backtop


Print 75 comment(s) - last by Hare.. on Jan 12 at 4:51 PM


It may not be as sexy, but this iPhone was here first
Apple iPhone = iPWNED?

Everyone knew this move had to be coming. While Apple may have popularized the little "i" with products like iMac, iBook, iPod, iTunes and iLife, the iPhone name has already been taken. Cisco has owned the trademark for iPhone since 2000 when it was purchased from Infogear. Infogear originally filed for the trademark in 1996 (well before Apple jumped into the "i" business). Cisco just recently ushered the name into service with a new line of VoIP devices marketed by Cisco's Linksys division.

Although Apple and Cisco have been in talks for quite some time over the iPhone name, no agreement was ever reached. Nevertheless, Apple boldly decided yesterday to announce the iPhone at MacWorld. Cisco isn't too happy about the move and has filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc.

"Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name," said Mark Chandler, senior vice president and general counsel for Cisco. "There is no doubt that Apple's new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission."

Cisco isn't going down without a fight on this one and it intends to fully protect its line of iPhone products. "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," said Chandler.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: How can this happen?
By Some1ne on 1/10/2007 8:14:54 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Either they lose momentum for having to change their phone name or they open the door for other companies to start making iPods.


The first might happen, but that second bit doesn't make sense. If Cisco decides to be nice, and allow Apple to use iPhone, it doesn't mean that Apple has to play nice with the trademarks that it owns, like iPod. Conversely, if Apple were to decided to let other people use its trademarks, it doesn't mean that Apple then recieves free reign to steal other people's trademarks as a result.

But regardless, go Cisco! Anything to take Apple down a peg is a positive thing...damn smug bastards think that just because they're good at putting stylish wrappers around things they can get away with charging $1100 for an upgrade from 1 GB to 4 GB of RAM, or $400 to add in a 500 GB disk. About time someone puts them in their place.


RE: How can this happen?
By MrDiSante on 1/10/2007 9:03:30 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed - or for that matter charging $500 + 2 year contract for a phone with 4GB of storage.


RE: How can this happen?
By sdsdv10 on 1/11/2007 3:23:09 PM , Rating: 3
The Treo 700w is $400 + 2 year contact at Verizon and it only has 128 MB of memory


RE: How can this happen?
By robp5p on 1/10/2007 9:22:46 PM , Rating: 1
Kind of funny, but Cisco's list price for a 1GB memory upgrade is $4800 for a Catalyst 6500.

It might seem that Cisco is wasting their time to defend a product like the linksys iPhone, but their vision for the future of communications is much bigger than putting MP3's on your cell phone with a big screen. They have long been the largest network infrastructure (routing, switching, wireless, security, etc) providor in the world, but They have quietly become the largest providor of enterprise telephony equipment (their VoIP solutions are outselling every other competitor combined), have acquired Scientific Atlanta (which means your set top box will say Cisco soon enough), and are changing the way cable/telecom companies are deploying the backbone of their triple-play (and 'quad-play', where a device like iPhone could become important in the future) IP networks. CEO John Chambers' vision for the future of communications is definitely something to look into, and the 'iPhone' could grow to be MUCH more interesting than Apple could ever dream of.


RE: How can this happen?
By NoSoftwarePatents on 1/10/2007 11:33:29 PM , Rating: 2
HOWEVER, you may not have to necessarily pay Cisco's price for that. Several vendors, Kingston, and Viking, make Cisco-compatible memory that works fine in many switches and routers.

This applies to Flash memory as well.


RE: How can this happen?
By glynor on 1/11/2007 1:40:31 AM , Rating: 2
And you have to buy RAM from Apple?

Last I checked, the RAM for a Mac Pro is run-of-the-mill EEC DDR2 FB-DIMMs, same as you'd use in any dual-xeon workstation. And last I checked, Crucial charges $1269.00 for 4GB of it, so Apple's $1099 isn't too far off the mark.


RE: How can this happen?
By Oregonian2 on 1/11/2007 3:13:15 PM , Rating: 2
I've noticed Crucial to be one of the spendier places to buy memory in the last few years (prior to which they were only slightly-spendy). So I'm not sure that's a good comparison point.


RE: How can this happen?
By glennpratt on 1/11/2007 9:05:21 AM , Rating: 2
That applies to apple as well, so it's a moot point.


RE: How can this happen?
By ToeCutter on 1/11/2007 3:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But regardless, go Cisco! Anything to take Apple down a peg is a positive thing...damn smug bastards think that just because they're good at putting stylish wrappers around things they can get away with charging $1100 for an upgrade from 1 GB to 4 GB of RAM, or $400 to add in a 500 GB disk. About time someone puts them in their place.


You've obviously never had to pay for a memory upgrade for a Cisco router.


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

Related Articles
iPhone Officially Announced
December 18, 2006, 3:19 AM
Apple Announces New iPods
September 12, 2006, 1:25 PM













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