Re:Apple Sues Amazon.com, Seeks Order to Stop Use of 'App St...
by Someone on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @04:52AM
(#2353597)
a mark cannot be registered if it consists solely of a generic or purely descriptive term. "Store" is generic.
Yes, it is, but as far as I can read from the Bloomberg article, the question at hand is about the combination of "App" with "Store" (if 'App' were the claim, they would have to go after Google, too). I haven't read Apple's claim, but I am fairly sure that Apple will argue that "App Store" is not solely a purely descriptive term. Also, there are many trademarks on more generic terms. For example, "Jaguar" is a trademark of Linotype (http://www.linotype.com/3228/jaguar.html)
If it should be granted what it seeks, how will other vendors be able to refer even generically to what they are offering?
"a place where you can buy software", or even "a place to buy apps" (if, as I assume, they are granting that 'apps' has become or always has been generic)
Counter-argument: if someone invents a new category of item and spends money to establish a name for it, why should everybody be allowed to go along with the ride? Should an inventor immediately come up with two terms, even before knowing that others want to copy them?
[Two not-so-good-examples of this I can think of are Royal Mail and KLM. Both have almost generic names (KLM = Royal Air Line Company), British stamps do not even have a country designation on them.]
I do think Apple may be too late to claim the term is specific for their store, but I think it will be a close call.
Yes, it is, but as far as I can read from the Bloomberg article, the question at hand is about the combination of "App" with "Store" (if 'App' were the claim, they would have to go after Google, too). I haven't read Apple's claim, but I am fairly sure that Apple will argue that "App Store" is not solely a purely descriptive term. Also, there are many trademarks on more generic terms. For example, "Jaguar" is a trademark of Linotype (http://www.linotype.com/3228/jaguar.html)
If it should be granted what it seeks, how will other vendors be able to refer even generically to what they are offering?
"a place where you can buy software", or even "a place to buy apps" (if, as I assume, they are granting that 'apps' has become or always has been generic)
Counter-argument: if someone invents a new category of item and spends money to establish a name for it, why should everybody be allowed to go along with the ride? Should an inventor immediately come up with two terms, even before knowing that others want to copy them? [Two not-so-good-examples of this I can think of are Royal Mail and KLM. Both have almost generic names (KLM = Royal Air Line Company), British stamps do not even have a country designation on them.]
I do think Apple may be too late to claim the term is specific for their store, but I think it will be a close call.