Apple trademarks the SHOP!

dr strangelove

Seriously, Apple have trademarked the shop:

"After trademarking the leaf and patenting the rectangle, Apple has gone one further and trademarked the shop.

The US Patent and Trademark office last week granted Apple's application to trademark a retail store featuring computers."

taken from: The Register

Bloody hell, what's next?
Apple trademarks the gas also known as "Air"?

pickarooney

dr strangelove wrote: »

Bloody hell, what's next?
Apple trademarks the gas also known as "Air"?

Done:
http://www.apple.com/macbookair/

im invisible

Fair play to them for getting in first

fullstop

Not exactly a difficult patent to break...just arrange your tables not in a line.

They did this because of the Chinese knockoff Apple stores.

hardCopy

The US patent system is a farce. It's stifling innovation and it's going to hamper their tech sector.

Cool Mo D

They haven't trademarked the shop, they've trademarked the layout they use in their Apple stores, which is maybe a bit silly, but nothing like what you've accused them of.

Lando Griffin

In before My Samsung Galaxy Iphone is better than any Apple crap.

FatherLen

added to the list of why i hate apple.

TheIrishGrover

Apple patent application 783797424793-37487:

"..... a method of transmitting light frequencies from 430-790 THz via physical connection to the human brain. A pair of these devices would be used, slightly offset from each other, into order to give a stereoscopic image. The device will be Apple white with a coloured disk surrounding aperture.......

....... Apple Inc wishes to also patent this device name: The iBall....."

Then they'll sue God and anyone who uses their device

Dravokivich

Wow, that's amazing.

Fúck dead pools, what's apple gonna patent next? Some form of device for enable transactions between a retailer and the customer? A method of dispensing the authentication of such a transaction?

hardCopy

Cool Mo D wrote: »

They haven't trademarked the shop, they've trademarked the layout they use in their Apple stores, which is maybe a bit silly, but nothing like what you've accused them of.

They'll probably lose a case when someone cites a church as prior art.

conorhal

They also trademarked 'the swipe', as a result I can no longer turn a page in a book without paying them money.... I have another single finger motion that they can try and patent if they like...

Cool Mo D

hardCopy wrote: »

They'll probably lose a case when someone cites a church as prior art.

It's a trademark, not a patent. There's no such thing as prior art there.

im invisible

conorhal wrote: »

They also trademarked 'the swipe', as a result I can no longer turn a page in a book without paying them money.... I have another single finger motion that they can try and patent if they like...

whats love got to do, got to do with it?
Whats love but a second handy motion...

1ZRed

Seriously you're actually blaming them? They only did it because they can get away with it because the patent system appears to be very flawed.

Many companies would also do the exact same thing if they could get away with it. Don't blame Apple, blame the broken patent system.

hatrickpatrick

1ZRed wrote: »

Seriously you're actually blaming them? They only did it because they can get away with it because the patent system appears to be very flawed.

Many companies would also do the exact same thing if they could get away with it. Don't blame Apple, blame the broken patent system.

I absolutely detest this argument. In Ireland it seems very easy to get away with rape and murder, does that mean the people who do it are blameless because the justice system isn't up to scratch?

Bottom line is Apple are still choosing to be obnoxious douchebags. How they get away with it is beside the point.

Dravokivich

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I absolutely detest this argument. In Ireland it seems very easy to get away with rape and murder, does that mean the people who do it are blameless because the justice system isn't up to scratch?

Bottom line is Apple are still choosing to be obnoxious douchebags. How they get away with it is beside the point.

Why did you think that was a valid counter point?

FatherLen

1ZRed wrote: »

Don't blame Apple

you???

Duggys Housemate

hardCopy wrote: »

The US patent system is a farce. It's stifling innovation and it's going to hamper their tech sector.

This, though is a trademark. I doubt if it is the only trademarked identification for a store, or a building design if the design represented a certain "look". You also can't produce a cola ( or any fizzy drink) in a can which is mostly red, with mostly cursive white lettering. Its been the case for a century or more.

nothing to do with patents.

Duggys Housemate

conorhal wrote: »

They also trademarked 'the swipe', as a result I can no longer turn a page in a book without paying them money.... I have another single finger motion that they can try and patent if they like...

no, they didn't.

al28283

Fair play to them, have you seen the new microsoft stores? They look almost identical to Apple stores

Duggys Housemate

So we're in a thread where nobody knows the difference between a patent and a trademark, and are getting angry about patents.

Great.

unsubscribe.

Dravokivich

al28283 wrote: »

Fair play to them, have you seen the new microsoft stores? They look almost identical to Apple stores

And burger kings look like mc donalds, only difference is the logos.

1ZRed

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I absolutely detest this argument. In Ireland it seems very easy to get away with rape and murder, does that mean the people who do it are blameless because the justice system isn't up to scratch?

Bottom line is Apple are still choosing to be obnoxious douchebags. How they get away with it is beside the point.

Yeah because a company that makes phones and computers who are patenting a store layout is very comparable to getting away with rape and murder in this country.

I don't care what they do tbh. It's just a tech company and I've no real interest in what so many of them get up to.

1ZRed

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

This, though is a trademark. I doubt if it is the only trademarked identification for a store, or a building design if the design represented a certain "look". You also can't produce a cola ( or any fizzy drink) in a can which is mostly red, with mostly cursive white lettering. Its been the case for a century or more.

nothing to do with patents.

+1
Well thanks for informing me from thinking otherwise I suppose :P

Capt'n Midnight

Karsini wrote: »

They did this because of the Chinese knockoff Apple stores.

Doesn't that mean that those Chinese shops represent Prior Art and thus invalidate it ?

If any were around before 2004? that is

Apple described just what features are included in the mark:

Rectangular tables arranged in a line in the middle of the store parallel to the walls and extending from the storefront to the back of the store.

Shelves and stools set beneath a table are also included:

There is multi-tiered shelving along the side walls, and a oblong table with stools located at the back of the store, set below video screens flush mounted on the back wall.

dr strangelove

Cool Mo D wrote: »

They haven't trademarked the shop, they've trademarked the layout they use in their Apple stores, which is maybe a bit silly, but nothing like what you've accused them of.

Don't care - i'm still outraged, and will be on the phone to Joe Duffy at the earliest opportunity

fullstop

Do people who hate Apple for filing so many patent applications hate Gillette too? They've basically patented almost anything to do with a razor/shaving and dominate the market as a result...or is it just because it's fashionable to hate Apple?

pickarooney

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

So we're in a thread where nobody knows the difference between a patent and a trademark, and are getting angry about patents.

Great.

unsubscribe.

I would have thought it was trademarkly obvious.

biko

Fookin' ****, glad I got out while I could.
Android ftw

Reading the article it specifies China copy cat stores so I see the reason behind it but come on people...

wilkie2006

Eh... I think I might be the only one who thinks this is fair enough(?)

Apple's shops are an extension of their brand. Just look at how much thought and time they've put into them; they're like cathedrals to capitalism (here, here, here...).

Like the Apple logo, their shops' layouts are immediately recognisable, unlike most other outlets (competitors and non-competitors alike).

I'm no Mac-head or in any way a fan of their products but I recognise clever marketing...