According to MarketWatch, Cisco has sued Apple over the use of “iPhone”. Doh. I guess assuming that they had worked out a deal beforehand proved the old phrase that to assume is to make an ass out of “u” and “me”. My dad still chuckles when says that.
Cisco Systems Inc. late Wednesday said it has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Apple Inc. seeking to prevent Apple from using the iPhone trademark. Cisco said it obtained the iPhone trademark in 2000 after acquiring Infogear. Cisco said Infogear’s original filing for the trademark was on March 20, 1996. “There is no doubt that Apple’s new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission,” said Mark Chandler, Cisco’s senior vice president and general counsel, in a statement.
Might I offer a translation for Chandler’s comments? “The iPhone is hot, hot, hot. We want a piece of that action.” Clearly this won’t stop Apple from completely dominating the smartphone market, but it is another road bump.
I like the part where Chandler says, "Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand."
Riiiight. Because obviously the first company anyone would think of when you say "iPhone" is Cisco, it's so obviously "their brand." Where did I leave my Cisco i...AnythingElse. Oh, right, I didn't leave it anywhere, because it doesn't freaking exist.
In all seriousness, Steve has clearly taken a risk in outright flouting trademark law, but sometimes it's fun to watch somebody who is that untouchable act like, "What are you going to do about it?"
Cisco Systems is squating on the apple phone name? Why don't apple just call it the iCell. I'll give them the rights to use my "iCell" trademark for 1 million. My "iBerry" trademark would go for half that.
Their last product started with an i and changed to a , maybe this one will too...
itv...tv
iPhone...Phone
I know that appke wants to keep its (i) product line.
But with cisco filing for law suit,I think apple should be more imaginative with its wording. Just stick a (h) infront of the (i) hi.phone still sounds the same.But at least when phone calls are made on this new apple product,advertising of the phone will be self expressive.Hi its me
I know that appke wants to keep its (i) product line.
But with cisco filing for law suit,I think apple should be more imaginative with its wording. Just stick a (h) infront of the (i) hi.phone still sounds the same.But at least when phone calls are made on this new apple product,advertising of the phone will be self expressive.Hi its me
I know that appke wants to keep its (i) product line.
But with cisco filing for law suit,I think apple should be more imaginative with its wording. Just stick a (h) infront of the (i) hi.phone still sounds the same.But at least when phone calls are made on this new apple product,advertising of the phone will be self expressive.Hi its me
Personally I think Cisco's Linksys arm knew that Apple were releasing a phone soon and therefore had to get a phone out before Apple in order to prove they were going to use the trademark and not just squat it, if you see what I mean (like me buying iphone.co.uk because I know Apple or Cisco might want it). All stinks of Cisco wanting a bite out of the big juicy Apple.
I don't know, maybe I'm talking out the back of my iHead.
Quote: 'Might I offer a translation for Chandler's comments? “The iPhone is hot, hot, hot. We want a piece of that action.”'
You know, the Apple iPhone looks like a cool, well thought out device. Apple make a lot of really great products. But they're not infallible and it's been widely reported, since even before Cisco released their iPhone that Cisco owned the trademark. Now Apple has infringed their trademark, of course they're going to litigate.
This isn't like when Luxpro announced they were suing Apple for suing them for making an iPod Shuffle clone. This is actually something that Apple did wrong.
Might I offer a translation for your comments? "Someone is suing Apple again. I love Apple blindly so I'll make it sound like Cisco don't really have a case and are just trying to get publicity."
Think I'll skip your stories in future. I prefer my news with a little less petty bias.
Read the comments by Jim Cramer on The Street (financial news). He has a good insight into the Cisco vs Apple thing.