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

It would be nice
By Sazabi19 on 7/7/2011 10:07:17 AM , Rating: 5
If the Patent Office or the guys that do trademarks were to bill people for wasting govt. time (if that's any more possible than them just running) for putting in generics. I would love to see some form of kick-back for each one. I hope Apple loses every one of their cases and get counter-sued, maybe then they will learn a lesson, but even then I doubt it.




RE: It would be nice
By XZerg on 7/7/2011 10:25:11 AM , Rating: 2
Even then many companies will still do it for the "Just-In-Case"... You gotta realize that they can't charge "too much" so not to demotivate a smoe joe from applying.


RE: It would be nice
By Sazabi19 on 7/7/2011 10:37:35 AM , Rating: 2
No I'm not saying a fee to put one in (although I think there is) I'm just saying if it's too generic and obvious. At this point it is costing tax payers a lot of money and time because now we have to have a court case over it. If it were overlooked and reaches this level the company or person should have to pay for everything during the period of the whole case if they were to lose the battle. That includes the judge's pay for the time the case was going and everyone else that tax payer money was spent on for something this rediculous. It's fine if it is a valid arguement or name/phrase.


RE: It would be nice
By macdevdude on 7/7/11, Rating: -1
RE: It would be nice
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:54:42 AM , Rating: 3
Microsoft doesn't go suing everyone for using the word Windows. They would only if Windows was being used in terms of OS

Google's AdWords, where in God's name have you ever seen that other then Google

App has been around long before mobile phone applications. A store that sells software hence would be an App Store. Android and WP7 both call their Marketplace but I still hear everyone call it an app store. App is too generic. It is not specific to Apple in any way.


RE: It would be nice
By inperfectdarkness on 7/7/2011 11:21:55 AM , Rating: 3
no, this would be like microsoft suing pella over use of the term "windows".


RE: It would be nice
By MmyCat on 7/8/2011 9:12:29 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, it would be more like Pella suing Anderson because they call shades a "Window Treatment". Their strongest claim would be that the color of the shade is "inferior" to their color and it dilutes the public perception of what a "Window Treatment" is.


RE: It would be nice
By MrPerez on 7/7/2011 2:54:04 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Go back to stroking your Steve Ballmer doll.


The same way you have been stroking your Steve Jobs blow up doll? lol

Anything Apple and your there posting to defend it, and not only that all your posts get -1 your, a Apple troll for sure.

Sad part is most of the time you get one Apple fanboi defending another fanboi but in your case they realized your a moron and they don't even bother, you are alone in this war you think we have against Apple and your getting butt raped.


"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














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