Cisco has filed an injunction against Apple computer for using it’s iPhone trademark. I had previously read that they were in talks and that an agreement was in the works for the use of this trademark. I don’t see what everyone else sees in Steve Jobs. It’s hard for me to like someone who likes themself more than their mother does. Clearly, Apple realizes that we don’t idolize a company that would sue for trademark infringement on a small family run business trying to put food on the table, and then say something like this. Please somebody tell me that this type of behavior isn’t something to look up to? Is this what America Idolizes?
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris said the company considers the lawsuit "silly" and Cisco’s U.S. trademark registration "tenuous at best." She noted that Apple is the first to use the name for a cell phone. "If Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we’re very confident we’ll prevail," she said.
I am a big fan of Cisco and many of their products. They support open environements and technology more than most technology companies and they made a great offer to Apple to share the trademark. Unfortunately, Apple thinks it’s too good for Cisco.
Fundamentally we wanted an open approach. We hoped our products could interoperate in the future. In our view, the network provides the basis to make this happen—it provides the foundation of innovation that allows converged devices to deliver the services that consumers want. Our goal was to take that to the next level by facilitating collaboration with Apple. And we wanted to make sure to differentiate the brands in a way that could work for both companies and not confuse people, since our products combine both web access and voice telephony. That’s it. Openness and clarity.
At MacWorld, Apple discussed the patents pending on their new phone technology. They clearly seem to value intellectual property. If the tables were turned, do you think Apple would allow someone to blatantly infringe on their rights? How would Apple react if someone launched a product called iPod but claimed it was ok to use the name because it used a different video format? Would that be ok? We know the answer – Apple is a very aggressive enforcer of their trademark rights. And that needs to be a two-way street.
Today’s technology blessed word is marked by the innovations of smart people working together to make a better platform, product and service. Today, even Microsoft designs websites that run in Firefox, and if they don’t people let them know about it.
The only company that is seeminly exempt from making products that are open is Apple. Apple is the first to cry when someone copies something they innovated, and yet 95 percent of the innovation that went into the iPhone was created outside of Cuppertino. Steve jobs would like you to think his company is the reason for these types of phones. The name is a blatent attempt to say, we are above even copyright law. Steve Jobs has been known to treat his employees like dog doo-doo, rip off his partners–and in my opinion–he even talks down to his customers who happily eat it up and beg for more. As a general rule, you shouldn’t like yourself more than your mother does, and you shouldn’t like your product more than your customers do, I think Apple is guilty of both.
GeekSpeaker 