Apple, CBS sued over 'Mighty Mouse' device

A computer peripheral maker filed suit against Apple and CBS on Tuesday, claiming the companies are infringing on its trademark for the "Mighty Mouse" device.

(Credit: Apple)

Maryland-based Man & Machine says it was selling its chemical-resistant and waterproof mouse to hospitals a year before Apple sold its single-button mouse of the same name.

CBS owns the rights to the Mighty Mouse cartoon and licensed the use of the name to Apple. The network was named in the lawsuit because Man & Machine says it doesn't have the right to license the name. Both Man & Machine and CBS have trademark applications for the name and are currently dueling for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's approval.

Man & Machine is asking for monetary damages and for a court to issue an injunction to prevent Apple from selling any more of its Mighty Mouse devices.

Note: CBS has agreed to acquire CNET Networks, publisher of News.com. The deal is expected to close in the third quarter.

[dbargen]

CBS obviously had rights to this name of a pop icon long before M&M came up with their mouse. Why should apple know to go looking for a no name company that is also using the name, when the it can legally license the name from the original company?

An AppleInsider story says that BOTH companies were licensing the name from CBS, whereas this one only references Apple. If both actually were, I'd say it was on CBS's head to not allow both to have it, or make sure both new it when they signed the other. If only Apple got licensing rights, then M&M will get blown out of the water.

By recent posts of what the M&M version of their mouses looks like, I'd have to say that it's an antiquated piece of machinery that hasn't made money in ages, and M&M is just looking for some extra cash. The Apple version has been around for YEARS now, and since they're in the same market, I would think they'd bring up the issue much earlier. There's no way they hadn't heard of the Apple version before now. Litigation like this is a waste of money and time.

[dbargen]

CBS obviously had rights to this name of a pop icon long before M&M came up with their mouse. Why should apple know to go looking for a no name company that is also using the name, when the it can legally license the name from the original company?

An AppleInsider story says that BOTH companies were licensing the name from CBS, whereas this one only references Apple. If both actually were, I'd say it was on CBS's head to not allow both to have it, or make sure both new it when they signed the other. If only Apple got licensing rights, then M&M will get blown out of the water.

By recent posts of what the M&M version of their mouses looks like, I'd have to say that it's an antiquated piece of machinery that hasn't made money in ages, and M&M is just looking for some extra cash. The Apple version has been around for YEARS now, and since they're in the same market, I would think they'd bring up the issue much earlier. There's no way they hadn't heard of the Apple version before now. Litigation like this is a waste of money and time.

[totocalimero]

Typical gold digger going after the deep pockets of Apple.

[sanenazok]

Typical large corporation that doesn't do a search before adopting a name that "sounds cool" with its marketing hype.

[sanenazok]

Also, the caption for the story on the home page says that this is a patent dispute, it's actually a trademark matter.

[Pete Bardo]

If M&M is using the image of Mighty Mouse in connection with the promotion, sales or packaging of its mighty mouse product, then it would need to license such use from CBS. The use of the name only is not in itself a trademark violation as it would cause no confusion in the marketplace between Mighty Mouse the computer pointing device and Might Mouse the cartoon.

Apple, on the other hand, producing a mouse with the same trademark name as a competing computer pointing device would definitely cause confusion in the marketplace as to which device the consumer is purchasing.

I'd bet on the small company to win this one.

[Thomas, David]

Say it isn't so!! NO WAY does this company actually think they own the name "Mighty Mouse" !! I grew up on this cartoon! Someone had to be asleep at the wheel when they gave them that name. But then again. Names aren't supposed to be patentable! What insanity is this!! "Mighty Mouse" is a trademark, and it certainly does NOT belong to this company suing Apple and CBS. They are going to lose their clothes on this one!

[Thomas, David]

Read the Bloomberg article. Bottom-line, and a judge is going to tell "Man and Machine" this, they should not have assumed they could actually use the trade-marked name "Mighty Mouse". The media industry is well-covered in these areas, with a ton of precedent. You can't get away with using "Superman", "Batman", etc without permission. I wonder why they thought "Mighty Mouse" would be any different. Maybe they don't know about "Mighty Mouse". I'm sure they know about "Mickey Mouse".

[Vegaman_Dan]

Do you honestly believe people would be so stupid and ignorant as to confuse the cartoon with a computer input device? If you honestly believe that, then your argument stands a chance. Somehow I don't believe the judge will be that stupid however. Unfortunately it's not really a case of who is right, but who has the most money to crush the opposition and that means this plaintiff doesn't have a chance.

In today's legal system, it only matters who has the most money to buy justice.

[DrtyDogg]

A trademark search show that neither company owns the trademark for use with a computer mouse. Though both have filed for it.

[Thomas, David]

Vegaman_Dan, It's certainly not about confusion. It's about the rights to be able to use the name to market a product. Narrowing the vision to, "Well, they weren't using it for this type of product" argument, is ASSUMING that they could have used the name at all. THAT is the point.

[appledogx--2008]

Another waste of the legal system. It's like M&M Mars suing phycists over calling the planet "Mars". It's too bad the legal system doesn't have a way to eject these garbage suits when there are so many really important problems facing the country.

It would be nice if mighty mouse could save the day on this one.

[Thomas, David]

Here is the real point folks. Its seems many think that because CBS wasn't using the name to sell a particular type of product, that allowed "Man and Machine" to be able to use the same name. This case isn't about market confusion, it's about whether "Man and Machine" ever had the right to use the name in the first place. Quite frankly, it seems that "Man and Machine" did NOT cover their bases when using this name. Getting a name trademarked through the agency is more than possible but NOT a guarantee it will hold up in court. Apple didn't attempt to trademark the name because they recognized who owned the name, and licensed it. I am sure that wasn't cheap. I don't "Man and Machine" even bothered to try that because the cost would have been prohibitive. Take all the facts into account folks. "Man and Machine" already lost this case.

[Thomas, David]

Hmmm, but then again, have they really? This very suit could do wonders for their business if their mouse is all its cracked up to be. It won't matter what they call it ... the "Hoobly Joobdilly".

[gsmiller88]

Only in America can a company be sued for licensing their own crap.

[fortyonejb]

its unfortunate so many people here COMPLETELY misunderstand the whole idea of what trademarks are actually for. CBS only can impede others for using "mighty mouse" in the context that it might confuse consumers from CBS's property. M&M can fully use the term to sell a pointing device. No one can purchase their device and think they are getting a cartoon. God help you if you are that stupid. For example, you could not open a gas station named "Shell". But you could open a restaurant named "Shell". Common words can not be exclusively trademarked except across their respective industry. Made up words such as "Microsoft" or "linux" have a better chance since the word was invented for a specific company.

Apple is in the wrong, they cannot sell a pointing device with the same name as an already existing pointing device.

[supoman]

Frivolous suit........ when you bring suits like this you should be force to reimburse the tax payers if it is found to be frivolous.

[BizStarz]

I'm a longtime user of Apple products (including their "Mighty Mouse"), and generally like the company. But most of these comments are obviously being written by emotionally-driven and blindly loyal Apple people who know little about trademark law or the specifics of this case. Have any of you actually read the case or checked out the "Mighty Mouse" trademark records on file at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (uspto.gov)? I didn't think so. And just because you haven't heard of Man & Machine, or the fact that they are a smaller company, how does that automatically make them the bad guy? If any of you had actually run a small company, or been involved in a legal battle against a much larger company, you'd know that Man & Machine probably tried to avoid this legal battle, but had to take on such a daunting legal battle to protect what they must feel are superior trademark rights. And before you get all pro-Apple about this case, you should also see how many small companies Apple has unfairly out-muscled in and out of court. So unless CBS can prove "Mighty Mouse" is what's referred to as a "famous" trademark, or has proof of use that predates that of Man & Machine, this case could end up being another example of David beating Goliath.

[Thomas, David]

That's the whole key point I was trying to make ... it IS a famous trademark. It is LITERALLY a part of American pop culture. To pretend it isn't is imply wishful thinking. But then again, that is something to be proved in court. Given the fact that I actually grew up on the cartoon, places me on the side of CBS (and I am not a fan of CBS). Of course, if a jury is selected, they'd have be a lot younger than baby boomers for them to win.

[benjaminstraight]

Now comes the legal slobber-knocker. Let's see who wins.