Not so long ago, a certain fruitily named computer manufacturer decided to distribute music, and were sued by an older, and similarly fruitily named record company for not only violating their trademarks, but violating a specific agreement not to encroach on the record company's turf.

The fruitily named computer company won the case on the grounds that they were only selling, and not producing music.

Surely the same thing applies here - Bonobo's Unretina only modifies images, it does not provide hardware on which to display them.

They got the trademark, even if it's ridiculous, Apple won't back down on that one. Rename or get removed. Even if I don't approve that "Retina" can be registered at all. But so did "Windows" ...

What's ridiculous about the trademark?

It's fine. Apple®. Logic®. New York®. Tiger®. Spaces®. Tubes®. Time Machine®.

You can't take product's name and use that product's name in your product when your product is about the original product without the owner's consent, even if the word is common. I find it funny that Bonobo would wonder that Retina is trademarked, considering the parent company is known as Apple.

Bonobo might feel they are in the right, but Unretina is using Retina specifically because of Apple's product, and it's directly related.

Just because a word is common doesn't mean you can't trademark it. I can't create a PC called the unApple and stand in shock when Apple comes calling.

I think you missed the point. It's a Mac app to downsize images. The trademark is for 'Electronic hand-held game units other than those adapted for use with an external display screen or monitor;'.

Also Apple were happy with the name for the first 6 weeks of the Mac App Store being open.

It is possible to have more than one trademark for a given word, and Apple has (at least) two for "retina":

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4003:o8... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4003:o8...

The one not mentioned in the article is for "Computers; computer hardware; computer displays; computer software; handheld mobile digital electronic devices used as a telephone, handheld computer, personal digital assistant, electronic organizer, and electronic notepad, and used to access the Internet, electronic mail, and other digital data".

> I think you missed the point. It's a Mac app to downsize images

I got that. As has also been mentioned, the trademark is for other things as well.

Essentially, Apple's Retina display is a specific trademark. Unretina isn't billed as an app to downsize images. Rather, it's an app that downsizes Retina® images.

Essentially, their marketing is piggybacking on Apple's trademark.

> Also Apple were happy with the name for the first 6 weeks of the Mac App Store being open.

That's an awful assumption based on no evidence. That it was on the App Store only means that they hadn't yet decided to take action, or that those responsible for taking action hadn't decided they should.

I believe most people who get notices like this knew what they were doing, and are using the event to get press to their product, esp since for this type they have to change the name.

I feel a great many "think it sucks" but knew it was a danger going in, and are fine complying.

Free publicity for the price of a name change - for a free app. Everyone wins.

Trademark search here... look for your favorite words! If you use the 2nd link you can search by company (search by "owner name"), you can see all the words that Apple/Facebook/Microsoft own

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=4010:pa...

I feel if Microsoft or Adobe had the same policies as Apple they would be riots in the street, but Apple mostly gets a free pass.

So my question to the fans of Apple, what is the limit? What would Apple have to do to turn you away from their platform?

I feel as if every little thing Apple does get reported/blogged about and you have all this faux-outrage and people trying to make stories where there aren't any. I don't know of any other company that get scrutinized so hard. I hardly think Apple gets a free pass when it comes to the tech community.

I am not saying the is any news conspiracy. Rather these stories do very little to dent Apple fanaticism. Unless all of these people own large portions of Apple stock, why are they so loyal to a company?

You've picked a bad article to make this point - if someone tried to re-brand OpenOffice as "MS Office" you can be sure that Microsoft would defend its trademarks, and you'd never see it on HN. But when Apple does the same, it is front page "news". Hardly a free pass.

No it would be more like MS sues every software product with the word Office or Windows in it. Which they don't as evidenced by the existence of OpenOffice.

I am not trying to argue Microsoft is some white knight or anything else noble, just that Apple policies are worse but with better marketing.

I'm guessing that "Office" was already in use. "Word" certainly was (i.e. Word Perfect). So "OpenWord" would be probably be fine. On the other hand, don't try making an "OpenExcel" or an "OpenPowerpoint".

That's a great example actually... it's Open OFFICE, competing with Microsoft OFFICE, and surprisingly AFAIK Microsoft did nothing to defend that.

That being said, Apple isn't the only company going a bit overboard, as Facebook is making legal threats to LameBook, TeachBook, and PlaceBook

That is partly my point, it is ridiculous no matter who is making the legal threats. The company making the threats should have no bearing on anything.

> I feel if Microsoft or Adobe had the same policies as Apple they would be riots in the street, but Apple mostly gets a free pass.

I'm confused. Are you saying MS and Adobe should be able to protect their trademark, or that they shouldn't?

That aren't "enforcing" their trademark in the courts where the attempt would probably be unsuccessful, they are just threating a guy with app store removable unless he does what they say.

The trademark summary says 'Electronic hand-held game units other than those adapted for use with an external display screen or monitor;'

I don't see why they would be unsuccessful in court. "Retina" is not a term normally associated with displays, so I see no problem with it as a trademark.

But in this context it has nothing or very little to do with displays - just images. Does the trademark still apply? We almost certainly won't find out, since lawsuits are so expensive that Bonobo will presumably just acquiesce.

You weren't aware of it, but it's been posted in other locations that another trademark for Retina by apple specifically covers software.

Ah, thanks.

One trademark summary. Another: " Computers; computer hardware; computer displays; computer software; handheld mobile digital electronic devices used as a telephone, handheld computer, personal digital assistant, electronic organizer, and electronic notepad, and used to access the Internet, electronic mail, and other digital data" Serial Number: 85056807 - http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=401...

Same source as the story: http://www.trademarkia.com/retina-85056807.html