backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by Larso.. on Feb 22 at 9:02 AM

Apple's iPhone may soon be called something else

Cisco Systems Inc. this week announced that its negotiations with Apple Inc. over the "iPhone" trademark will be extended to February 21st. The companies have actually discussed the iPhone name for the past several years but came to no conclusions. In January, Cisco filed a lawsuit against Apple after Apple announced its mobile phone using the "iPhone" name. Cisco has agreed to give Apple an extension until Wednesday, February 21, 2007. According to Cisco:
Apple has asked Cisco for another extension on the deadline for Apple to respond to our lawsuit. Cisco has agreed to give Apple an extension until Wednesday, Feb. 21. Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution.
Legally, Cisco is the rightful owner of the "iPhone" trademark, which it has owned since 2000. Prior to Cisco, the trademark was owned by a company called Infogear, which Cisco later purchased. Interestingly, Infogear had sold products using the "iPhone" trademark for several years before being acquired by Cisco.

Late last year, Cisco's consumer division Linksys announced a line of VoIP phones based on the "iPhone" trademark. The phones were Wi-Fi phones with a built-in Skype interface. Apple later argued that its own iPhone was a true mobile phone and the first one in the world to use the "iPhone" trademark. When Cisco filed for the lawsuit, Apple called Cisco's actions "silly."


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Isn't it silly for apple too?
By nangryo on 2/16/07, Rating: 0
RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By politicalslug on 2/16/2007 8:37:18 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
When they charge a company that sells MP3 player that just look like their player (about 50% of resemble)and got loose in the end...

I hope they learn to match about what they do ad what they said..

It's embarrassing u know.


What the hell did you just write?

Some posters here have bad English skills, but yours are downright horrible. I couldn't, after five minutes, figure out what the hell you were trying to convey. Please try again (utilizing a dictionary if need be).


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By Messudieh on 2/16/2007 8:45:06 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed; that was a terrible bit of literary work there.

Is it really that hard to write full sentences... or proper thoughts even?


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By jtesoro on 2/16/2007 10:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
It would be good to realize that a lot of people on this site are not native English speakers. While I also don't understand what he is saying, I'm willing to give him a lot of slack and suggest that others do so as well.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By joust on 2/17/2007 12:38:33 AM , Rating: 2
I cut slack too. For instance, I'll let syntactical errors such as punctuation, plurality, tense, and spelling go. I err on the side of not being a dick like some of those grammar Nazis.

On the other hand, his post was simply atrocious, not only in terms of syntax, but also in terms of semantics. When his English is so bad that one cannot reasonably infer the meaning, he should definitely get thrashed for it.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By nangryo on 2/16/2007 9:26:11 PM , Rating: 2
my bad sorry,... I'll try better next time


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By joust on 2/17/2007 12:40:31 AM , Rating: 3
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By mindless1 on 2/18/2007 3:28:33 AM , Rating: 2
Yes the grammer was horrendous, but I understood fine what was meant. Maybe if you didn't get a mental block and managed to focus, you'd get it too.

It's called focus, not getting distracted by the little things.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By cityhill on 2/17/2007 8:07:03 AM , Rating: 2
Boy, before I thought you were just drunk.
Now I know you're illiterate.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By Larso on 2/22/2007 9:02:41 AM , Rating: 2
You guys are butchering that poor fellow. He apologized the best he could and you smack him again.

Be nice to each other please. I'm no native english speaker myself, and I know how hard it is to pick words and metaphors in another language without being misunderstood.


By crystal clear on 2/17/2007 11:32:13 PM , Rating: 2
"It's embarrassing u know"


By crystal clear on 2/17/2007 11:47:11 PM , Rating: 2
USE THIS -MAY IT CAN HELP YOU OUT ?????????

http://www.google.com/language_tools

Translate
Translate text:
my bad sorry,... I'll try better next time

Arabic to English BETAChinese to English BETAChinese (Simplified to Traditional) BETAChinese (Traditional to Simplified) BETAEnglish to Arabic BETAEnglish to Chinese (Simplified) BETAEnglish to Chinese (Traditional) BETAEnglish to FrenchEnglish to GermanEnglish to ItalianEnglish to Japanese BETAEnglish to Korean BETAEnglish to PortugueseEnglish to Russian BETAEnglish to SpanishFrench to EnglishFrench to GermanGerman to EnglishGerman to FrenchItalian to EnglishJapanese to English BETAKorean to English BETAPortuguese to EnglishRussian to English BETASpanish to English

Good luck

Let the LASHINGS COMMENCE.............


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By Samus on 2/17/2007 12:36:10 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
When they charge a company that sells MP3 player that just look like their player (about 50% of resemble)and got loose in the end... <BR>
I hope they learn to match about what they do ad what they said..
<BR>
It's embarrassing u know.


The only thing embarrassing is that post on DailyTech.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By VLXXX on 2/17/2007 7:49:11 AM , Rating: 2
If by this you mean;

Apple is quick to sue others for what Apple is now doing to Cisco. Isn't it ironic?

And shouldn't they learn to reap what they sow? Yes.


RE: Isn't it silly for apple too?
By plowak on 2/17/2007 2:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, oh oh! That simicolon should be a full colon!
Wonderful transliteration but will it satisfy those who champion the cause of pedantry?


hypocrisy
By soydios on 2/17/2007 12:41:43 AM , Rating: 5
I find it mildly comical that after Apple has sued many companies for operating on the gray edges of trademark infringement, they are calling Cisco's lawsuit "silly", when they are at fault for blatantly ignoring Cisco's trademark.
I think that Apple designs great products, but I also think that they should be held to the same standards that they impose on others.




RE: hypocrisy
By INeedCache on 2/17/2007 1:38:12 AM , Rating: 2
I agree wholeheartedly. It's too bad I've seen way too many Apple-weenies here who believe they should simply be given all rights to whatever they want. With respect to this Cisco ordeal, I've seen garbage like "If it's called an iPhone, people will just assume it's from Apple, they'll get ripped off." Totally pathetic. I have nothing against Apple, aside from those horrendous TV commercials, but they do need to be held to the same standards as everyone else.


RE: hypocrisy
By Hare on 2/17/2007 3:15:24 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
It's too bad I've seen way too many Apple-weenies here who believe they should simply be given all rights to whatever they want.

I've read most of the comments in each article about the iPhone and I haven't noticed anyone saying that Apple should get the trademark (no matter if the person likes or hates Apple).

What I've seen is people like me and masher2 try to say that things are not black and white and the actual legal issues are complex. Unfortunately Dailytech has many readers who simply label people "Apple zealots or fanboys" if the message does not Apple bashing and simply tries to show the other side of the coin. Same thing with Sony etc.

For the record. I believe Cisco is the rightful owner of the trademark and Apple should use something else. My opinion however doesn't matter if the courts decide that Cisco has kept the name in the closet for too long, if Apple's iPhone is considered a different kind of product, if the whole i + phone is considered a weak trademark, or if Apple can use other companies with "iPhone" to gain permission to use the name. I find it hard to believe that Apple is dumb enough to go fight against the windmills. Their case has some merit.

Let's just keep the flames low and try to get along...


RE: hypocrisy
By lufoxe on 2/19/2007 9:07:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Unfortunately Dailytech has many readers who simply label people "Apple zealots or fanboys" if the message does not Apple bashing and simply tries to show the other side of the coin. Same thing with Sony etc.

Totally agree with you hare, but you do have to admit, they deserve it sometimes, and it's fun. LOL

Now, as they say, down to business. I honestly do not think apple should get the trademark. If Cisco sat on it, and didn't release an iphone I could understand. BUT they did release it, albeit a little late, but since they own that trademark, they can release it for as long as they have it. I can't release a gaming system called the Famicon, I'll get sued by Nintendo. Or I'm sure if I released an alternative interface to windows and called it Bob, Microsoft would go after me (although that is kinda weak since it is a name, but Microsoft would have a case) or let's say a year ago I release an OS called vista (before Microsoft released the new name of the OS) if Microsoft had a trademark for it (which I assume they would before they release the name, one thing you can't argue is Microsoft legal department) I would be up a certain creak without a paddle.

Anyways, while I am not an apple basher (I own a G4 tower) and I love their computer hardware and design, I believe they have crossed the line.


RE: hypocrisy
By Hare on 2/19/2007 10:55:25 AM , Rating: 2
Oops, that was supposed to be "contain Apple bashing".

Anyway. As I said. This is not a matter of opinion. Let the courts decide what will happen. I personally think that Cisco would win if this goes that far but let's see. Maybe Apple just calls it "Apple iPhone" etc and dodges the whole issue.

Btw. MS can't use "Vista". They have to use "Windows Vista".

Ps. Funny that someone modded me down. Figures...


RE: hypocrisy
By masher2 (blog) on 2/17/2007 1:19:00 PM , Rating: 1
> "I also think that [Apple] should be held to the same standards that they impose on others..."

Rather better to hold Apple and everyone else to the standard set down by the law. Judge each case on its own merits.


Iphone is a stupid name anyway
By cityhill on 2/17/2007 8:05:26 AM , Rating: 2
I mean, what was jobs thinking? The last thing that's unique about this device is the fact that it makes calls too...why not icom or ibeam or something? I don't call my treo a phone.

remember, ipod had no meaning either until apple put a zillion dollars worth of marketing behind it.




RE: Iphone is a stupid name anyway
By cooldadd on 2/17/2007 11:33:38 AM , Rating: 2
I suggest iToc (to be pronounced as I-talk).

...Remember, you heard it hear first!


Nuf said.


By SithJuice on 2/17/2007 12:55:30 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe Apple should return to using a type of apple as the name for their new phone, the way they did with the original Macintosh - like "Granny Smith" or "Golden Delicious". On second thought, they just need to pay Cisco and stick with iphone.


Gates Can Take Out Apple
By vikingz2000 on 2/17/2007 7:46:49 AM , Rating: 2
I have been an Apple adherent since the 80’s, and probably always will be. Still, I can’t help but wonder AND be thankful for Mr. Gate’s tolerance towards Apple in light of the Windows bashing commercials. Don’t you think Windows could do a lot of harm to Apple if they ceased to create and support Office for Mac? If Word and Excel were not available for the Mac, then that may be a reason (for me, at least) to consider switching to Windows! I couldn’t imagine the Mac surviving on iWork alone (Pages, Keynote) if there wasn’t a way to create Office formats (or if they weren’t licensed to do so).




RE: Gates Can Take Out Apple
By Madzombie on 2/18/2007 8:10:58 AM , Rating: 2
I think there's some sort of anti-monopoly agreement that forces Microsoft to make MS Office for macs. I agree totally about the Mac adverts though. I intensely dislike it when adverts emphasise the problems of the competition, rather than trying to sell themself based on the advantages of their own product. There's a major difference between saying "OSX: the fastest, most powerful operating system in the world" and "Hey, silly PC owners, your system is for corporate nerds and crashes all the time, buy ours instead".


eat that stevie
By Pirks on 2/16/2007 7:37:13 PM , Rating: 1
time for vista bashing clowns from cupertino to learn some hard lessons

hey, apple haters - could you please upmod me in response for downmodding by mac zealots?

let this post's rating be an indicator of mac zealotry level of DT readers :o)




RE: eat that stevie
By Visk on 2/16/2007 7:39:17 PM , Rating: 2
This, my friends, is what's called "flamebait"


Bah to them!
By Mazzer on 2/16/2007 8:31:27 PM , Rating: 2
I hate to be the Apple basher, but I do hope they don't get the name. I think it would really damper their whole "image." Its the fact that they have put up lawsuits over other companies who use "i/I" or "pod" in their name. O and to throw in and be the apple basher...Where is the commercial from Apple that touts their great gaming capabilities? Ya it doesn't exist.




Big Deal
By kelmon on 2/17/2007 8:12:06 AM , Rating: 2
At the end of the day I am expecting Apple to end up paying Cisco for the name iPhone since Apple has more to gain from it than Cisco/Linksys does, so if Cisco plays hardball then they're going to get very little. This said I don't see why Apple simply doesn't go the same route as the iTV and call the phone the Apple Phone, or something similar, in order to get the company's name more recognition with Joe Consumer.




lol
By Future145 on 2/17/2007 10:05:30 PM , Rating: 2
i find it funny how apple thinks they can just add "I" to any word and claim it their own.




Apple & Cisco + Judges & Jobs
By crystal clear on 2/18/2007 12:26:33 AM , Rating: 2
"Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution."

Unquote-
You better do it fast because-

Quote-

House: Judges patently in need of patent education

The House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill yesterday that will establish a program for educating judges on patent laws and allow judges to defer patent cases to more well-versed colleagues. The official title of the bill is "to establish a pilot program in certain United States district courts to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges," and it was introduced last spring by representatives Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Adam Schiff (D-CA). The bill was approved by voice vote in September, and after yesterday's motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill based on voice vote, it now awaits Senate approval.

Under the proposed pilot program, certain US district court judges will be able to request being assigned patent or plant variety protection issues. Patent cases will still be randomly assigned to district court judges regardless of whether or not they opt in. However, in districts that are participating in the pilot, judges can then choose to defer the case to another judge who has opted in on patent cases. When a case is deferred, it will be randomly reassigned to one of the judges who opted-in, says the bill's text. The purpose of the random assigning and reassigning process is to cut down on "forum shopping," according to Schiff.

The desired outcome of such a policy is for patent cases to be heard more quickly and by more experienced judges than they have been in the past. "This legislation will raise the level of expertise in patent litigation, improve the reliability of patents and allow businesses to spend more time inventing and less time litigating," Representative Schiff said in September, adding that he hoped the bill would ultimately reduce costs to consumer.............

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070213-8834...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.0...


Jobs has something new to take on after DRM-

(maybe he believes in that phrase"When did you last - did something new")

Quote-

"I believe that what is wrong with our schools in this nation is that they have become unionized in the worst possible way," Jobs said. This unionization and lifetime employment of K-12 teachers is off-the-charts crazy."

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/2/1...







iphone
By roflskates on 2/18/2007 9:27:29 AM , Rating: 2
Why not just call it the iCell or something? At least try to avoid a friggin lawsuit. lol




Cisco IPod
By Tyhr on 2/19/2007 11:10:00 AM , Rating: 2
Cisco should release a new device called the IPod, and claim any lawsuit from Apple to be "silly", especially when it stands for "Internet Protocoled Operating Device".

M$ is forced by law to make MS Office for Mac? That might be true, but doesn't sound right. Why wouldn't they be forced to write it for every os out there, like linux, etc.

If true - why not force Apple to write Final Cut Pro for Windows then, and stop their monopoly.




Why not call it Apple iPhone??
By msalti on 2/19/2007 11:39:36 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know how these trademarks work but wouldn't "Apple iPhone" be different then just calling it the "iPhone" ?




"Death Is Very Likely The Single Best Invention Of Life" -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki