
Apple seeks to trademark “startup” in Australia - shandsaker
http://www.startupsmart.com.au/leadership/legal-matters/apple-seeks-to-trademark-startup-in-australia/2013082810576.html
======
jacques_chester
Trademarks are not global variables. They are scoped.

In trademark law these are called "classes".

If I have a trademark for McDonalds that covers navigation equipment, then the
hamburger company can't sue me using _their_ trademark which covers
hamburgers. The coverage is scoped.

Now!

Observe the list of classes -- 37, 38, 41 and 42.

Apple is essentially registering "startup" to cover devices, their
maintenance, development and training.

Not all uses of "startup" ever. Just those uses attached to what Apple
produces.

~~~
grabeh
The owner of a mark with a sufficient reputation can take action against
dissimilar goods and services where they're riding on the goodwill of the mark
of course so TMs are not completely limited to their classes.

Rolex could sue me if used their marks on a good which they weren't registered
in if I was trying to take unfair advantage of their mark, tractors for
example.

Whilst it's highly unlikely in this case that Apple would, I think it's
inappropriate to seek protection of the term in the first place, at least from
a PR perspective and from the risk of trade mark creep.

~~~
wisty
In Australia, McDonalds lost a case when they tried to stop McWilliams selling
a "Big Mac" 2 litre bottle of wine, because no-one would mistake it for a
hamburger.
([http://www.internationallawoffice.com/newsletters/detail.asp...](http://www.internationallawoffice.com/newsletters/detail.aspx?g=d30cba2f-38ce-448b-99f5-e0329cacfb1f))

~~~
grabeh
Thanks for that. Interesting! Looks like in Australia there has to be a
likelihood of confusion even where a mark has reputation.

This is not the case in the EU, where the mere act of taking unfair
advantage/causing detriment is sufficient for a TM owner to take action, even
where there is no likelihood of confusion. Likewise, in the US, a TM owner
would also have an action for TM dilution which does not require confusion.

------
nsmartt
I'm told that no one cares whether Apple is shady because they build quality
products, but I _really_ want to see a shift away from Apple products in
protest of said shadiness.

edit: clarity

~~~
drylight
Please don't say Linux.

~~~
hdra
Say one thing OS X does objectively better than Linux. I honestly can't think
of any.

~~~
dylangs1030
I've run both linux and OS X as my default setups (currently linux), and I
have to say, OS X does a lot of things better. I like linux better overall,
but that's just too strong a statement. Here's a few that OS X does better:

\-- Font anti-aliasing.

\-- Package management - people using linux should be expected to be able to
compile from source, I know, but at least _most_ packages released for Mac OS
X are developed with binaries.

\-- Graphics card drivers, specifically Nvidia (which Mac ships with).

~~~
octotoad
I've been using Linux and BSD for thirteen years and I can't even remember the
last time I had to manually build and install an application from source (not
counting random, early-stage hobby projects from github and things).

Open source Unix systems are the kings of package management. OS X pretty much
does the exact opposite of 'package management', and any third party solution
is based on existing Linux and BSD implementations.

~~~
rmk2
Replying to this because I can't reply to the child comment.

This is something I keep hearing, and I keep linking to the same thing.
"Download and One-Click Install" can easily be done on Linux. In fact, that's
even what it is called: "One Click Install", at least as far as openSUSE is
concerned.

Explanation:
[http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:One_Click_Install](http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:One_Click_Install)

Example:
[http://software.opensuse.org/package/chromium](http://software.opensuse.org/package/chromium)

Bonus: It _still_ adds a repository so you have a working update path that
plays nicely with the _centralised package management_ that lets you manage
_every single package_ centrally, instead of having half a gazillion
individual updaters, bundled libs etc.

------
ohwp
At first I thought it was a joke. Then I read the article...

This is one of the reasons why I never buy something from Apple. I think they
are bad for our creativity.

------
itafroma
I think it's important to stress that trademarks are not copyrights or
patents: assuming Apple's trademark application goes through, the protection
on the mark is good only for the goods and services they specified in the
application (edit: with a caveat mentioned by grabeh elsewhere[1]):

> Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer
> peripherals, mobile phones, and consumer electronic devices, and
> demonstration of products relating thereto

Based on that, this looks to be a new retail service they plan on offering
called "Startup".

Edit:

Also note that in 2011, Apple already applied for the Startup trademark in the
US and China with the same international registration number:
[http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/04/apple-
fi...](http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/04/apple-files-for-
mission-control-and-all-new-startup-trademarks.html)

As far as I can tell from the action on the trademark application[2], it was
granted a preliminary trademark (which is standard practice) and was opened up
to objections: at least one was raised, and the USPTO has now passed it to
Apple to respond. It looks like they have until September 20th to do so[3].

[1]:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6288395](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6288395)

[2]:
[http://www.trademarkia.com/startup-85296886.html](http://www.trademarkia.com/startup-85296886.html)

[3]:
[http://trademarks.justia.com/852/96/startup-85296886.html](http://trademarks.justia.com/852/96/startup-85296886.html)

------
m4x
The article doesn't really comment on why Apple would actually want to
trademark the word 'startup'. As far as I know it isn't used as part of their
marketing anywhere. Can anybody here offer some insight?

~~~
pavlov
The trademark application shown in the article offers a hint. The categories
listed include "retail store services", "maintenance, installation and repair
of computer hardware", "technical support services".

It sounds like Startup will be a service offered in Apple retail stores,
similar to the Genius Bar.

~~~
skeletonjelly
Australia doesn't seem to be the typical testing ground though for Apple. Why
now?

------
pavanred
If only they spent all that time and money they spend on lawyers on R&D and
developing new products instead...

~~~
rimantas
What would happen then? MS spends lots more money on R&D, does it matter?

~~~
awestroke
Apples and oranges

~~~
rimantas
My point was that the amount of money spent on R&D does not matter. Apple came
up with iPhone and iPad anyway. Your point is? That R&D is apples and R&D is
oranges?

------
bananamansion
we'll just start calling it "startdown" we're in australia afterall.

~~~
personlurking
I was thinking "startupside-down".

This news is right up there with the big tech companies trying to grab .book,
.search, etc

------
b1daly
It's hard to believe that Apple could get this through in the US given the
amount of live marks with the word STARTUP. Over 50 results!

I have been working on a trademark application that was rejected preliminary
basis on the grounds of "likelihood of confusion." (My mark is HOTKEY MATRIX
for a hardware controller of audio software, the existing mark is HOT KEYS for
"Computer Software program for playback of digital audio by touching computer
screen.)

I was a little shocked when I delved into the various rulings how byzantine
and nuanced the judgements are. Since the core issue is the potential for
likeliness of confusion on the part of a consumer, each case is supposed to be
judged on its own.

If your into this kind of thing here's the discussion on the US "Trademark
Manual of Examining Procedure."

[http://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/detail/manual/TMEP/Apr2013/d1e2.x...](http://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/detail/manual/TMEP/Apr2013/d1e2.xml#/manual/TMEP/Apr2013/TMEP-1200d1e5036.xml)

I wonder if there is some strategy by which getting registration in other
countries helps with getting US registration.

------
chmike
I thought it was not allowed to trade mark common words like car, plane, etc.
And startup seams a common word, well in our community.

------
Sagat
In other news, Google trademarks the color blue. Smurf village foreclosed.

------
ateeqs
Apple can go suck a lemon.

~~~
levosmetalo
Do we really need that kind of comments here on HN?

~~~
ateeqs
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir5Xl_mLbkM](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir5Xl_mLbkM)

