> I'm all for calling out big companies when they do crappy things, but you have to be seen to defend your trademarks & the system to allow businesses to contest trademark applications is there for a reason.

I always see this "defense" when big corporations abuse small companies by frivolous lawsuits... but with this you're actually saying that there's a chance someone will mix up a fruit logo of that small company with Apple's which is ridiculous. Especially since they don't share the market.

Please don't defend abusive corporations with this :/

Apple is not “required” to enforce its mark in every instance or risk losing it. The circumstances under which a company could actually lose a trademark—such as abandonment and genericide—are quite limited. Genericide occurs when a trademark becomes the standard term for a type of good (‘zipper’ and ‘escalator’ being two famous examples). This is very rare and would not be a problem for Apple unless people start saying “Apple” simply to mean “smart device.” Courts also set a very high bar to show abandonment (usually years of total non-use). Importantly, failure to enforce a mark against every potential infringer does not show abandonment

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not...

> ‘zipper’ and ‘escalator’ being two famous examples

Or "iPad".

I dont think that has caught on to use anything other than referring to a Apple Made tabelt device

Tablet is still the naming for other non-apple devices though it seems the market has given up on them instead perfering larger phones