×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple, New York City In Legal Dispute Over Logo

Zonk posted about 6 years ago | from the oh-our-wacky-trademark-system dept.

The Courts 254

Lemmy Caution writes "Apple, Inc. has filed a suit to prevent New York City's non-profit 'GreeNYC' initiative from using a logo that incorporates an apple in its design. Commentators have noted the substantial differences between the two designs, not to mention the irony of this sort of infringement claim. The city of New York has filed to have the claim rejected, and even possibly the cancellation of Apple's logo in light of the long history of the nickname 'The Big Apple' to describe the city."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

254 comments

The What Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975590)

"We believe the 'infinity apple' design and its mission to create environmental awareness are unique and distinctive and do not infringe upon the Apple computer brand," said Kimberly Spell of NYC & Company on Thursday.
The "infinity apple?" What is this, some sort of lame Marvel comics crossover event?

Re:The What Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975864)

It's symbolic for recycling, dork.

I REALLY hope Apple wins... (5, Insightful)

Cedric Tsui (890887) | about 6 years ago | (#22975606)

I REALLY hope Apple wins and NYC's logo is thrown out.
There's no one better suited to start rolling back absurd property rights than a city full of pissed off politicians.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (4, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | about 6 years ago | (#22975624)

actually I hope it goes the over way. Apple needs to be shown that not every apple is their's.

The two logo's don't look anything like each other. NYC's is missing the giant bite for starters.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (5, Informative)

k2enemy (555744) | about 6 years ago | (#22975658)

I think you may have misunderstood the parent. Of course Apple's claim is ridiculous, but with the current state of intellectual property law, Apple has a possibility of winning. This by itself would be BAD, but it may prompt politicians to do something about reforming IP law.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (5, Informative)

omega_dk (1090143) | about 6 years ago | (#22975804)

Well, that might be true... if there were a lawsuit involved at all. [engadget.com]

Hey /.! How about posting about 'filing suit' when it actually happens, and not when someone lacks basic reading comprehension? Not even in TFA does it mention a legal dispute; it says it filed a challenge to NYC's trademark application.

I believe this article needs to be tagged 'adaylateandadollarshort'

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

discontinuity (792010) | about 6 years ago | (#22975854)

but it may prompt politicians to do something about reforming IP law.

Maybe that would happen if Apple had sued a federal agency or something. There's not too much NYC can do about national IP law (directly, at least).

I really like the idea of a counter suit on the basis that Apple stole the apple from NYC first.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | about 6 years ago | (#22975914)

Which should be the case, unquestionably...

However, "this day and age" I could actually see it sticking, and having New York sponsered by Apple...

iLoveNY

It'l start somewhere... then comes MicroSeattle... Texas becomes Tuxas... Florida...Fluoridation... Sponsered by Colgate... Birmingham... BMGham... its "unconquered territory"... someones gonna try it eventually...

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22976468)

Apple has to vigorously defend its trademark or lose it. There is no choice in the arena of trademarks. Basically, a judge needs to conclude the marks won't cause confusion in the marketplace so that someone else cannot come along and claim Apple (or New York) did not defend its marks right. Such a successful claim for could cause huge problems for either of them.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

digitig (1056110) | about 6 years ago | (#22975942)

Apple needs to be shown that not every apple is their's.
Maybe there's really just one apple in this case -- and it has "Kallisti" written on it.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22976046)

I agree. The difference between the two logos are much greater than ... say ... the old Macintosh logo and this orthodontists' [localortho.com.au] rip.

*cues apple lawyers*

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 6 years ago | (#22976146)

The two logo's don't look anything like each other. NYC's is missing the giant bite for starters.

They should redo the logo and take a chunk out of it, and say its in memory of the World Trade Center and its' victims.

I think Apple laid a lemon on this one.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975666)

This is a perfect test for trademark fair use. This is what it was designed for. Nobody owns the image of an apple and it is absurd for Apple Computer to claim that. I'm surprised that Apple Computer is continuing on this course. Their opponent is an environmental organization. This will not look good to their customer base.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

Walzmyn (913748) | about 6 years ago | (#22975680)

Does anybody know why the *GREEN* NYC logo is not... err... green?

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (2, Interesting)

Aglassis (10161) | about 6 years ago | (#22975740)

Does anybody know why the *GREEN* NYC logo is not... err... green?
So it will go with the black background on the web site. Though technically, due to the infinity symbol, it should be blue [google.com].

On the other hand... (1)

weston (16146) | about 6 years ago | (#22975688)

the other extreme outcome (Apple's trademark rights eroded) might also cause some positive reactions and make potential future actors more cautious.

So I think it's likely we'll see an alloyed settlement. That's what's likely to benefit the lawyers, anway (and both parties, I suppose).

Apple may actually have a case (1, Interesting)

Cedric Tsui (890887) | about 6 years ago | (#22975690)

Wow. Apple may actually have a case here. One of the anonymous comments in TFA from a graphics designer is fantastic. I can't link to it, so I'll copy it.

Subject: Apples to Oranges, Image Attached!
Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:16 am

I worked for many years as a graphic designer and found that most artists "borrow" good design. That is what we are taught to do. It's not blatant plagiarism, but used as the root in preliminary design and eventual fruit in this case, of the final design.

After comparing the two side by side, or rather overlayed one atop the other and turned into transparencies, it is clear the original apple logo was used as the basis for the design in question.

If you look closely you can see the greenNYC logo follows the exact curve of the apple and in fact may have been "cookie cut" from an actual Apple Inc. logo using special image editing tools.

You can go through thousands of clip art and dingbats and not come across the same curve. However, I have seen the Apple logo as a symbol in a couple typefaces presumably placed there by a dedicated fan.(???)

It is not uncommon to paste dozens of similar logos and symbols all over the work area to help along the process.

This artist took it a little too far and figured no one would notice. Some of us hear myths about changing a design by a certain percent makes it okay...well not quite.

The designer probably put a stylized letter "S", squashed it, flopped it, and punched it out of the Apple Inc. logo. Then tweaked the ends of the "S" and fused on the stem.

Then they grabbed the Apple Inc. leaf and flopped it and moved it slightly down and to the left.

"Down, and to the left. Down and to the left..."

*image was posted here* [imageshack.us]

I've been guilty of similar blunders, and was surprised when my client caught it...even though it had a different typeface, different colors, different markets AND my own Icon built from scratch!

Too similar he said...no go.

That's when I learned just placing elements the same as another can make you out as a copy cat even though the artwork is your own.

Go easy on the designer...

Probably up way too late, from way too many lattes for way too little money.

I guarantee you Apple Inc. paid more to challenge the design than the actual designer got paid in the first place.

There's just no money in it.

Sad but true.

Many so called design firms hire freelance that are often out of the country like India for mere pennies compared to established firms in the U.S.

You have a better chance of being a movie star than getting rich playing designer! Find a friend in the business and latch on, otherwise you're just another pretty fish.

My 2 cents anyway.

If you can't access the link above just click here or copy and paste the address into your address bar to view the image.

http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=applestoorangesua8.jpg [imageshack.us]

Re:Apple may actually have a case (5, Insightful)

Kalriath (849904) | about 6 years ago | (#22975800)

What the hell is that designer on? The curve of the Apple logo isn't even close to the curve of the NYC apple!

If you were to remove the Apple logo, I wouldn't even see the resemblence (because there isn't one). I hope Apple gets crushed in court.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975944)

Uh, did you look at the image that you actually link to? The right side of the logo is much further out than the Apple logo, even ignoring the bite that would still be there if the explanation were true. The leaf is a completely different shape and relative size, so even the cut and paste claim there doesn't hold water.

The very example that is supposed to prove it shows it isn't true.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (2, Insightful)

Destined Soul (1240672) | about 6 years ago | (#22975948)

Is it just me, or am I the only one who thought the overlayed images would have matched much better in terms of the curvature? After looking closely at the edges and how the edges of each of the apples curve, particularly noticeable near the "bite mark" where Apple's bite curves in "substantially" more than NYC's version.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (1)

Cedric Tsui (890887) | about 6 years ago | (#22976064)

Hmm. Yeah.
It wasn't zoomed in this close when he posted it.
However, you can also see that the left side isn't quite lined up. If you moved the infinity apple a little further to the left, it could fit a little better.

aside from that. If the fella 'punched it to the apple logo' he might not have done so perfectly.

Anyways. You're right. It's not as close as I first thought it was.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (4, Insightful)

Nightspirit (846159) | about 6 years ago | (#22976006)

Those look totally different, it doesn't match the shape on the bottom left, the indentation on the bottom, and most of the right side. The only place it appears to somewhat match are the top left curve, and there are only so many ways you can draw an apple.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22976052)

Sorry, it's just a coincidence that they look similar. Obviously pretty much any designer has seen the Apple logo before and that might provide inspiration but I seriously doubt they just copied the actual logo. It's just a coincidence.

I have done this myself. I have designed something totally on my own without even a reference and it accidentally matched other people's work as much as this NYC/Apple comparison. No joke. It's just part of the artist's eye. A good design is a good design.

Re:Apple may actually have a case (5, Insightful)

inflex (123318) | about 6 years ago | (#22976058)

Only reason they appear 'close' according to that 'designer' is because of the limited resolution and a big slice of wishful thinking. There's a lot of differences in the curve outline between the two;

* the right hand bottom/mid side where the infinity symbol bulges out
* the right hand top side the infinity logo again is on the inside of the apple logo
* the left hand side the curve infinity symbol is on the -inside- of the apple logo
* the bottom bumps of the infinity curve have a lesser curvature

Sorry, but that guys reasoning of similarities is about as useful as saying "If you squint, then this Ford car looks clearly like this Chevy, see, it even has 4 wheels!".

Re:Apple may actually have a case (1)

Ecuador (740021) | about 6 years ago | (#22976352)

Hahaha. That post made me laugh. The "graphic designer" is blind (the curves don't really match) and a complete idiot (to claim that it is easier to make the logo in question by "cookie cutting" Apple's logo).
However, I hope that judges agree with Apple's reasoning, that the logo is comfusingly similar and bad for business. An so, drop Apple's logo since NYC has been called the Big Apple for decades...

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (3, Funny)

tubapro12 (896596) | about 6 years ago | (#22975766)

I call no ability for IP on the apple design, prior art by ID designer.</sarcasm>

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975988)

Does that mean that the Beatles' Apple Corps, Ltd. can sue the computer company?

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | about 6 years ago | (#22976074)

There's no one better suited to start rolling back absurd property rights than a city full of pissed off politicians.

New York city politicians cannot do anything about federal trademark laws. In light of that, who do you think should win?

I hope Apple NYC ups the ante, files their own complaint & get's Apple's trademark rescinded. Might* teach them to not be so trigger happy with the legal threats.

* Let's face it - probably not.

Re:I REALLY hope Apple wins... (1)

realmadpuppy (1135593) | about 6 years ago | (#22976236)

Funny, I hope that NYC crushes that arrogant, SOB of a company. NYC has been The Big Apple way before that prick company from Cupertino was a glimmer in Jobs and Wozniak's eyes. Holy Shit, I'm confused? Am I in NYC or did I just buy a Mac? what a bunch of jerk-offs.

WTF is wrong with slashdot? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975614)

everything is all big now in IE, fix your shit css!

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (1, Informative)

beelsebob (529313) | about 6 years ago | (#22975656)

Or... fix [mozilla.org] your [apple.com] browser [opera.com].

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22976198)

For the record, it looks awful in Konqueror as well.

Since when does the Slashdot-crowd support websites designing for specific browsers instead of writing standard-compliant code that is compatible with any sane browser? That it renders OK in Firefox is a lame excuse; the same excuse is used by people who write crap that only barely renders in Internet Explorer, and then it is rejected fervently (and rightfully so). Can we have a little consistency here?

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (1)

Kalriath (849904) | about 6 years ago | (#22975810)

It's shitty in Firefox as well.

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (1)

Urza9814 (883915) | about 6 years ago | (#22975918)

What version of firefox? Works fine for me in both 2.0.0.13 and 3.0b5

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (2, Informative)

maskedbishounen (772174) | about 6 years ago | (#22976022)

Mainly when the border is showing, the rounded corners aren't where they should be.

Here's a screenshot [imageshack.us] comparing Opera 9.26's correct behavior with Firefox 3b5's.

Re:WTF is wrong with slashdot? (1)

Urza9814 (883915) | about 6 years ago | (#22976078)

Ah. For some reason my firefox 3b5 isn't showing _any_ rounded corners, so of course I didn't notice. lol. But yes, the gray does extend all the way up on mine as well.

apple (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975644)

god should sue them, after all they copied his design.

Apple (1)

El Lobo (994537) | about 6 years ago | (#22975646)

Abble were (kind of) forgiven by the Beatles Apple company. Now they won't forgive anyone else, even the Beatles themselves. They are the only posible Abble. Look ma, shiny!!!!!

Apple's REAL Complaint (2, Funny)

Bieeanda (961632) | about 6 years ago | (#22975668)

The Apple logo encourages people to drop hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars on electronic gadgets they may or may not need (more energy consumption). GreeNYC apple will be used to encourage people to walk, bike and unplug appliances when not in use (less energy consumption).
Green is bad for business.

Rainbow and Silver (4, Funny)

retech (1228598) | about 6 years ago | (#22975672)

Next up: Apple sues every gay pride organization and person wearing a rainbow for their old (shitty) logo infringement.

After that: Apple will sue the Universe for Mercury, Silver, Nickel, Tin, Aluminum and Lead all using the colour silver, an obvious infringement upon their new logo.

I suppose Jobs will start suing anyone who wears a turtleneck while giving Keynote presentations.

Please someone (namely the judges), stop the madness.

I don't see the problem (2, Interesting)

Hempy (170448) | about 6 years ago | (#22975674)

Where's the problem here? It's not like NYC tried to call themselves "i(The Big Apple)" or "The Big iApple". I also wonder about all of those T-Shirts and bumper stickers that read "I NYC". Do you think people will start getting sued for wearing one or will it be the manufacturer for making them? "Next up at 10, supermarkets across the nation selling apples must pay licensing fees to Apple, Inc. for displaying them on their shelves and using them in their weekly advertisements."

In Other News (4, Funny)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 6 years ago | (#22975682)

A twelve-year old boy posted on his blog that he really wants an iPod for his birthday, but is considering holding out for Christmas, hoping that the next iteration of the iPod will be out by then. Apple assumes someone broke an NDA on the release date of the next iPod, and they are suing the poor boy, and everyone he has friended on MySpace. Tom was not available for comment.

Re:In Other News (2, Insightful)

thegrassyknowl (762218) | about 6 years ago | (#22975770)

It all sounds like a case of:

Apple: Hey you fuckpig lawyers, why do we pay you so much

Fuckpigs: Because we sue people and make you money

Apple: So fuck off and sue someone then

Fuckpigs: Who?

Apple: Do we look like we really give a shit?

Fuckpigs: Ok, how about a city that's been calling itself an apple since before computers were invented or a 12 year old?

Apple: Somebody will think of the children, sue the city.

C'mon, Apple! (3, Insightful)

christurkel (520220) | about 6 years ago | (#22975686)

I am die hard Mac fan and the two are even close to the same. Actually, NYC's looks like a heart to me.

Re:C'mon, Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975938)

Perhaps you should consider not staying a fan. They are constantly doing shit like this.

What graphics artists have said... (1, Informative)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 6 years ago | (#22975694)

I've seen this on several blogs by now (Slashdot seems a bit slow today), and mostly the usual comments. Lots of people commenting on Apple Records having an Apple logo (not knowing that Apple Inc. paid probably an eight digit sum for all Apple Corps trademarks). But a few graphics artists compared the shapes of the logos - and they are identical. That New York logo has exactly the very distinctive and recognisable shape of the Apple logo. And it seems that the designers also got a bit of inspiration from Apple's headquarters address and put an infinity symbol into their logo.

There are millions of ways to draw an apple shape. There is no reason to copy the shape of Apple's logo.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (1)

ND4SPDR (841029) | about 6 years ago | (#22975762)

That's dumb. Maybe they look similar because they're both depicting, uh, let's see, the SAME fruit? That argument is asinine, and anyone dumb enough to confuse the two logos probably shouldn't be buying a computer anyway.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (5, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | about 6 years ago | (#22975768)

That's like saying that cars look alike because they have a hood, driver/passenger doors, trunk, and 4 doors. There are only so many ways to draw an apple before it stops looking like an apple. These logos are clearly nothing alike in the ways that matter.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 6 years ago | (#22976186)

These logos are clearly nothing alike in the ways that matter.

What matters to you, me and the rest of Slashdot doesn't matter. What matters is what the legal system thinks ... and that's a lot less predictable, and maybe a lot less rational. Time will tell.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975886)

I'm not sure exactly what qualifications are necessary to say the shape is the same, but I'm pretty sure whoever says they are is missing them. I overlaid the images with photoshop and changed the mode to multiply. With the heights the same the logos don't match at all. Flipped horizontally they still don't. Scaled to 112% horizontally (while keeping vertical the same) does get the sides to line up very well, but the curves at the top and bottom still don't match properly.

Not to mention the bite is missing, the curved bottom of the Apple logo is a pointed bottom on the NYC logo, there is a stem on the NYC logo, and the leaves don't even curve in the same direction (down for Apple, up for the NYC logo).

All in all, the *only* thing these logos have in common is an apple-like shape. And I think that actual apples own the copyright on that.

The differences between the logos: (4, Informative)

argent (18001) | about 6 years ago | (#22975928)

The apple logo is a solid apple with a bite out of its side, in a variety of color schemes (rainbow (original), red (early variant), black (on white paper), white (current logo), and blue (in the OS X title bar)). It has no stem. The leaf extends to the left. The bottom is rounded, and it is noticably "chubbier" than the NYC logo.

The NYC logo is an outline of an apple, with no bite, and with the outline extended into a stylized infinity or possibly a "yin/yang" symbol, in green or white, with a stem and the leaf extending to the left. The bottom is a sharp indent, and the shape is slimmer than the Apple logo.

The "stem" is a distinctive difference, it has never appeared in any Apple logo, and it has appeared in other NYC-related "big apple" artwork (for example the "Big Apple" sculptures that decorated NYC in 2004).

Different colors, different shape, consistent with previous NYC "big Apple" icons and logos. The only difference is that the apple is more rounded and less "pear shaped", which is most likely simply due to the need to accommodate the yin/yang/infinity symbol.

[erratum] (1)

argent (18001) | about 6 years ago | (#22975976)

I wrote: The NYC logo is an outline of an apple, with no bite, and with the outline extended into a stylized infinity or possibly a "yin/yang" symbol, in green or white, with a stem and the leaf extending to the left.

That should read: The NYC logo is an outline of an apple, with no bite, and with the outline extended into a stylized infinity or possibly a "yin/yang" symbol, in green or white, with a stem and the leaf extending to the right .

Plus they're not in the same industry... (1)

Animaether (411575) | about 6 years ago | (#22976286)

One is in computers / software / consumer electronics. The other is... well, it's a city.. and they're using it as a logo for a city and community effort to make NYC greener.

I'm sorry, but no - Apple's trademarked logo does not stand to be diluted from this any more than most of the other apple logos out there.

That said, I'm sure their lawyers feel differently and are erring on the safe side; defending their logo just-in-case... if they don't, they're screwed anyway. If they do.. at the most they're out some cash for the claims/judgment/etc. Just sad that they feel the need to feel differently in the first place.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (1)

stubear (130454) | about 6 years ago | (#22976516)

They must not have been very good graphic designers given their lack of attention to detail. Given your logic, Apple should go after Applebee's as well.

Re:What graphics artists have said... (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 6 years ago | (#22976524)

But a few graphics artists compared the shapes of the logos - and they are identical.

You mean except for the part that they look nothing alike?

Apples and Oranges (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975720)

It's almost the case of comparing Apples and Oranges and saying they are so similar.

Re:Apples and Oranges (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975774)

you fag. sound good. yes. you big fag.

Argumentation (2, Insightful)

DSVaughan (1007255) | about 6 years ago | (#22975722)

Sounds to me like people with way too much money are arguing with other people with way too much money. If there is a definitive difference in logos, then there is no problem (legally).

Hey, Steve Jobs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975742)

...bite my Big Apple!

signed,

NYC

Apple' opening a can of worms... (1)

analog_line (465182) | about 6 years ago | (#22975758)

...and I hope they get the daylights scared out of them by the judge in the case. This lawsuit is ridiculous on its face. I'd be shocked to see this thrown back at them and have their own trademark actually canceled, but if it did happen it would be well deserved.

I'm really surprised at a lot of Apple's moves lately. Pushing new Safari installs as an "update", and this idiotic lawsuit make it sound like there was some turnover in Apple's legal department. They've certainly always been bareknuckled, and unapologetic about suing over anything, but generally they at least have arguments, whether you agree with them or not. This is just stupid, though.

bah (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | about 6 years ago | (#22975764)

I always thought that you'd need to show that your trademarked image was reasonably similar which this is nothing of the sort. *or* that one could reasonably associate one brand with another effectively allowing the infringing brand to piggy back on the infringed trademark's notoriety. this isn't the case here either, no one's stupid enough to confuse greeNYC with Macs or any of Apple's products.

APple should sue GLTGA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975786)

For appropriating their rainbow color scheme. Confused the hell out of me the first time I saw that on a square sticker.

You guys (supporting Apple) are nuts (1)

Man in Spandex (775950) | about 6 years ago | (#22975792)

What shape do you want an Apple to have? a fucking Banana?

I bet if you replace Apple by Microsoft and the Apple logo by that wavy Windows logo, you'd have Slashdot throwing flaming paper towels at Microsoft for suing.

Re:You guys (supporting Apple) are nuts (1)

Koiu Lpoi (632570) | about 6 years ago | (#22975842)

Well, if Green(RandomCityHere) had a logo that was the MS Windows logo, traced, pallete swapped, and a window filled in, wouldn't we be support MS here, at least a little bit? People here on Slashdot are biased in one direction, yes, but we're not stupid. We can see when things are right and when they're not. Look at the posts above yours - you can find a picture of the two logos superimposed. One is clearly based on the other.

Re:You guys (supporting Apple) are nuts (1)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | about 6 years ago | (#22976528)

no, it clearly isn't. Apple's logo is fatter, it curves slightly more outwards, and has less of a dimple in the top and bottom. You can't call dibs on any representation of a fruit, and if you can, New York called dibs on apples first.

Plus as GreeNYC are not in the computer business, Apples trademark claim means dick. Precedent for this comes from apple themselves with their battle with Apple Records. Apple need to GTFO, if they get away with this after stealing Apple Record's trademark, it proves that the trademark system is a total joke.

My apple. (1)

madclicker (827757) | about 6 years ago | (#22975794)

My apple looks like an orange. All man are in danger of future lawsuits for infringement. Surgeons making a fortune.

quick fanboys to the rescue! (1)

timmarhy (659436) | about 6 years ago | (#22975798)

quickly, to the imobile to defend apple against anyone who points out the companys glaring flaws or money grubbing attitude!

Tony & Vito will sort this out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975820)

I am sure this will all be sorted out once Tony & Vito go over and break Steve Job's legs.

It says (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 6 years ago | (#22975828)

I think I read somewhere in the fine print that Apple is also claiming that the i 3 NY logo is too similar to their "i" logos (iTunes, iPods, iMacs, etc), or are they saving this for the next bunch of law suits?

Seriously, talk about one bad Apple soiling the bunch.

"clear case of trademark infringement"? (1)

sed quid in infernos (1167989) | about 6 years ago | (#22975832)

TFA is mistaken about whether the use of Apple's old logo on busses and vans is a "clear case of trademark infringement." The essence of trademark infringement is the likelihood of consumer confusion. It's possible to make the case that tourists in Vietnam would likely think Apple Computer (as it was called then) was running van and bus lines in Vietnam, but it's hardly "clear."

It is clearly copyright infringement. It also might be trademark dilution, but that's a far harder case to make than trademark infringement (meaning it's not really "clear"), and it's not widely enforced outside the U.S.

It's Look'n'feel over and over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975856)

Apple wants to sue NYC for a logo they STOLE from The Beatles. Just like when they sued MS for a GUI they STOLE from Xerox.

Re:It's Look'n'feel over and over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22976084)

Please stop trolling... Apple paid for both of the above...

so is Steve Jobs going to sue other guys... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975868)

...who knock up some chick and then refuse to pay child support and spend years denying that he fathered the child?

That's why he was so determined to kill the Lisa computer: Lisa Brennen was the child that he fathered and tried to deny for years.

Total scum.

Could it be Apple is going Green? (1)

kai6novice (1093633) | about 6 years ago | (#22975876)

Every company tech or not are going green. They all try to come up with some kind of product that related to green. If Apple were to come up with a green computer or gadget, they could easily just use "Green Apple" to market their new green product line. If that is the case, they definitely need to do something regarding this logo. So their future "Green Apple" line won't get mix up with this green NYC logo. Possible? Maybe..

mod uP (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#22975910)

Never heeded Juliet Are together Open platfo8m, similarly grisly Were nullified by as those 8on gay, whether to repeat out of bed in the Discussion I'm

Fucktards (1)

cmacb (547347) | about 6 years ago | (#22975972)

A rare case where no other term will quite do.

In a perfect world, not only would Apple lose, but they would also lose their right to do business in New York, their stores would be confiscated and turned over to the homeless.

Apple... really, c'mon (1)

purpleraison (1042004) | about 6 years ago | (#22975994)

I must confess that as an avid Macintosh user/owner/fan, even I find it a bit over-the-top suing a non-profit organization of New York if the logo doesn't bear the distinctive aspects of the Apple logo (like the bite taken out of the right side of the apple).

In fact, I would go so far as to say that Apple Records would have a bit more of a reason to object, but even still New York really is synonymous with the 'Big Apple', much in the same way that the Blue Crab is the logo for Maryland, and the other states with similar things.

Additionally, I think the GreenNYC logo is actually much cooler than the Apple logo.

GreeNYC Doesn't Sell Computers (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 6 years ago | (#22975998)

Or sell downloaded music, or music players or anything else Apple markets under its logo.

This suit is frivolous. Trademarks aren't vague references just to a corporation in a vacuum. They are the mark under which a mark holder markets its product, which is in a specific business sector, under which the holder registers the mark. The test of whether someone else is infringing the held mark is whether the other use would cause confusion to a consumer looking for the first mark holder's product, who would be confused into thinking that the other mark's product is the one they're looking for. There's no way someone looking for any of Apple's products would think that the GreeNYC offerings are what they were looking for from Apple.

The trademark laws are very simple, clear, and probably the most sensible of all the intellectual property laws. There is no way that Apple's lawyers pressing this claim could possibly be unaware that they have no legitimate claim. They are just hassling a City government hoping to intimidate it.

Well, they picked the wrong city. Our city will kick their corporation's ass. Besides, we've been using an apple as our logo for centuries before Apple ever put sandals on its feet.

The court should not only immediately dismiss this frivolous suit, but it should sanction the lawyers, putting a "frivolous" mark in their lawyers' licenses. After a few of those, they should have their licenses shredded.

And then recycled. I'm sure NYC would be glad to dispose of it for them.

Who cares? (1)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | about 6 years ago | (#22976026)

Is this even a surprise? Haven't we at Slashdot endured enough of these stories to know that lawyers have to be a little more trigger happy when it comes to trademark issues? I know it's still quite stupid, but I doubt this will go anywhere. And until it does, why even bother with it?

Microsoftian! (1)

Kylere (846597) | about 6 years ago | (#22976036)

How very Microsoftian of Apple. Sucess in the computer industry seems to cause suicidally stupid business decisions. Vista, Gateway Country Stores, Apple getting silly over logo, etc.

Dumbest lawsuit I've heard in awhile (1)

pawnipt (822998) | about 6 years ago | (#22976166)

This information is killing my brain cells! Next in line, apple farming companies across the globe! SUE SUE SUE!!!! "THE BIG APPLE" "WHAT DID YOU SAY MY MAC IS BIG??" "HUHH??" oh snap we're gunna sue!

There may be differences... (1)

Derek Loev (1050412) | about 6 years ago | (#22976326)

but when I see the greenNYC logo I immediately think of Apple. I don't understand any of the legalities of this situation but Apple is a company that has always been very strong on branding and greenNYC will be a substantially public logo that from Apple's point of view could jeopardize their image.

Albert Heijn should sue Apple (1)

Burlador (1048862) | about 6 years ago | (#22976404)

The logo [ncrvnet.nl] of the Dutch supermarket chain Albert Heijn looks as similar to Apple's as the GreeNYC one. They should sue Apple.

Still, it's silly (1)

rastoboy29 (807168) | about 6 years ago | (#22976412)

This is what happens when you let the lawyers make the decisions.  Never, ever let the lawyers make the decisions--they rarely have a strong grasp on reality.  Take their advice, sure, but then use some judgement.  There was no need for Apple to be a baddie actor, here.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...