Apple going after A.pl

[domainhacks-931385]

Sounds like they are salty that they lost out on their domain hack...


'Apple, fresh from a patent victory against South Korean rival Samsung, has turned its sights on a smaller target - Polish online grocery website A.pl.

Apple brand is widely recognized and the company says that A.pl, by using the name that sounds similar, is using Apple's reputation," patent office spokesman Adam Taukert said.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/apl-apple-grocery-store_n_1873264.html

 

[Dave]

As others have said this is very sad from Apple.

 

[copper]

Macintosh maker gone mad!

 

[networkguy]

The letter 'A' is a generic letter representing their grocery chains. Their logos even the ones in archive.org don't appear confusing to apples either, the 'a' looks more like Alexa's logo than apple's.

The 'pl' is incidental to the domain and is something that simply can not be altered, after all it's an ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code which is the world standard string structure for the ccTLD protocol.

I'm sure this point will be raised if arbitration arises for the domain name 'A' a single letter ccTLD of Poland.

Maybe I'm wrong here but to my knowledge there hasn't been a UDRP case won by the complainant where the domain's letters right of the dot where brought into question.

 

[DU]

Actually selling groceries does infringe on Apple, since they sell lemons to users which are packaged as computing devices.

:loveyou:

---------- Post added at 11:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------

Maybe I'm wrong here but to my knowledge there hasn't been a UDRP case won by the complainant where the domain's letters right of the dot where brought into question.

There have been many cases where the right of the dot was considered - usually it is related to .me/.tv etc where the domain registry purposefully markets a "meaning" behind the TLD.

For a company based in PL using a .PL this may be a push to argue as this would have been their primary choice and de facto country default.

Their logo was suspect though :lol:

 

[enterscope]

This is just getting out of hand. It's one thing if they were a tech company and could confuse customers into thinking they were Apple, but this is ridiculous.

 

[networkguy]

For a company based in PL using a .PL this may be a push to argue as this would have been their primary choice and de facto country default.

Exactly! :bingo: :bingo:

Their logo was suspect though :lol:

:P

 

[Kate]

By the way Apple actually owns apple.pl.

 

[domainhacks-931385]

By the way Apple actually owns apple.pl.

Right, but I get the feeling that they are pissed off that they don't own their domain hack and will sue a legitimate grocer to try to get it.

What if there was a legitimate company in greenland called goo? Google would probably try their best to pry goo.gl

These 2 companies are absolutely anal about anything that has any shred of resemblance to their their name.

 

[liquidcherry]

I still use a tin can and string. It's surprisingly effective. I don't get bothered at all.

Ahhh,you are the dude in those progresso soup commercials,gotcha!

cheers

liquid

---------- Post added at 10:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:56 PM ----------

Right, but I get the feeling that they are pissed off that they don't own their domain hack and will sue a legitimate grocer to try to get it.

What if there was a legitimate company in greenland called goo? Google would probably try their best to pry goo.gl

These 2 companies are absolutely anal about anything that has any shred of resemblance to their their name.

hmmm,shouldn't this be moved to the adult section now??lol,j/k

cheers

liquid

 

[johname]

The leaf on the logo looks like they traced it off the apple inc logo and rotated it a bit lol. Trouble.

In a fair world they should be told there logo looks too much like apple inc and they need to change it, and it ends there.

They did try to go circle intead of apple shape to avoid this problem but that darn leaf lol

Some of this is vector art, its just too tempting to Bezier curve the leaf and add gradients.

 

[Kate]

Right, but I get the feeling that they are pissed off that they don't own their domain hack and will sue a legitimate grocer to try to get it.

So you're saying they are desperately missing out on a URL shortener ? And they waited 13 years ?

Domainers have become somewhat paranoid, it seems that every domain-related claim by a large (or smaller) corporation must automatically be labeled as reverse domain name hijacking/bullying, as if the case had no merits whatsoever.
Maybe this case is borderline or overreaching, I'm saying in general.

What if there was a legitimate company in greenland called goo? Google would probably try their best to pry goo.gl

Of course it would be very smart for a Greenland-based company to use goo.gl, regardless of purpose.
Comparing apples and oranges.

Reminds me of the domainer who set up a domain reseller on kenom.com, or the swapnames.com saga. And predictably domainers will go whining and crying the world is so unfair

 

[surprise]

So you're saying they are desperately missing out on a URL shortener ? And they waited 13 years ?

yes :] because they were near bankruptcy back then ... and it was already taken i guess , but now these days we have seen a trend for shorter domain names and domain hacks ..

 

[Kate]

Where did you read that Apple is laying claims over the domain, this is not the core of the issue.

But I found this:

A.PL Internet SA is the company's official name, and it's an online deli site that advertises delivery straight to its customers' doors. It does happen to be named A.pl--".pl" is the country domain for Poland. Apple is taking issue with its "trademark," however, and has demanded that the Polish Patent Office cancel its trademark. And this is not a new blip on Apple's radar--Apple also objected to the registration of the trademark in the first place.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2622...pany_sues_online_polish_grocer_over_logo.html

 

[surprise]

The store is called a.pl ...

"According to the Polish Patent office Apple has asked for the name and logo of the retailer to be cancelled."

Dropping the domain name is implied don't you think ..

 

[johname]

They probably bought the logo off a $xx logo contest site from a goat herder that moonlights as a logo designer with an old computer and pirated software. Ending up with a too much apple inc inspired logo.

This is why companys use known designers and pay the bigger bucks.

 

[surprise]

They probably bought the logo off a $xx logo contest site from a goat herder that moonlights as a logo designer with an old computer and pirated software. Ending up with a too much apple inc inspired logo.

This is why companys use known designers and pay the bigger bucks.

So now we cant use fruits and apples as a logo for a grocery store lol , the logo is totally different , that being said , if the same logo and domain name and store name were used for a smartphone company then yes Apple claims may have merits ...

 

[johname]

the logo is totally different

Sorry but we are talking about the world's number one company (which has a reason people would want to copy their logo) The leaf being without a stem, detached and its shape and direction is a massive part of the logo trademark. Combine that with other things and we get where we are today.

 

[Kate]

Dropping the domain name is implied don't you think ..

Indirectly, that is possible. But my point is that the case is not just about the domain.

Imagine Apple wins and their TM is canceled. Then A.pl would have to rebrand itself, change their trade name and domain.
That doesn't mean they don't get to keep the domain.

Sometimes companies sell off domains that are no longer of use to them, for example old registrations prior to mergers.
Then you could imagine A.pl is sold to another party, and used for something else.

I don't think it would automatically be awarded to Apple just because they win the case. It does not appear that Apple is asking for the domain anyway so let's no make assumptions.

They probably bought the logo off a $xx logo contest site from a goat herder that moonlights as a logo designer with an old computer and pirated software. Ending up with a too much apple inc inspired logo.

Maybe it's not intentional but if Apple objected to their TM in the first place they knew they had to be careful and watch every step they make. It could be that they gave Apple the ammo to sue them.

 

[DU]

Sorry but we are talking about the world's number one company (which has a reason people would want to copy their logo) The leaf being without a stem, detached and its shape and direction is a massive part of the logo trademark. Combine that with other things and we get where we are today.

Probably not looking at old logo.... the new one is totally different.

Here's the comparison

http://androidspin.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Apple-fresh.jpg

Different but same emboss, same leaf. Similar enough...

but found this while looking.

http://nerdreactor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ASG.jpg

 

[surprise]

Sorry but we are talking about the world's number one company (which has a reason people would want to copy their logo) The leaf being without a stem, detached and its shape and direction is a massive part of the logo trademark. Combine that with other things and we get where we are today.

I thought the logo is old at a time apple wasn't number one company , and this is ridiculous we cant use a detached leaf in our logos now ? the logo is different in many aspects , color , look , appearance , and it is aimed as in for fruits for a grocery store which i think is totally legit , as you said earlier maybe the designer unconscionably copied some of apple's logo ( the leaf ! ) , i think it was an honest mistake if there is one , IMO the grocery store should sue apple's a** off for the bad publicity ...