backtop


Print 36 comment(s) - last by GotThumbs.. on Jul 11 at 3:31 PM


A judge ruled that Apple's case that Amazon infringed its "App Store" trademark was too weak to grant a preliminary injunction.
Early setback could prove troubling later in the case

Two weeks ago we reported that Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) lawsuit against Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) in Oakland, California federal court was going nowhere fast.  Upset about Amazon's use of the term "Appstore" ("Appstore for Android"), Apple sued claiming Amazon had infringed on its trademark "App Store". 

It sought an injunction forcing Amazon to temporarily cease using the name while the case was decided.  However, the presiding judge said at the time that Apple's evidence of customer confusion was weak and that they were considering denying the motion.

Now Judge Phyllis Hamilton has made good on that threat, smacking down Apple's request for a preliminary injunction.

Apple's case seems to be going nowhere.  Judge Hamilton reaffirmed on Wednesday that Apple had failed to present compelling evidence that customers would confuse Amazon's store for Apple's, or vice versa.  The judge also expressed skepticism over the last several weeks about Apple's arguments that the trademark was non-generic.

A trial is set to begin October 2012.

While the preliminary injunction does not officially affect the trial outcome, it does set the mood for the trial.  Preliminary injunctions (PI) are typically granted if the evidence is strong or there's a compelling case that irreparable damage will occur if the injunction isn't granted.  A denial of a PI request can have the opposite effect -- it can indicate pre-trial that the case is weak and that the alleged harm isn't great.

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) is currently in the midst of a lawsuit it filed against Apple on the grounds that the term "App Store" was overly generic.  

The outcome of these trials could affect many players in the industry.  Apple has fired off many cease and desist letters, including ones to the owner of pcappstore.com, and open source startup Amahi.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Misleading
By Motoman on 7/7/2011 10:05:12 AM , Rating: 4
LOL

Well, "macdevdude," when you ask a judge for a ruling, and the judge refuses to give you that ruling...do you call that "winning?"

Apple has no case at all - it's almost as stupid as the Taco Bell case that a few retards are still frothing about in another current thread.

Although, the "winning" part is pretty apt - both you and Apple appear to be behaving just like good ol' Charlie Sheen right about now. Completely batsh1t crazy.


RE: Misleading
By Sazabi19 on 7/7/2011 10:12:55 AM , Rating: 2
If it were only labeled "Appstore" I could possibly see some confusion because it would be vague. The title for the Amazon store is Appstore for Android, there is nothing misleading about that. I’ll give you that the average Mac user isn’t the most sophisticated or tech savvy person, but I would honestly hope that in no way would that confuse them. Though there are many stereotypes that say this is the case for them, I really hope not. If it were a general “Appstore” title then I think all parties involved should have to change it to make it a more specific title to let the user know what device/OS the appstore is for (ie: Appstore for Android, Appstore for iJunk, Appstore for MS, etc…). but most places have this as “app” is a generally accepted term for an application, which is not specific to Apple or anyone.


RE: Misleading
By Motoman on 7/7/2011 10:24:50 AM , Rating: 2
The term "appstore" is infinitely too generic to warrant any kind of trade protection at all. Such protection should never have been granted, and ultimately it should be revoked.


RE: Misleading
By kleinma on 7/7/2011 10:25:50 AM , Rating: 2
Don't even bother Sazabi

MacDevDude simply comes here to defend Apple in between praying to his little budda belly steve jobs statue.

His comments are 100% pro apple regardless of what the article is about. The article could be about how Apple announced that anything you ever create using Apple hardware/software is the sole property of Apple, and he would still be here defending it.


RE: Misleading
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:32:10 AM , Rating: 2
Apple could they were going bankrupt and he would still praise them for being so good and saying that nothing is wrong.

It will be interesting how much of this worshiping will end when the O'Holy Jobs kicks the bucket.


RE: Misleading
By Sazabi19 on 7/7/2011 10:34:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'm aware, he, Tony, and Pirks all have orgies together and look at apples in the store and circle-jerk constantly... although I have to admit I have seen Pirks say a few intelligent things and they were a huge surprise. The other 2 I think are just shoved too far up Steve to see the light anymore.


RE: Misleading
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:38:14 AM , Rating: 2
Pirks will at least comment on other things not related to Apple.

Tony and this kid, I have only seen them comment on Apple related things.


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot














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