Comments on: Why can't Apple, Cisco just play nice?

Cisco had hoped to forge an interoperability agreement with Apple in exchange for the use of its trademarked name "iPhone."

[kathakalimask]

Apple Fanboys and Haterboys

My first post!

I'll admit to being a very happy, contented Apple fanboy -- both
as a consumer and as a shareholder.

I am quite puzzled as to why so many of you are such unhappy,
malcontented Apple haterboys! What gives? Sold the stock too
early? Stuck with non-Apple products in your life?

Another thing I am puzzled by: Since you haterboys don't like
the company or its products too much, why do you even bother
to post about Apple?

[Christopher Hall]

I would guess...

I would go so far as to speculate that your "Apple haterboys" post against your beloved company for the same reason you took up arms against them.

People are, for better or worse, incapable of remaining silent.

[lingsun]

Apple is a bully.

Apple is a bully. They expect to infringe on others but they aren't the least bit reasonable when it comes to other companies.

[lingsun]

Apple is a bully.

Apple is a bully. They expect to infringe on others but they aren't the least bit reasonable when it comes to other companies.

[LetsThink]

Cisco, Not Apple, is in the Wrong

If you told anyone on planet earth in recent months that an
"iPhone" has hit the market, 99 out of 100 would have assumed
that it was an Apple product. Apple has done an amazing job of
creating buzz around the "i" moniker. iPod, iTunes, iMovie,
iDVD, etc. Apple has done such a great job that everyone was
anticipating an iPhone from Apple.

Now along comes Cisco. They knew full well that if they chose to
call a product the iPhone, it would fly in the face of Apple. It's
like saying "f--- you" Apple, we're going to steal all your hard
earned buzz and screw you. We're going to use the system
against you.

The purpose of the trademark system is to avoid confusion in
the minds of the public and give rightful ownership to those
companies who have earned the public's attention for their
moniker. Cisco consciously chose to misuse that system.

What amazes me today is how uncreative our corporate cultures
have become and how bullying and deception are used to move
into areas we should never go. We see it on the world stage with
politics. Almost everywhere we see an extreme lack of creativity
in government, foreign policy, energy policy, education,
economics, and most other areas of human endeavor.

Apple and a few other companies come along with incredible
ideas and execution. Apple even tells how to do it. "Think
Different." I'm shocked that Cisco was so uncreative that it
couldn't even find another letter of the alphabet to use for their
product. They chose to try to steal Apple's thunder by stealing
Apple's buzz.

What that tells me is that the culture at Cisco is extremely short
sighted and uncreative. It tells me that they probably don't make
products that I would want to buy. I'd rather go with companies
who rely on true innovation and creativity to create their own
buzz and great products, rather than a company that tries to
misuse the system to steal from others.

I hope the Trademark office can see through this stupidity of
Cisco's. I hope they can see how they are being used to defeat
the intended purpose of tradmarks, which is to give companies
their rightful due in creating monikers that people associate with
their brand.

I applaud Apple's response to this travesty on the part of Cisco. I
hope other companies will look at how Apple has succeeded in
creating a corporate culture based on "good ole American
ingenuity and innovation" rather than on deception, bullying,
and misuse of the legal system, etc. to try to armtwist their way
into the hearts and minds of Americans.

I say to companies in general. Play fair. Play nice. Do the honest
thing. I hope Cisco's corporate management catches hell for
trying to stomp on Apple. Why can't companies create true
innovation and earn the public's respect like Apple, Intel, and
others have done. Be truly creative rather than use underhanded
tactics.

[markdoiron]

Wrong-headed Thinking

LetsThink's dissertation is so full of wrong-headed thinking I'm not certain even where to begin.

1. There are many iProducts out there that don't belong to Apple Computer (I'm specifying them, since I wouldn't want the reader to confuse them with Apple Corporation, a company that has issues with Apple Computer over the use of the word "apple" in conjunction with a certain music delivery service. Bottom Line: Apple Computer has a history of playing loose and fancy with prior TM registrations).

2. The purpose of trademark law has nothing to do with "earn[ing] the public's attention". It has everything to do with registering the TM. That's U.S. law. Businesses/individuals that use a TM without registering it are at the whim of those who register it. That's the history of actual, real-world lawsuits in the U.S.

3. Apple Computer did not have a huge line of iProducts when the iPhone TM was originally registered (2000). This predates most of their iProduct line and, as I said earlier, occurred at a time when many companies were offering iProducts of their own (as many companies continue to do today).

4. If Cisco was shortsighted I don't think they'd be pressing so hard for interoperability with Apple Computer's product line. The fact that they want to interoperate suggests that they believe there is a future for that product line. In fact, if they refused such an offer from Apple Computer, fanboys would probably voice loudly how shortsighted Cisco was for that.

5. The Trademark Office won't have much say about this lawsuit. This will be settled in the courts, or by mutual agreement between the two companies.

6. The underhanded tactic here was Apple Computer walking away from the talks the day before they announced the allegedly trademark infringing name to the world. Cisco is defending their product's name, which TM law requires that they do (lest they lose the trademark). Let me say that again: If Cisco does NOT defend the name iPhone, they will lose it. That is U.S. TM law.

--mark d.

[13ryan886]

Apple realizes ultimately the TM isn't important

How many articles do think there were when Cisco released their iPhone? A few, more than usual because of the buzz surrounding Apple potentially releasing an iPhone. Now, how many when Apple released their iPhone? A Time magazine article plus many many more. Even if Apple loses the TM, which they might simply because Cisco got there first. The iPhone name is cemented in with Apple not Cisco in the public's mind. So even if Apple is forced to rename their iPhoen to (apple)phone like the new (apple)tv or some other name. You can bet that when people walk into an Appls Store or stop at a Cingular kiosk that people will be asking "Hey, do you have any of those iPhones or whatever its called now?"
From what I could tell, the actual iPhone doesn't that Steve Jobs introduced and didn't have the iPhone name engraved on it like on iPods. It appears to just have the Apple symbol. Which indicates to me that Apple knew they weren't confident it would ultimately be dubbed the iPhone.

[MicroFreak]

The funny thingis...

CISCO lost the trade-mark and it was granted to a Florida based
company, perhaps that is the reason that Apple had to halt
negotiations with them.

But I better wait befor I start to take sides on this one.

HE HE HE! Life is Funny!