily actually think Fangguo is infringing on them. The law is such that Apple must defend their trademark against anything that may appear to be an infringement, or else Apple may lose the right to defend it later against actual infringement.
dolinsky 15y ago
For those who choose not to read the article and merely comment that Apple is haphazardly suing another company, the article describes one of the basic principles of trademark law and why Apple must sue: Now here's where things get a little tricky. Fangguo Foods produces items like snack foods, flour and noodles, which obviously have nothing at all to do with any Apple products. As a result, Apple's trademark assertions seem misplaced and without merit. Recently, though, Fangguo had filed applications to extend its trademark to 16 different product categories, one of which includes "notebook computers" and "electronic-game software." And therein lies the rub. Fangguo received the status of "Famous Nanchong City Trademark" in 2007 and "Famous Sichuan Province Trademark" the following year. Zhao explained that he registered Fangguo's logo under so many seemingly unrelated product categories not because he had specific plans to expand to other types of manufacturing, but just in case he did meet somebody who wanted to produce, say, Fangguo computers, he would be able to expand the brand name. In the world of trademark law, a company that doesn't actively seek to protect its trademarks is more likely to lose the ability to enforce them. Consequently, it makes a whole lot of sense to go after Fangguo for their trademark given that they are looking for trademark protection in an area where Apple already operates.
51Cards 15y ago
That logo looks like the love child between Apple and LG. In fact it reminds me more of LG than Apple.

20 points by anderzole 15y ago

The logo looks more like the LG logo (http://www.lg.com/us/img/logo-lg.png http://www.lg.com/us/img/logo-lg.png) than the Apple logo

matmann2001 15y ago
This is exactly what I thought.
HannibalLecter 15y ago
I agree. It's a case of a company stealing the thunder of two real companies. Great idea if you're totally unethical, until it catches up with you. After this suit, I bet LG sues also.
nomdeplume 15y ago
yes; I knew when I saw it that it looked similar to a company that I could not remember. You reminded me.

sorbus 15y ago

> Seeing the Fangguo logo in a super market clearly doesn't conjure up images of Apple products, but imagine an electronics store featuring products plastered with the Fangguo logo - it stands to reason that consumers might get confused and mistake one company's product for another. I suppose that if you had never seen the Apple logo, and merely had it described to you very badly then you might confuse the two. Maybe, if it was a really bad description and you had poor eyesight. I didn't even get that Fangguo's logo was supposed to be a stylized apple until the article said so.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
How often do you see food company logos in electronics stores? I suppose if there's snacks by the checkout, but people mistaking that logo for Apple's and thinking that Jobs started manufacturing candy bars doesn't really pass the straight-face test.
- Hoff 15y ago
  Target and Walmart are among the retailers that sell both groceries and Apple products in the same store.
culturestate 15y ago
I can _kind of_ see where they're coming from. I've been out and about and had folks look at my MacBook Pro (no case, no shell, no stickers) and ask me if it was a Mac. I can definitely see older folks seeing "a fruit" on a computer and assigning it to Apple. I guess you could even argue that they own "fruit" branding on electronics. This is no more out of line than that time they sued Woolworth's.

Create 15y ago

AAPL is obviously not in the music business, therefore can use the name Apple. And it doesn't sell Beatles anyway ...or isn't that the case? Are these the same people, who deliberately manipulate photographs which they submit as evidence to courts? hypocrites. and their followers. and their propagandists who pay attention to the hype.

Locke1689 15y ago
If you were paying attention this was an actual case and ended up with Apple, Inc. buying the Apple trademark and then licensing it back to Apple Corp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
- Create 15y ago
  I was paying attention, and am paying attention. What you are referring to, in plain terms, is that Apple Inc. had more money than Apple Corp, meaning that it can afford to do whatever it wishes to do. (don't misunderstand: I have no empathy for the record industry either).
  - Locke1689 15y ago
    Are you seriously arguing that The Beatles are the underdog in this scenario? Also, "Apple Inc. had more money than Apple Corp, meaning that it can afford to do whatever it wishes to do" implies there was something improper, which is clearly not the case. It's not like Apple, Inc. bribed the courts to force Apple Corp. to hand over their trademark; Apple, Inc. reportedly paid as much as $500 million to Apple Corp. to control the trademark. Sounds like the real winner was Apple Corp.

vvpan 15y ago

So.... everything that has a logo that resembles an apple (the most popular fruit after banana?) violates Apple's rights?

coderdude 15y ago

I'm all for defending your IP but this is ridiculous. That logo looks nothing like the Apple logo. I mean this is from China where they wouldn't give two squirts of piss when it comes to ripping the rest of the world off, but this is what Apple decides to go after?

ams6110 15y ago
Recently, though, Fangguo had filed applications to extend its trademark to 16 different product categories, one of which includes "notebook computers" and "electronic-game software." In that light it's a bit more understandable. If they had stayed strictly in the food segment I doubt it would have been an issue. Trademarks have to be defended or they can be voided; companies tend to err on the side of caution.
- coderdude 15y ago
  That makes a little more sense, but I still do not think that anyone would ever mistake Apple's "I look like an apple" logo for the Chinese company's "I don't look like anything but I have a leaf" logo. Their logo looks more like an old hand grenade.
  - stan_rogers 15y ago
    It's a "where do you draw the line" thing -- Apple has to demonstrate that, in their opinion, things are getting a little too close for comfort. LG should probably do the same. Neither, I don't think, would be launching an action with the expectation of winning (necessarily), but having a filed grievance on record for something at this level would certainly help in a case where the offending logo were a little closer to theirs.

Julie188 15y ago

It ticks me off that Apple uses its gadzillions in profits for frivolous lawsuits like this. Dear Apple, the shape of an apple belongs to the fruit, not to you ... if you can use it, so can others.

T-hawk 15y ago
To be fair, remember how trademark law works. Apple doesn't necessarily actually think Fangguo is infringing on them. The law is such that Apple must defend their trademark against anything that may appear to be an infringement, or else Apple may lose the right to defend it later against actual infringement.

dolinsky 15y ago

For those who choose not to read the article and merely comment that Apple is haphazardly suing another company, the article describes one of the basic principles of trademark law and why Apple must sue: Now here's where things get a little tricky. Fangguo Foods produces items like snack foods, flour and noodles, which obviously have nothing at all to do with any Apple products. As a result, Apple's trademark assertions seem misplaced and without merit. Recently, though, Fangguo had filed applications to extend its trademark to 16 different product categories, one of which includes "notebook computers" and "electronic-game software." And therein lies the rub. Fangguo received the status of "Famous Nanchong City Trademark" in 2007 and "Famous Sichuan Province Trademark" the following year. Zhao explained that he registered Fangguo's logo under so many seemingly unrelated product categories not because he had specific plans to expand to other types of manufacturing, but just in case he did meet somebody who wanted to produce, say, Fangguo computers, he would be able to expand the brand name. In the world of trademark law, a company that doesn't actively seek to protect its trademarks is more likely to lose the ability to enforce them. Consequently, it makes a whole lot of sense to go after Fangguo for their trademark given that they are looking for trademark protection in an area where Apple already operates.

51Cards 15y ago

That logo looks like the love child between Apple and LG. In fact it reminds me more of LG than Apple.