- Related Stories
-
Apple threat prompted name change, coders say
November 15, 2005 -
Jukebox ware gives Pocket PC an iPod look
March 9, 2004 -
Beatles group sues Apple over trademark
September 12, 2003
The Cupertino, Calif.-based company has sent cease-and-desist letters to at least two companies that include the word "pod" in their product titles, in connection with its iPod digital-music players.
Mach5products.com, which sells a device for collecting data from vending machines called Profit Pod, received one of the letters. TightPod, which manufactures laptop-protecting covers, got another.
Apple asked both companies to rename their products, arguing that they infringe on its iPod trademark.
Sarah Wright, intellectual-property solicitor at law firm Olswang, said Apple's letters are not unusual. The Mac maker may not expect or intend to take the matter all the way to court, she said.
"It's common practice for big-brand owners to send letters like this...If they don't police their brand properly and ensure that trademarks that are too similar to their brands don't get on the register, it makes it more difficult to enforce their rights against third parties," she said.
A blog on sister site ZDNet News posted what purports to be a letter from Apple's lawyers to Carolee and Dave Ellison, who run Mach5products. The letter reads: "We believe there is confusing similarity between Apple's iPod mark and the Profit Pod mark. Both devices receive and transmit data, and are used with computers, both are used in connection with video games, and both have other similar components. Moreover, it has not gone unnoticed that, like Apple's iPod device, the Profit Pod product is a small, flat, round-cornered rectangular device with a display screen."
Mach5products also applied for a patent on the name of its product in 2004, an action Apple requested the company rescind in its letter.
Wright said the trademark filing may have been the catalyst for Apple's move. "Often, people think they must get a trademark," she said. "Sometimes they're better off not getting one and acquiring rights through trading...and avoid getting into these kind of scrapes."
TightPod has also been instructed to abandon a trademark application it had filed to cover the TightPod in relation to MP3 players, with Apple once again citing possible confusion with its iPod.
Terry Wilson, who makes and sells TightPods, has responded by offering to remove the reference to MP3 players or for Apple to pay half the cost of rebranding efforts. Wilson is also considering going to court over the matter.
Apple did not respond to requests for comment.
This is not the first time the company has used legal means to protect its iPod trademark. Apple sued a German company over its Spodradio product earlier this year.
Jo Best of Silicon.com reported from London.
See more CNET content tagged:
trademark, Apple Computer, Mac maker, letter, Apple iPod




thepod.ca also apparently trademarked "pod".
thier product materials??
Audacious.
?90s. A word?s presence in the dictionary doesn?t mean it can?t be
trademarked.
http://www.techknowcafe.com/content/view/627/43/
so get over it.
I remember when Apple tried to copyright 'Apple' and sued apple growers in Washington state. That didn't get far either.
It's much easier to welcome and help companies out with the use of the name than to fight it. It's that sort of attitude that will drive people to the Zume or other devices instead.
What a load of Horse Hockey!
I'm glad I bought my wife teh Sansa media player. She loves it and Apple has nothing to do with it.
it, or "X-Boxed it". But they are using "Pod" for ALL MANNER of
news and audio downloading.
"PodCasting" is ubiquitous, not "MP3-ing".
"pod" has become a term for mobil and media technology and a
"lifestyle" designation due to it's pop culture popularity.
BRANDING is worth something.
Sad but true. Otherwise there is no point in the TM.
Apple legal team - GO!
Since they are both music related Line 6 should sue Apple over it just on principle.
I guess Line 6 has more class than they do.
For example: John Doe might have taken a TM out on "Mickey Mouse" in 1910, but if he hasn't done anything to protect his TM while some 50+ years later Disney has become the "Mickey Mouse" we all know about, then John Doe's TM is of very little value.
In the end few legal matters have to do with class, and I suspect that Steve Jobs isn't personally behind any specific attempts to protect their marketspace other than generally approving the legal methods needed to do so.
HAL...HAL open the POD bay doors.
and now read this:
"We believe there is confusing similarity between Apple's iPod mark and the Profit Pod mark. Both devices receive and transmit data, and are used with computers, both are used in connection with video games, and both have other similar components. Moreover, it has not gone unnoticed that, like Apple's iPod device, the Profit Pod product is a small, flat, round-cornered rectangular device with a display screen."
Do you think this device is profiting from iPod's populatiry? Do you think this device will eat away iPod's market share? This is so rediculus. Apple can try all it wants.. it's difficult to win this case. I think they are wasting their time and money here
Sheesh Apple!
Was I looking at an Apple product or some other kind of gizmo? I really couldn't be sure if this was an iPod knock off or what! I wish I could have looked for where the headphones plugged in and tried out the iTunes integration!
I really HOPE AND PRAY that MS really does make a good player (lol Ive started seeing designs for other companies new players too and am excited!) as well as offering to buy my music out from the ProfitPod.. ahem.. I mean my iPOd (see I still confused those two...NOT!) I am so tired of authorized computers being able to be used, not being able to put MY MUSIC I PAID FOR from iTunes onto other devices WIHTOUT LOOSING QUALITY due to the decompression and then recompression...
Apple's days are limited (Once the iPOd sales begin to falter what'll hold up the rest of the company then?) and I think they are beginning to see reality. So what do they do the only thing they can... sue people to try to build up a defense that they have ALWAYS been protective of their market and devices so as competitors begin to take their market share they can have a 'history' defense.
This has more to do with legal issues than with Apple in particular.
If you take a closer look at it, it is all about lawyers making
business for themselves. If you want a trademark you have to hire
lawyers to get one and more lawyers to keep one.
I blame the lawyers!! Nine times out of ten it's their fault anyway.
How low can one go?
Isn't this more blatant a copyright infringement than using the term "pod"?
care anyway?
But I agree, the word 'Windows' should not be patented. For same reason, they call it 'Blu-Ray' and not 'Blue-Ray'
- My Trademark is...
- by idsantos August 16, 2006 12:57 AM PDT
- My Trademark is I or i, so maybe 'I' should send a letter to Apple, requsting that they change the Ipod name to something else.
- Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (57 Comments)