Cranky Apple lawyers go after NYC green logo

I say more power to New York. The New York logo IS an extremely valuable trademark right now. It would be incredibly dumb of New York not to protect it. Anyone who has a problem with that can go fly a kite. Apple does not need the approval of the Peanut user to take care of business.

Great statement, alansky, isn't it?

I say more power to Apple. The Apple logo IS an extremely valuable trademark right now. It would be incredibly dumb of Apple not to protect it. Anyone who has a problem with that can go fly a kite. Apple does not need the approval of the Peanut Gallery to take care of business.

There is no trademark police, just as there is no copyright police. You have to defend your trademark (or copyright) yourself or you lose it.

I don't think Apple cares whether they win or lose the case. If Apple loses the case, they have a court ruling that New York did not infringe on their trademark, and the existence of the law suit proves that they actively their trademark. Losing the case is just as much a victory as winning the case, because in the future, no one will be able to claim that Apple acquiesced to the dilution of their trademark.

I'm sure Apple doesn't enjoy spending the money and that its legal team has a "here we go again" attitude, but it's necessary.

Is this Digg?

First, BobbyW runs his mouth on stare decisis and demonstrates ignorance of US law, while managing to offer some irrelevant marketing advice for a legal question.

Michael, next time you do a legal comment, you should spend 5 minutes browsing Wikipedia, and you won't get called out so harshly. (In this case, you would have gone to Trademark > Dilution.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Dilution

Apple is nearly obligated to speak up when their attention is drawn to something like this. The lesson here is to not name your fledgling company after a common fruit.

It makes plenty of sense for Apple to be against this. It's easy for a company or group to gain stickiness using an already extremely sticky symbol. (sorry to use marketing phrases, but they work)

I thought they lost last time they tried to take another apple.

MyAppleStores.com

Hmmm lets see

New york originally obtained the BIG APPLE nickname back in 1921.

Apple was not established till 1976 I believe.

How can you honestly mistake NY apple green logo with apples monotone apple?

Diffrent colors. The general public will distinguish both logos just by simply seeing the color. Plus they are totally diffrent. I understand if it was a solid apple and bitten. but the ny logo is a N and Y. totally diffrent in aspect and color.

Apple is way over their heads with this one.

i wonder if soon they will sue the apple itself for copyright infrigement? or maybe they will go after the guy that rendered this picture.

http://matrimonyxpress.com/images/Dec06/apple_bitten.jpg

Since you know people will get confused by looking at it.

I can see why Apple would want to protect it's logo, but at the same time, I'd think it be a good subliminal message that would help counteract Greenpeace. Apple = Environmentally Green

In addition to what Hawkman said, trademark policing is not just /pour encourager les autres/. Unlike copyright or patent, trademark law requires you to police your mark -- if you don't police your mark, you run the risk of losing it.

That said, it's a freakin' apple, used by a city in a recycling program -- I'm having a hard time seeing where there's any likelihood of confusion between the two products / entities among the target consumers. Somebody in Apple's legal department has gone a bit off the rails, IMO.

Please, please do your research before writing ignorant articles like this one. This is not a lawsuit and not a real fight. This is one company defending its logo. Your sister blog Engadget posted a piece explaining it all a couple of days ago. You would think that the author might have read it first before posting about an old story.

Engadget article: http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/03/apple-vs-nyc-whats-really-going-on/