Apple sues another company that using 'app store' name

[micropage7]

Originally Posted by the non mobile site this time

Apple has targeted yet another company on its path toward making the term "App Store" its own.

A cease-and-desist letter from Apple, represented by the law offices of New York's Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, has surfaced today and takes aim at GetJar, a company that claims to have "the world's largest free app store."

In the letter--which was acquired by The Wall Street Journal and dated June 22, 2011--Apple's lawyers take aim at GetJar's claim, specifically the use of the term "App Store." Apple asserts that those two words relate to its own mobile application service, and that GetJar should not be using them to talk about its own.

"GetJar's use of Apple's APP STORE mark improperly suggests to consumers that numerous companies offer an APP STORE mobile download service, when in fact the term APP STORE refers exclusively to Apple's groundbreaking download service," the letter reads. Apple follows by suggesting that GetJar use "mobile download service" or "application download service," instead.

The letter then goes on to note that "Apple takes protecting its mark seriously" and that GetJar should stop using the words on its site and elsewhere, as well as agreeing to do so in the future.

In a statement provided to Mashable, GetJar's CEO Ilja Laurs said Apple's cease-and-desist letter was a "surprise."

"GetJar has been in the business of offering apps to consumers since 2005, well before Apple, and helped to pioneer the model that the general public understands as an app store today," Laurs said. "We have built a strong, global and growing business around this model, and plan to continue to use the phrase 'app store' to describe what we do."

Laurs said the legal action is "yet more proof that (Apple) tends to act as if it is above the law," and that the company "won't be bullied by Apple" despite GetJar's smaller size.

An Apple representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This is the latest in Apple's legal efforts to make the term "App Store" its very own and no one else's. Apple filed suit against retail giant Amazon back in March, taking aim at the company's newly launched Appstore--a digital download offering for users on Google's Android platform. At the time, an Apple spokeswoman said, "we've asked Amazon not to copy the app store name because it will confuse and mislead customers."

Amazon ended up countersuing Apple in April, arguing that the term was too generic, which then led to Apple saying that it "denies that the mark App Store is generic and, on that basis, denies that the Amazon Appstore for Android service is an 'app store.'"

Apple's original effort against Amazon hit a roadblock this week after a federal judge denied Apple's request to immediately stop the company from using the "Appstore" moniker with an injunction.

Besides the Amazon fracas, Apple's been tussling with Microsoft in its attempt to trademark the term in the U.S. Apple already has the trademarks in Europe, which have been targeted for invalidation in a group effort by Microsoft, HTC, Nokia, and Sony Ericsson.

GetJar, which is based in San Mateo, Calif., (just north of Apple's headquarters) was founded in 2004 and started up its application store a year later. The company picked up a $25 million round of funding back in February, which joined an $11 million effort from the year before. The company has struck numerous partnerships with companies like Sprint, AT&T, Yahoo, and Zynga.

Update at 4:45 p.m. PT: In a follow-up post about the letter on GetJar's company blog, Chief Marketing Officer Patrick Mork said that the company's not going to make the changes suggested in Apple's letter, a move that could very well lead to another lawsuit.

"GetJar won't be subject to this kind of bullying. We're not going to 'cease & desist,'" Mork wrote. "We were here long before Steve & Co. We were built by developers, to help developers. Not to help sell handsets or search results. In the words of Twisted Sister: We're not going to take it! Steve Jobs isn't our dad."

Mork goes on to argue that GetJar was distributing applications long before the iPhone was launched, and that the company doesn't even compete with Apple.

"Nobody can (compete) on iOS as they're a closed ecosystem. We merely re-direct Apple users to Apple's App Store as a courtesy," Mork wrote. "We do this for free with nothing in return. We don't even get much Apple traffic and our Android traffic is hundreds of times larger and strategically far more important."

GetJar is using the situation as a launchpad to start a new Facebook Cause called "The Open and Free App Movement" aimed at banding together smaller companies and developers who share its vision on mobile application pricing and distribution.

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20...#ixzz1RfewVKOf

i feel kinda uncomfortable with this, it looks Apple is going too much in this case. what do you think?

[cheesy999]

is this appearing as a really thin column of text to anyone else?

This is most probably apple needing money from patent trolling since the iphone is now being beaten by android

they'd get a lot more sales if they stopped doing stupid aluminium and glass designed, and just did a practical design with the materials HTC etc use (Polycarbonate resin?) although it looks nice it makes it a lot less comfortable and the aluminium and glass has a tendency to scratch and crack, where other phones just flex slightly when dropped etc

although this is apple so they will continue to do things just because their stylish, at the moment their still getting quite a bit of money so they won't likely change anything until that drops substantially

[micropage7]

Originally Posted by cheesy999

is this appearing as a really thin column of text to anyone else

This is most probably apple needing money from patent trolling since the iphone is now being beaten by android

yeah, its like they are pretty mad to make all that they use super duper exclusive. and its pretty annoying.

[cheesy999]

Originally Posted by micropage7

yeah, its like they are pretty mad to make all that they use super duper exclusive. and its pretty annoying.

i wouldn't even consider buying an iphone considering my friend has an iphone, i have one of the lowest end HTC android phones (about 1/4 of the price of an iphone) and if we stand in the same place on the same phone network, i can have 2-3 bars of signal and he has none (Honestly apple, put a decent antenna in their for once)

[Nick259]

Wait but if 'app store' is just short for 'application store' then how can they patent that? That's like trying to patent the word supermarket or newsagents.

[animal007uk]

Apple's claim that it owns the trademark "app store" has been dismissed by a US court.

Full story here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07...zon_trademark/

[micropage7]

Originally Posted by cheesy999

i wouldn't even consider buying an iphone considering my friend has an iphone, i have one of the lowest end HTC android phones (about 1/4 of the price of an iphone) and if we stand in the same place on the same phone network, i can have 2-3 bars of signal and he has none (Honestly apple, put a decent antenna in their for once)

so do i, apple stuff is nice but since they (what should i say? have bad attitude-or i feel like that) i go less interested. and android is pretty impressive it would be nice switch to it

[cheesy999]

Originally Posted by micropage7

so do i, apple stuff is nice but since they (what should i say? have bad attitude-or i feel like that) i go less interesting. and android is pretty impressive it would be nice switch to it

just make sure you get one with flash support, the only drawback of my current android is that the slow processor means it only supports really basic flash

(no flash at all on iphone )

[micropage7]

Originally Posted by Nick259

Wait but if 'app store' is just short for 'application store' then how can they patent that? That's like trying to patent the word supermarket or newsagents.

nah, thats why i say its annoying. every one knows its a generic name that any one could use it ::sad::

[FordGT90Concept]

Apple can serve papers but that doesn't mean jack squat without the backing of the law and the law is not Apple's side in this case.

[remixedcat]

I's annoying really. I never really cared for the arrogance apple has.

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by animal007uk

Apple's claim that it owns the trademark "app store" has been dismissed by a US court.

Full story here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07...zon_trademark/

I was just about to bring that up. I thought they were already told they couldn't trademark the name.

And can somebody please fix the OP. That is downright annoying.

EDIT: Actually, after reading, the hearing hasn't taken place yet. The judge just dismissed the injunction Apple tried to put on Amazon for the term App Store (or Appstore in the case of Amazon). In other words, Apple wanted Amazon to have to rename their service until the judgment was made, but the courts decided Amazon can essentially keep using it until the hearing and judgment takes place.

Meh, this is stupid. I agree with everyone else, it's a generic term. I sure as hell hope Apple loses their ass on this one.

[Wile E]

There's been an update: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20...pp-store-name/

Update at 4:45 p.m. PT: In a follow-up post about the letter on GetJar's company blog, Chief Marketing Officer Patrick Mork said that the company's not going to make the changes suggested in Apple's letter, a move that could very well lead to another lawsuit.

"GetJar won't be subject to this kind of bullying. We're not going to 'cease & desist,'" Mork wrote. "We were here long before Steve & Co. We were built by developers, to help developers. Not to help sell handsets or search results. In the words of Twisted Sister: We're not going to take it! Steve Jobs isn't our dad."

Mork goes on to argue that GetJar was distributing applications long before the iPhone was launched, and that the company doesn't even compete with Apple.

"Nobody can (compete) on iOS as they're a closed ecosystem. We merely re-direct Apple users to Apple's App Store as a courtesy," Mork wrote. "We do this for free with nothing in return. We don't even get much Apple traffic and our Android traffic is hundreds of times larger and strategically far more important."

GetJar is using the situation as a launchpad to start a new Facebook Cause called "The Open and Free App Movement" aimed at banding together smaller companies and developers who share its vision on mobile application pricing and distribution.

And micropage, can you use the link I provided (it's the non-mobile version of the article) to fix your OP? That column of test is nerve wracking. lol

[Zyon]

Whenever you see Apple filing lawsuits, think Microsoft and Linspire (formerly Lindows).

Apple fails that they think just because they own a lot of iThings they own everything that starts with 'i'.

[remixedcat]

case in point IOS (internetworking operating system) belongs to cisco... apple copied off it with ios...

Iphone belonged to Cisco Linksys.... apple copied off it with the iphone...

totally un-oringial.

and Cisco IOS has been around for a EXTREMELY long time....

[ShiBDiB]

Originally Posted by micropage7

yeah, its like they are pretty mad to make all that they use super duper exclusive. and its pretty annoying.

Almost as annoying as the way the text in the first post is formatted

[Neuromancer]

Originally Posted by Zyon

Whenever you see Apple filing lawsuits, think Microsoft and Linspire (formerly Lindows).

Apple fails that they think just because they own a lot of iThings they own everything that starts with 'i'.

Well that is a direct ripoffof a trademarked name.

Much like Zuitube, is now zui.com (kids verson of youtube).

(I have 3 kids )

App store, I will say, lots of people are really dumb. My aunt told me to get an iPad, I said why? I can get a laptop or a netbook. She actually said "But does it have apps?"

WOW. I think that what Apple is marketing towards.

[Mussels]

Originally Posted by Wile E

There's been an update: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20...pp-store-name/



And micropage, can you use the link I provided (it's the non-mobile version of the article) to fix your OP? That column of test is nerve wracking. lol

i fixed it, thanks for the link.

[remixedcat]

Originally Posted by Neuromancer

App store, I will say, lots of people are really dumb. My aunt told me to get an iPad, I said why? I can get a laptop or a netbook. She actually said "But does it have apps?"

WOW. I think that what Apple is marketing towards.

scary....

[Completely Bonkers]

I hope some enterprising top legal firm will help this kid sue Apple for millions damages plus punative for this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06..._rejected_app/

[Widjaja]

Lol this is just pathetic.

Without a doubt Apple aims towards a crowd which looks at the item and goes wow that looks cool I bet it goes as fast as it looks!

Some people go to some desperate measures to get an apple product.
For example my Brother was sold an ASUS GTX480 for $200USD because the seller wanted to get the latest iPhone which with prepay costs $1250USD here.

My Brother has sold the GTX480 for twice as much since then.

[WhiteLotus]

I'm waiting for them to trademark the fruit Apple, and everytime you eat one you gotta make sure not to take chunk out of it so it would look like the logo.

I mean seriously... what is the world coming to when one company can copywrite even the letter "i" in brand names. WTF

[RejZoR]

Originally Posted by animal007uk

Apple's claim that it owns the trademark "app store" has been dismissed by a US court.

Full story here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07...zon_trademark/

Amen to common sense...

[micropage7]

Originally Posted by Completely Bonkers

I hope some enterprising top legal firm will help this kid sue Apple for millions damages plus punative for this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06..._rejected_app/

yep.. it must be painful so you gonna burn their office
ok apple offers you exclusivity and so and so, but over it all? i dont think so
maybe apple go big head coz millions people wait for their stuff and make them thinking that they know it all, so it makes them go out of line

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by RejZoR

Amen to common sense...

Read the link and my comment on it above. The courts did not dismiss the case. Apple may still be able to trademark App and/or App Store. The real hearing hasn't happened yet. The ruling was just on a temporary injunction.