iPhone name owned by Apple, regardless of the press

John A 0 262 Views

You've likely heard of the whole commotion that was caused over Apple's usage of the iPhone name, which was a trademark of Cisco. Well, the funny thing is that the whole deal is over, and Cisco has really lost. Well, not officially, as a statement from the 2 companies was released last Wednesday:

They settled to share the name, and "explore opportunities for interoperability in the areas of security, and consumer and enterprise communications."

I just about killed myself laughing when I heard this statement. Don't you see how ironic it is? Apple is the bigger and more dominant company. When named the product, no doubt they were aware of the already-present-but-obscure iPhone that had been created by Cisco. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but it sort of looked like Cisco had the upperhand of the situation. They had a phone that was called the iPhone, and the dissimilarities to that and Apple's iPhone are not many.

I kind of suspect that a sum of money was passed behind the public's backs. The name "iPhone" will mean Apple to everyone except computer nerds. It's unlikely that the name has any value for Cisco now. I can only hope that money was actually used to settle the agreement, because anything that Cisco's iPhone was worth is worth nothing now. Just look at Wikipedia's article on the iPhone, there is nothing save one small paragraph devoted to the lawsuit, let alone specifications of the Cisco product.

Is that so surprising? We knew that Apple wouldn't give up the iPhone trademark, especially because of the commotion it sparked after the keynote. Apple can basically use its huge weight to manuevre itself through legality issues whether it be the name "Apple", or simply DRM ties between iPod and iTunes.

At this point, it would have been simply better for Cisco to rename their product and sell the name to Apple.

Dani AI

Generated

Short recap and context: Apple unveiled the iPhone at Macworld on January 9, 2007; Cisco filed suit the next day asserting rights it had acquired when it bought Infogear; the companies later paused litigation to talk and on February 21, 2007 announced a settlement that lets both use the “iPhone” name worldwide and to explore interoperability, while leaving other terms confidential. (apple.com)

Why Cisco could enforce the name: Cisco’s claim traces to the Infogear/iPhone filings (Infogear’s application dates back to 1996 and Cisco acquired the asset in 2000), and trademark law is territorial — rights come from use and registration in specific jurisdictions, and registration brings legal advantages. That explains why a company that reasserts an older mark can block or negotiate with a later entrant in the same space. (newsroom.cisco.com)

About the “money behind the scenes” theory and design-power concerns: public statements from Apple and Cisco explicitly note that “other terms of the agreement are confidential,” so the press releases do not disclose payments or specific concessions; confidentiality in settlements is common because it closes disputes quickly and avoids costly litigation. That outcome matches what described (preserving IP by enforcement). The frustration in and ’s posts about perceived corporate leverage is understandable, but the public record shows a negotiated coexistence rather than a court decision for either side. (apple.com)

Practical takeaway (for anyone naming products): do trademark clearance searches early, register in markets you care about, document commercial use, and consult counsel before a launch. Public disputes like this are a reminder that a good clearance strategy beats a reactive legal fight. (uspto.gov)

Member Avatar for jwenting
jwenting 1,905 duckman

they probably got more money this way than had they done as youy suggested...

And at least this way they have made certain they have a right to their IP (all of it), which they'd have lost instantly had they let Apple take the name without a fight.

IMO it's a shame and Apple should have been made to publicly witdraw the name (and maybe even the product), but that's business.

Member Avatar for RwCC
RwCC 56 Junior Poster

This is what, the 2nd lawsuit over a name because of Apple? They seem to be using more 'brute force' than ever.

The rival tactics of Microsoft used to laughed at by Apple, yet now they seem to be embracing these "do what we say, or pay" bad practices.

Apple - you have let me down.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview