Apple Computer has been hit with a trademark infringement lawsuit, alleging that its newly released Mac operating system, nicknamed Tiger, encroaches on the name of online computer reseller Tiger Direct.
Tiger Direct, a subsidiary of Systemax, filed the suit Thursday and is seeking a temporary restraining order and injunction when it goes before a U.S. District Court in Florida for a hearing Tuesday.
Apple plans to debut its Tiger OS at 6 p.m. Friday amid much fanfare at its retail stores. The computer maker plans to close its stores at 5 p.m., only to reopen them an hour later for Tiger's launch with a celebration that will continue through midnight.
Tiger Direct, however, will not be celebrating.
In its lawsuit, Tiger Direct alleges Apple's infringement on its trademark has had far-reaching implications.
"Apple Computer's use of the term 'Tiger' has also affected search results in Internet search engines. Before?an Internet search for the term 'tiger' would result in Tiger Direct being the sole provider of computers, computer software and computer related products. Tiger Direct would also almost always appear in the first three responses to such a search," the lawsuit states.
But now, Tiger Direct alleges, Apple's Tiger OS is at the top of the search listing on Yahoo and Microsoft's MSN, as well as inundating search results on Google.
And as other Apple resellers begin to carry the Tiger OS, more competition is expected to follow when it comes to computer-related Tiger searches, Tiger Direct claims.
Tiger Direct is asking the courts to issue preliminary and permanent injunctions against Apple to prevent its future use of the name "Tiger" in its products, as well as seeking damages in excess of $75,000.
Apple declined to comment, citing the pending litigation with Tiger Direct.
I think these rinky dink companies are starting a new trend of Public relations schemes that involves suing big and known companies in order to get free publicity, they are the new "remoras of the industry" parasitic jerks that are out to flood the system for wicked purposes, I hope they and there lawyers are destroeyed in court and made to look like fools in the eyes of the industry.
SysteMax, the owner of TigerDirect has had... practically $2 billion dollars in sales in 2004 (that's BILLION).
By the way Apple's sales for the same period were higher, but only about four times higher coming in at $8.24 billion and that includes subsidiaries like Apple UK and Filemaker.
So I don't know how the first qualifies as Rinky Dink and not the second. 8*Rinky Dink should be at least "Dink" if not "somewhat less Rinky Dink"
i used to shop at tiger direct on occasion but this is a really lame and low blowing publicity stunt to try to ride on the coattails of something bigger. Tiger Direct grow up. Your store is a mess, the staff pretends to know everything under the sun when it comes to computers and technology, and it's just plain chaotic and disorganized. Thanks for giving me a reason not to shop there anymore.
When it comes to Apple vs. PC...but I have to say in complete defense of Apple...this is the stupidest gawddamn thing I've ever heard of. What next? Tiger Direct going after Tyan for make a motherboard called Tiger? What about Tiger Electronics the makers of those cheap 'o handheld games? Or how about Tony the Tiger?
Apple corp's employees need to visit the campus site of Tiger Direct with brass knuckles, numchucks, and pry bars and do some damage. Normally this would be bull **** worthy of just getting pissed over. But considering they pulled this the DAY before the release of Tiger I consider this pummel worthy BS.
I don't know if the case has merit and maybe it doesn't matter, but isn't Tiger just a Code name that Apple is using? I don't know how trademark laws work, but it seams to me that if the name was an "internal" name used to refer to OS X.4 then wouldn't it really not fall under a trademark?
Their brand is Tiger DIRECT first of all. And as far as I know, Tiger Direct makes no software to speak of so how brand confusion figures in is beyond me. This suit is a joke.
I don't recall the Automaker filing suit when Apple released their Jaguar OS back in 2002 or even raised a stink for that matter. Maybe because Jaguar had more class! Maybe they thought it was free extra publicity for them. Maybe they thought it was the sincerest form of flattery.
Maybe Tiger Direct should stop wasting everyone's time!
I wonder what would happen if everyone here got a bulk-mailing app, and bulk emailed 500 messages each in protest to Tiger Direct, if that would over-load their servers and shut them down for a day?
Hmmmm.
And besides, Tiger Direct, to my knowledge, doesn't even sell the Mac OS or hardware. What the f- are they complaining about?
C'mon it's a lawsuit - a way for people to resolve their issues without resorting to threats and violence. TigerDirect spent money advertising their brand and placing it on search engines.
Anyways, I get about 300 pieces of junk e-mail in my throw-away yahoo account, and it has hardly brought the yahoo service to its knees. So you would need to send about 500,000 messages each not just 500.
Lawyers and CEOs, are slowly but surely taking this country right down the drain. Does any judge need to spend more then 5 seconds on this issue, before he throws it right out of court?
How can someone attempt to grab a "Tiger" by its tail without considering the consequences of dangers of the "Jaws - Teeth.." and the "Paws" of such an ferocious animal being loose - is this a "Bengal" one or what ;-)? I seem to have heard so little of Tiger Direct this has got to be some sort a publicity stunt or something like that. If this is the way things go then Orion "Pictures" should commence a suit against Orion "Computers" for copy right infringement...
Is "Tiger Direct" trademarked? Is "Tiger" trademarked?
I have a funny feeling that both are. If Tiger Direct did not trademark "Tiger", they have no case. However, they may have a case with the search engines.
TigerDirect placed before Apple & Tiger OS .... Actually "5 Tigers" (about saving 5 species of Tigers) beat them both.... TigerDirect was #2 and Apple was #4.
Why didn't they object after the mark was published for opposition.
Apple registered the Tiger trademark (see below), which was published for opposition on August 17, 2004. If they thought the mark infringed, why didn't they challenge it then?
Word Mark TIGER Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 78269988 Filing Date July 2, 2003 Current Filing Basis 1B Original Filing Basis 1B Published for Opposition August 17, 2004 Owner (APPLICANT) Apple Computer, Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014 Attorney of Record John Donald Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
Of course this particular lawsuit is utterly ridiculous, but I remember reading something that said that unless you sue every time there is a *potential* infringement on your copyright, you could lose all rights to it completely. In other words, you can't selectively enforce it.
Maybe that's what Tiger Direct is doing. I don't know.
For sure not in the US. The person suing would first have to consent to the "infringement" and then sue in order for there to be any sort of bar (this is trademark and not copyright by the way).
Maybe something like this happens in Europe...but that's also unlikely.
TigerDirect has NEVER used separate words for their company name until this lawsuit. Now, in the legal filings they never refer to themselves without breaking it into two words.
Just more fuel to the "litigation for self-promotional purposes" fire...
"TigerDirect" (or "Tiger Direct") is actually registered. The same with Apple. What they registered, I believe, is "Mac OS X Tiger".
I'm not a lawyer, plus I don't live in US, but I sometimes deal with logos and brand names. So I believe it's not a problem to register an ordinary word, like "apple", "tiger" or "window". What's more difficult it's to lay claim to the exclusive use of it. That's why I'm often pushed not to use plain words but invent something new instead. Or at least to add something to the word. Like in "Apple Computer" or "MS Windows".
I believe you can register a company name with just one letter, say "T". But it doesn't mean that since then every brand name with "T" (e.g. "Tiger"), is banned.
TRO DENIED because they didn't follow the basic rules
Macmerc has some of the docs on their site.
Under Rule 65(b) of the Fed. Rules of Civil Procedure, before a TRO can be issued, the plaintiff must certify in writing what efforts were taken to give notice to the other party or reasons notice is not required.
TigerDirect did not do this, so their TRO was denied. This is, literally, 1st year law school stuff.
So, either: 1. their lawyers are so bad they flubbed this totally basic requirement for any TRO, or
2. they knew full well what they were doing and the whole motion for a TRO was bogus
Rule 65(b) motions are always made but almost never granted.
Other than the notice requirements you mention, the moving party (in this case Tiger Direct) has to show things that are very difficult to show such as immediate injury.
So their lawyers aren't as bad as you think they are.
About Tiger Direct v. Apple. I've been thinking about how Tiger Direct could sue Apple over its release of the Tiger Operating System for Mac computers. Then, after spinning in my office chair, it dawned on me. When one of the grandmothers of one founders of Tiger Direct was in her mid-twenties, she went to India and traded with a British governor the name "Tiger" for two cases of gin. This may seem unlikely, but it is probably Tiger Direct's best chance of winning this trademark infringement case.
That is because there is between slim and no chance that people are going to confuse the company Tiger Direct and Apple's new operating system, Tiger OS. A trademark is any word, name, symbol, etc. or any combination used in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from others and to show the source of goods. In short, trademark is a brand name.
I have purchased computer-related products, printers, software, etc., from Tiger Direct. It seems to be a good company. Good price, reliable, fast shipping. But, the test under trademark law is the "likelihood of confusion." There is no way that Tiger Direct can assert without giggling or on-the-floor laughing that an average buyer is going to confuse Tiger Direct, an online computer parts store with Apple's new version of its Mac operating system. There is no similarity in the overall impression created by the two marks except they both use the word "Tiger." And, I am sure that Apple and its lawyers did not intend to illegitimately trade on the reputation of Tiger Direct and intend to siphon off business from Tiger Direct, which sells Apple products, by the way.
But, business is business. Maybe Tiger Direct wants the spotlight on them at Apple's expense. What is most telling is that Tiger Direct complains that it is no longer at the top of the "hits" when Tiger is entered into Google, Yahoo or other search engines. I was trying to think how Tiger Direct could complain and I took a couple of spins in my office chair and remembered about a guy I was introduced to a few years ago who was real talented at singing songs or tunes without opening his lips or forming words. Everybody called him "Hummer" and he really liked it. But, then the US military started ordering vehicles also called Hummer and pretty soon he wasn't third or fourth on Yahoo or Google, he wasn't even there at all. But & our Hummer didn't sue &
If the lawsuit has any merit they'll settle. If it doesn't it will be dismissed in a few months. End of story. Should Apple be forced to change the name of the OS, which is extremely unlikely, they can just pick any other big cat, but I'll bet they will do a trademark search next time.
And, as noted, their own name was one word 'TigerDirect', which they DID trademark. And it's one word because any half-way competent trademarl attorney would have made it clear to them that 'Tiger' alone is not a trademarkable item
On the same basis, MS's trademark on 'Windows' is totally fraudulent. 'Microsft's Windows' is a legitimate trademark, but 'Windows' alone is a totally generic term. Of couse, Ol' Bill's legal staff will raise all sorts of futile smoke on this one, and eventually, MS dollars tend to 'win' the argument. But, 'Lindows' remains a perfectly good product name.
If what you said is true, no trademark could ever include a non-made up word. That would make "Apple" generic as well since it's just a "generic" word.
Now a trademark can become "generic" which is something you must have heard of. For example, at one time "elevator" was a trademark belonging to Otis. However, Otis used it to describe their people mover product in a way that caused it to become a generic name for the product.
So there's no reason why someone can't get a trademark on the word "tiger." It depends on the context. Actually the following "tiger" words are trademarked: tiger (lighting products) black tiger (comic books) eye of tiger (paint brushes) red tiger (flowering plants) and a few thousand more.
And don't worry - Windows is a valid trademark. Just ask the people who made an overpriced product called Lindows, or whatever became of it. What do you think their first defense was, of course that "Windows" is not a valid trademark, and yet they lost. Let me guess, that means that the courts are all in the grasp of Bill...or maybe it's a valid trademark.
How in the world does Tiger Direct ever expects to win this ridiculous lawsuit is beyond my wildest imagination. How does Tiger OSx infringe on Tiger Direct ? Tiger Direct has never developed nor sold a computer software program much less an Operating System. If it had or did, it might have some legal grounds to infringement. If I call my next litter of kittens, Tiger and market them would I be infringing on Tiger Direct ? I'd say Tiger Direct is a pathetic company reaching desperately for straws and hope Apple counter sues for all costs this wrongful lawsuit entitles them to. Tiger is also the brand name of a beer, established and produced long before Tiger Direct or the computing business was even thought of. Does this mean Tiger Beer has the right to sue Tiger Direct for infringement ? How low does Tiger Direct go to get $ 75,000 ?
Chamtech's spray-on antenna uses a nano material to provide a low-power boost to antenna range. The wireless-in-a-can product may some day bring an end to unsightly cell towers.
Whether Apple will release a new iPad next month doesn't seem to be the question as much as what day it will happen. A new rumor has it down to the day.
Tommy Jordan, the man who shot his daughter's laptop for YouTube, gets a visit from police and child protection services. Oh, and Good Morning America.
EnerG2 opens a plant to make an engineered carbon that will improve performance of energy storage devices and make storage for start-stop hybrid cars less expensive.
As UC Berkeley students, the co-founders of "Back to the Roots" discovered they could grow mushrooms using recycled coffee grounds. Now their mushroom kit sells at grocery stores across the country.
wait so long to file anyhow?
Public relations schemes that involves suing big and known
companies in order to get free publicity, they are the new
"remoras of the industry" parasitic jerks that are out to flood the
system for wicked purposes, I hope they and there lawyers are
destroeyed in court and made to look like fools in the eyes of
the industry.
practically $2 billion dollars in sales in 2004 (that's BILLION).
By the way Apple's sales for the same period were higher, but only about four times higher coming in at $8.24 billion and that includes subsidiaries like Apple UK and Filemaker.
So I don't know how the first qualifies as Rinky Dink and not the second. 8*Rinky Dink should be at least "Dink" if not "somewhat less Rinky Dink"
Tiger Direct grow up. Your store is a mess, the staff pretends to know everything under the sun when it comes to computers and technology, and it's just plain chaotic and disorganized. Thanks for giving me a reason not to shop there anymore.
Apple corp's employees need to visit the campus site of Tiger Direct with brass knuckles, numchucks, and pry bars and do some damage. Normally this would be bull **** worthy of just getting pissed over. But considering they pulled this the DAY before the release of Tiger I consider this pummel worthy BS.
will find a mouse pad, two cheap PC's, and a Tiger Woods golf
game. That's it.
Maybe Tiger Direct should stop wasting everyone's time!
It's the same reason why Apple didn't sue a business like "Apple Vacations"
Hmmmm.
And besides, Tiger Direct, to my knowledge, doesn't even sell the Mac OS or hardware. What the f- are they complaining about?
Wake up...time to die!
Anyways, I get about 300 pieces of junk e-mail in my throw-away yahoo account, and it has hardly brought the yahoo service to its knees. So you would need to send about 500,000 messages each not just 500.
I have a funny feeling that both are. If Tiger Direct did not
trademark "Tiger", they have no case. However, they may have a
case with the search engines.
The case won't stand.
Tigers" (about saving 5 species of Tigers) beat them both....
TigerDirect was #2 and Apple was #4.
Funny...
Word Mark TIGER
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 78269988
Filing Date July 2, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition August 17, 2004
Owner (APPLICANT) Apple Computer, Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014
Attorney of Record John Donald
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
I went to the PTO website and searched for "tiger computer" and guess what came up?? Tiger Direct has TigerPC registered.
It's like me using Apple for a video card (that's a part of a computer) and then claiming it's just a regular object.
Sorry there's no excuse for this mistake on Apple's part.
Maybe that's what Tiger Direct is doing. I don't know.
Maybe something like this happens in Europe...but that's also unlikely.
Just more fuel to the "litigation for self-promotional purposes" fire...
with Apple. What they registered, I believe, is "Mac OS X Tiger".
I'm not a lawyer, plus I don't live in US, but I sometimes deal
with logos and brand names. So I believe it's not a problem to
register an ordinary word, like "apple", "tiger" or "window".
What's more difficult it's to lay claim to the exclusive use of it.
That's why I'm often pushed not to use plain words but invent
something new instead. Or at least to add something to the
word. Like in "Apple Computer" or "MS Windows".
I believe you can register a company name with just one letter,
say "T". But it doesn't mean that since then every brand name
with "T" (e.g. "Tiger"), is banned.
Under Rule 65(b) of the Fed. Rules of Civil Procedure, before a
TRO can be issued, the plaintiff must certify in writing what
efforts were taken to give notice to the other party or reasons
notice is not required.
TigerDirect did not do this, so their TRO was denied. This is,
literally, 1st year law school stuff.
So, either:
1. their lawyers are so bad they flubbed this totally basic
requirement for any TRO, or
2. they knew full well what they were doing and the whole
motion for a TRO was bogus
Other than the notice requirements you mention, the moving party (in this case Tiger Direct) has to show things that are very difficult to show such as immediate injury.
So their lawyers aren't as bad as you think they are.
That is because there is between slim and no chance that people are going to confuse the company Tiger Direct and Apple's new operating system, Tiger OS. A trademark is any word, name, symbol, etc. or any combination used in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from others and to show the source of goods. In short, trademark is a brand name.
I have purchased computer-related products, printers, software, etc., from Tiger Direct. It seems to be a good company. Good price, reliable, fast shipping. But, the test under trademark law is the "likelihood of confusion." There is no way that Tiger Direct can assert without giggling or on-the-floor laughing that an average buyer is going to confuse Tiger Direct, an online computer parts store with Apple's new version of its Mac operating system. There is no similarity in the overall impression created by the two marks except they both use the word "Tiger." And, I am sure that Apple and its lawyers did not intend to illegitimately trade on the reputation of Tiger Direct and intend to siphon off business from Tiger Direct, which sells Apple products, by the way.
But, business is business. Maybe Tiger Direct wants the spotlight on them at Apple's expense. What is most telling is that Tiger Direct complains that it is no longer at the top of the "hits" when Tiger is entered into Google, Yahoo or other search engines. I was trying to think how Tiger Direct could complain and I took a couple of spins in my office chair and remembered about a guy I was introduced to a few years ago who was real talented at singing songs or tunes without opening his lips or forming words. Everybody called him "Hummer" and he really liked it. But, then the US military started ordering vehicles also called Hummer and pretty soon he wasn't third or fourth on Yahoo or Google, he wasn't even there at all. But & our Hummer didn't sue &
Evan Shirley
Honolulu, Hawai'i
they DID trademark. And it's one word because any half-way
competent trademarl attorney would have made it clear to them
that 'Tiger' alone is not a trademarkable item
On the same basis, MS's trademark on 'Windows' is totally
fraudulent. 'Microsft's Windows' is a legitimate trademark, but
'Windows' alone is a totally generic term. Of couse, Ol' Bill's legal
staff will raise all sorts of futile smoke on this one, and
eventually, MS dollars tend to 'win' the argument. But, 'Lindows'
remains a perfectly good product name.
Now a trademark can become "generic" which is something you must have heard of. For example, at one time "elevator" was a trademark belonging to Otis. However, Otis used it to describe their people mover product in a way that caused it to become a generic name for the product.
So there's no reason why someone can't get a trademark on the word "tiger." It depends on the context. Actually the following "tiger" words are trademarked:
tiger (lighting products)
black tiger (comic books)
eye of tiger (paint brushes)
red tiger (flowering plants)
and a few thousand more.
And don't worry - Windows is a valid trademark. Just ask the people who made an overpriced product called Lindows, or whatever became of it. What do you think their first defense was, of course that "Windows" is not a valid trademark, and yet they lost. Let me guess, that means that the courts are all in the grasp of Bill...or maybe it's a valid trademark.
HAPPY MAY DAY