WTF is up with Apple?

Customgamer1

Ok I was on line looking over some news updates when I came across this:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33730

The title says:

"Apple claims rights over pods"

It is saying they are going after companies that have a product that has "pod" in the name.

So if they can copy right "pod" then I think I am going to try and copy right the following:

1. And
2. If
3. The
4. can
5. First

So when other companies use these words they can pay me $2000 each time!

Why can companies now get away with copy righting common words?? How messed up does the US government have to be to allow even a case on this? It's just a word "pod" if it was something like a brand name Apple I can see but once you start going after general words it gets a bit out of hand don't you think?????

P.S. I do understand Apple is a general name but it's a company not a product. There are a lot of products and not that many companies.

Dark Lord

theres a new storage facility place by me that rents out portable storage units. the play is called My Pod.

Customgamer1

That place better watch out lol. They might be getting a letter becasue people might get confused thinking it's a giant Ipod or something...

Counterfe1t

if you think thats ridiculous, an actual company copyright righted the happy birthday song, and paris hilton copyright the word hot. as to who works inside the goverment to allow such lunacy.

Customgamer1

So maybe if we tried Driverheaven could copyright the works I listed lol. Then we would be one rich support site

H3X4D3C1M4L

You guys sound surprised.... this is just typical Steve Jobs to me

The_Neon_Cowboy

short and sweete version? its all retarded

H3X4D3C1M4L

You know the way to defeat this? Talk like a techie and it won't ever get copyrighted because only geeks and nerds know how and no one wants to be like that ever so they won't adopt and copyright it.

Can't say its hot without it costing you? Say "It has an abundance of thermal energy being released".

Can't say iPod? Say "Flash based digital audio decoding personal entertainment device."

Pretty soon hard drive will get copyrighted and we'll have to say "Rotating magnetic disk magnetic storage technology"

bobbytomorow

Only collar poppin' yuppie scum use apple

Customgamer1

Maybe I should copyright it lol and see how far I can get!

H3X4D3C1M4L

How far you get before someone punches you too haha

pr0digal jenius

Happy Birthday is actually public domain now

Counterfe1t

was it removed or patent just run out?

SFOSOK

Can't say there is anything up with apple. They have always been down.

Maddogg6

Seems to be a lot of misunderstanding of USPTO laws...

Paris Hiliton didnt JUST trademark the word 'HOT' - she started a line of clothes and registered the trademark 'Thats Hot' for it.

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield...te=dv8pom.4.21

You can't *just* trademark a word. A TM need to be associated with a product or brand name in a 'category' - like clothes, or food or whatever... - and if you search TESS - you'll find multiple 'thats hot' trademarks registered and active (some were abandoned - but not all) BUT associated with different product types.

Link to search results

So - if you have a PMP - you just cant use the word 'pod' with it... but the 'My POD' is in NO danger whatsoever. - or any other 'pod' references that IS NOT some sort of digital media player.

Trademarking a word - is nothing new, and isnt the end of the world.

Make a POD forum, make a POD carrying case OR make a POD guitar FX processor.... Like it ALREADY existed BEFORE apples iPod was around. No problems. Just no POD mp3 players (or however it is classified/categorized) if you dont want apple sueing you.

Now - if the POD guitar FX processor - played MP3's (for say practicing or playalong) Id say there was a problem, or at least, the existing art/product should have prevented the POD TM to be accepted by the USPTO (IMO).

Edit: having a Cease and desist order or being sued - doesnt mean apple will win. The link to the above instance (in OP) seems like Jobs is a bit full of himself and *should* be thrown out....
Now if he DOES win that case.... Then start bitching to your reps. Doing so here does nothing.
/end edit.

Maddogg6

Music compositions fall under 'copyrights' and copyrights expire... Trademarks on the other hand, require 'maintence fees' to keep a TM 'live' and can be kept alive indefinitly. Otherwise they become 'abandoned' and thus, free to be used by anyone until re-registered (and fees paid) with the USPTO.
But a copyright - after it expires cant be re-submitted to extend its protections.

TheBlackCat

There seems to be a lot of confusion about inellectual property. Patents, copyrights, and trademarks are NOT the same things.

Copyrights deal with creative works, books, movies, music, software, etc. Every creative work is automatically copyrighted the instant it is completed. There is no way around that, it is simply how the law works. You can still sue even if you didn't register the copyright, but only for actual damages. Punative damages require registering. As maddog said, copyrights automatically expire after a set period of time (theoretically, although congress may pushed this time back retroactively under pressure from Disney and other and very well might again). They cannot be renewed. You cannot copyright words, individual names, short phrases, and various other things. So Apple did not copyright "Pod". Copyrights do not have to be enforced, if someone lets people pirate something for 50 years they can still turn around and sue everyone a day later. You are also required to actually have come up with something yourself in order to copyright it. Since it is copyrighted the moment it is completed, you cannot copyright something someone else did first because they already own the copyright.

Patents deal with products and processes. You cannot patent abstract things like words and you cannot patent creative works (although you can patent products or processes related to these works). Patents do have to be registered to prove that you came up with the idea. It must be new in the patent, it cannot be something that was made or published publicly before the patent application was submitted, and it has to be something you came up with. Patents also do not have to be enforeced, the owner can ignore it one moment and then sue like crazy the next. They also have a fixed time frame, much shorter than copyrights.

Trademarks deal with small things, brands, names, stuff like that. Trademarks are very different than patents and copyrights. First, they can be renewed indefinitely. Second, they must be enforced. If you don't stop people from using your trademark, you lose it. If the trademark becomes part of the common language, you lose the trademark. Apple has no choice but to actively enforce it or they will lose it.

Maddogg6

Well...

What seems to me to be happening is that - *someone* coined this term 'podcast' - and now they are regretting not attaching a TM to 'POD' alone... And looks like futile damage control to me. (look at how often 'PODCAST' is seen on TV now)
Seems more like they are trying to set the prescence so they can go after the networks for using the 'podcast' term.... or its at least my opinion. That would seem like a much better payoff in the legal fees than some little laptop case maker.

Not to mention- Apples not found in this list of (live) regitered TM's for 'POD'
(but I suppose it *could* be an incomplete list too ..??)

'Prior art' and 'category' are 2 problems as I see with the OPs case.

TheBlackCat

Are you sure about that? "Pod" listing at USPTO website, filed July 29, 2004.

Maddogg6

so no - Im only sure of death and taxes...

It seems links to search results arent allowed with TESS...

But clearly the list shows how many 'pod' TMs were granted... and laptop cases are much different than what apple offers...

SFOSOK

I still enjoy itunes more than Windows media player so they aren't all bad.

OmegaRED

Only iPod should be allowed as a copywrite, kind of like Microsoft Windows...can't copywrite the word "windows" can you?

TheBlackCat

As I explained before, you can't copyright names at all. You can only copyright creative works. Names, single words, and short phrases are explicitly forbidden from being copyrighted under US and international law. Such things must be trademarked, something completely different. And yes, "Windows" can be trademarked, although I think the trademark only applies when the word is used in certain ways (I am not as familiar with trademark law).

Geminiwave

hey I have an apple.

*looks at collar* Okay guys thats a fluke. I just threw on some clothes so I could be decent indoors. I really never have my collar popped..



Seriously though apple pisses me off. I'm writing up a blog about my experiences with applecare and I'm gunna get other people to write about theirs.