
Last week Apple asked me to remove my app from the App Store. Now I know why. - bcwood
Last week, I received an email asking me to remove one of my applications from the App Store, saying that "they had been notified" that the name of my application was infringing on a registered trademark.<p>The name of my application?<p>Facetime. (http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/facetime.html)<p>Specifically, this is what the email said:<p>"We received notice from the trademark owner of FACETIME who has confirmed their ownership of registrations for FACETIME in the US and other countries.<p>Accordingly, please remove your application from the App Store and change the name of your application."
======
gojomo
Apple bought the trademark from FaceTime Communications, a company in instant-
messaging automation and security. Apparently FaceTime Communications may be
transitioning to a new brand soon:

<http://www.facetime.com/LearnMore.aspx>

------
spicyj
Well, to be fair, you _were_ infringing on their trademark (or whoseever
trademark it was previously).

~~~
petercooper
That depends on what their app did. From what I can make out with Google
cache, it was a timer app.

The two trademarks Facetime Corp held (and which Apple has supposedly bought)
orient around "computer software used for communicating over global computer
networks using voice, text, fax, or e-mail."

A timer app called Facetime doesn't on the face of it appear to violate either
of these other Facetime trademarks but.. trademarks are a wishy-washy world of
legal wrangling, so it seems Apple's prepared to just push their weight around
since they own the store and have the right to do so.

~~~
Luc
Whether they own the store or not has nothing to do with it. It's a
straightforward legal claim. They have sent the same kinds of notices to app
developers for other trademark owners. It's especially straightforward because
they have published their own app with that name, so it's not just a matter of
over-zealous trademark protection.

~~~
dalore
So Apple records should get Apple to cease selling music.

~~~
ahoyhere
All you'd have to do is Google to avoid making a very, very silly comment:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer>

~~~
dalore
Not silly as that is the very case I was alluding to.

~~~
ahoyhere
Given the general level of discourse (and lack of historical knowledge) around
here these days, you'd probably be better served by adding some kind of
sarcasm indicator. :)

------
Wazzup12
User bcwood posted this in a neutral, matter of fact, way. Then I wonder why
almost all the subsequent comments are so argumentative and biased. Chill,
guys. Is being polite and cool not the thing to be on Internet?

~~~
10ren
HN comments are often argumentative. Commonly the top comment on a submission
attacks an incidental error in it, ignoring the point of the submission. This
may be partly due to startups being _scrappy_. Or maybe because it's on the
internet. However on HN, at least it's usually done politely and civilly.

The other kind of useless (noise aot signal) comment is the meta-comment. Like
yours (and now mine).

The recommended solution is to ignore what you don't like. By focusing on the
good, the bad falls away - especially on a time-based "news" site like this
one. Tomorrow, it will be gone. Good advice for startups (ignore your
competition; get on with making something great). Life too.

Think of the interesting comments have left neglected and unloved because of
the time you spent reading these annoying ones.

~~~
grandalf
I have noticed it too. I think it's mostly just old fashioned karma whoring...

~~~
10ren
So I guess the issue isn't that people on HN sometimes make emptily
argumentative comment - but that people on HN vote them up.

~~~
grandalf
I think so.

------
fernando
The bottom line is that you must take care of the IP aspects of your online
business. We tend to forget such things as registering your copyright, your
trademarks and maybe some patent (if you came up with some groundbreaking
stuff, such as the "buy now" button).

I married a lawyer, so she handles this for me. That's a potently dangerous
strategy, so if your risk aversion is higher, you may try reading this book
instead: Legal Guide to Web & Software Development
[http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Guide-Software-Development-CD-
Ro...](http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Guide-Software-Development-CD-
Rom/dp/1413305326/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275980815&sr=1-1)

------
antidaily
Change your apps name. Not that big of a deal.

~~~
icey
(context - [http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/steve-jobs-to-
develop...](http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/steve-jobs-to-developer-
name-change-not-that-big-of-a-deal/) )

------
dpcan
This is a classic "pick your battles" or "know when to fold'em" moments I
think. This is technically "press" for your app, so hopefully some real good
will come out of it when you come back to tell us the new name.

~~~
edster
Better yet, have the new name ready before getting this press! A huge
opportunity has just passed by.

------
mambodog
Just out of interest, how long had your app been in the App Store?

~~~
bcwood
It had been on the App Store for about a year.

------
fernando
And what do we learn from this? Make sure you trademark your application's
name soon. I learned it the hard way too, BTW...

~~~
duck
Yes, but I wonder how many people do this?

------
cstuder
Speaking of trademarks: Isn't 'iOS' owned by Cisco? Their Internet Operating
System is running on their routers...

~~~
cgomez
Yep, and Apple licensed the rights to the name.

[http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/cisco_and_apple_agreeme...](http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios_trademark/)

------
warpwoof
Makes sense. Apple didn't want to give away the name of one of their new
products/features before launch, but needed your app gone before launch also.

------
houseabsolute
I am interested that they didn't just say, "We own the trademark Facetime,
GTFO." Maybe they just have an automated system that does this kind of thing?
I assume you will change the name to something else and everything will be OK,
right?

~~~
bcwood
I would guess they didn't want to reveal anything about their plans before the
announcment yesterday, which is why they were kind of vague about the whole
thing. Yes, I'll just rename the app (not sure to what yet), and resubmit.

~~~
lallysingh
Timeface

------
Tichy
Personally, I don't like the name anyway. I am not a face, and nor are my
friends. That name is just a reminder of the hollowness of online
communication.

What's next, bodytime? Will that be the currency of the future (I got actual
bodytime with x)? Except bodytime is already used for the stupid demand of
employers that their workers are physically present in the office.

~~~
ErrantX
Facetime is a widely adopted contraction of Face to Face time; which is in
itself a widely accepted concept in the digital age (I find it mildly ironic
that it has been adopted for this form of communication as well - because it
defies the original meaning of the word :))

------
ufomuffin
I think you can find a better name that does more justice

~~~
bcwood
Agreed. I was actually never that excited about the name. I worked with a
designer on the app, and the name was her idea.

------
Maskawanian
Eh, not surprised, you expect fair play from Apple?

~~~
stevejohnson
This is in fact fair play. Do you dispute that the trademark was taken and
that the app name did not infringe?

~~~
chc
It appears that the app name __did not __infringe, yes. Apple's trademark is
for communications software and his is for a timer program.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
That's not how trademarks work.

You register in a class, here in the UK FaceTime wasn't registered until this
March. It's registered against the Nice Classificiation
([http://www.wipo.int/classifications/nivilo/nice/index.htm?la...](http://www.wipo.int/classifications/nivilo/nice/index.htm?lang=EN))
meaning that if you want to use the term FaceTime for anything encompassed by
classes 16 or 35 then you need to license the trademark.

Apple are an international company and need to abide by trademark restrictions
in other jurisdictions in which they are operating commercially.

FaceTime appears to have been registered using the Madrid system in more
places than just the US.

So, whilst the US-only classes are quite narrow this is not the end of the
locus of operation and so international trademarks have to be considered.

~~~
_delirium
If it was only registered in March 2010, doesn't that cause a problem for
using the Madrid-system registration to enforce the trademark against products
that were released in 2009, like this one? At least in the U.S., the various
presumptive benefits of having a registered trademark are much weaker if
you're trying to enforce it against a usage that preceded the registration. It
seems they would have to rely on the older FaceTime Communications USPTO marks
in order to establish priority, but those marks are only in the narrower U.S.
classes.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I only did a quick search (UK, US), there could be community (EC) registered
marks that are earlier but these should have shown up (in the UK search).

Trademarks are unregistered IP as well as registered. Registration gains you
more protection and makes suing people easier but it can be done with an
unregistered mark (or that's how things work in the EC).

It doesn't matter when any product was made in as much as the registered mark
is a sign of the origin of goods/services it is not a product mark. If there
is no other IP protection on your product I can rip it off and sell it as long
as I don't use your trademark.

I don't know sufficient to comment on priority of registrations in the US both
in the specifics and in general, sorry.

------
jaekwon
The context is that Apple doesn't have the balls to say things as they are.

~~~
cmelbye
Yeah, those losers. They really should have just said "Hey, we're releasing a
brand new feature called FaceTime and we need you to change your apps name. Oh
yeah, and just don't tell anyone. Thanks!"

~~~
omouse
What does all this secrecy buy them? Nothing.

~~~
c1sc0
A cool brand name they probably thought long and hard about before adopting
it. A brand that will have resonance with the general population at the cost
of alienating some developers. This is what 'crossroads between liberal arts
and technology' is about; changing the pecking order in the technology
business: Apple first, normal people second, developers a distant third.

~~~
shykes
How does the Facetime brand alienate developers exactly?

~~~
jarin
Developers hate frivolous and silly names for protocols and software packages.
Just look at Cocoa, Groovy, Sinatra, PubSubHubbub, and
acts_as_taggable_on_steroids.

~~~
gte910h
I wasn't aware of anyone having emotions about any names since I heard an 18
year raging about how to pronounce "GNU" when I was in college.

