2 ms·
It's the logo for The Beatles' Apple Corps (whose trademarks now belong to Apple Inc as part of the settlement of the whole Apple v Apple thing about 15 years a
by fredoralive 3y ago
It's the logo for The Beatles' Apple Corps (whose trademarks now belong to Apple Inc as part of the settlement of the whole Apple v Apple thing about 15 years ago), so the fields it makes claims on[1] are mostly related to things like records and DVDs, so it seems odd if Apple Inc really are trying to use it to sue this association (are they actually suing?).
[1] https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?ID=ROM.1028240&DES=1 https://www3.wipo.int/madrid/monitor/en/showData.jsp?ID=ROM....
- hnbad 3y agoI seem to have misread this part of the article: > Wired notes that Apple first tried to secure the fruit trademark in Switzerland in 2017, when it filed an application for a black-and-white depiction of a Granny Smith apple. Indeed, it applied for an image of a whole apple rather than its trademark apple with a bite. This seems to me like a (intentional?) misunderstanding of trademark law as having a trademark for the grayscale picture of an apple would merely entail that grayscale picture of an apple, not all other apples, nor even necessarily another grayscale picture of a different apple from a different perspective. What I read into it is that Apple filed for a generic apple trademark rather than either of the pre-existing logos it already owned the trademarks for in other markets. Given the source's likely bias, I'm inclined to believe the article is written in bad faith and there is no realistic threat to the actual fruit company.