{"id":11256,"date":"2022-02-09T04:27:07","date_gmt":"2022-02-09T04:27:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/09\/apple-opposes-trademark-for-indie-film-apple-man-claiming-potential-confusion\/"},"modified":"2022-02-09T04:27:07","modified_gmt":"2022-02-09T04:27:07","slug":"apple-opposes-trademark-for-indie-film-apple-man-claiming-potential-confusion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/09\/apple-opposes-trademark-for-indie-film-apple-man-claiming-potential-confusion\/","title":{"rendered":"Apple Opposes Trademark For Indie Film ‘Apple-Man’ Claiming Potential Confusion"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n

from the billable-hours<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

\nWhen it comes to silly trademark disputes, Apple<\/a> has come up for discussion many, many times. The mega-corporation is a jealous defender of all of its IP, but most of<\/a> our stories have focused on its disputes<\/a> with companies that created logos that involve any sort of apple or other fruit<\/a>. Sometimes it’s not even companies that Apple is fighting with, but entire foreign political parties<\/a>. The idea here is that when it comes to logos or trade dress, Apple appears to think that it owns all the apples.\n<\/p>\n

\nBut what about the word itself? Well, the company can get absurd at that level, too. For instance, Apple recently opposed the trademark application for a Ukrainian filmmaker’s indie opus<\/a>, entitled Apple-Man<\/em>.\n<\/p>\n

\n

\nApple in December filed an opposition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office seeking to block Ukrainian director Vasyl Moskalenko\u2019s trademark application for his indie project. The world\u2019s most valuable company argues that viewers will mistakenly believe Apple-Man is associated with Apple and that the movie will dilute its brand.<\/em>\n<\/p>\n

\n\u201cThe Apple Marks are so famous and instantly recognizable that the similarities in Applicant\u2019s Mark will overshadow any minor differences and cause the ordinary consumer to believe that Applicant is related to, affiliated with, or endorsed by Apple,\u201d states the filing, which is embedded below. \u201cConsumers are likely to assume, erroneously, that Applicant\u2019s Mark is a further extension of the famous Apple brand.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nAlright, so let’s stipulate the following right up front: Apple’s trademark on its name is no doubt famous. That affords the company far more protection on that mark than your normal everyday trademark. One of the main differences, however, is that Apple can enforce the mark not only for customer confusion, but for things like tarnishment, if someone used the term in a way that could be seen as disparaging to Apple.\n<\/p>\n

\nIn the quote above, Apple is going the traditional confusion route in its opposition. But that’s unbelievably silly. This is an indie film that nobody is going to associate with Apple. It’s also, because it’s a film, entitled to First Amendment protections that are almost certain to override any trademark concerns, particularly those as flimsy as Apple’s.\n<\/p>\n

\nElsewhere, Apple argues for dilution.\n<\/p>\n

\n

\nApple also argues the trademark, if granted, will \u201ccause dilution of the distinctiveness of the famous Apple Marks by eroding consumers\u2019 exclusive identification of the Apple Marks with Apple.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nBut consumers don’t<\/em> have an exclusive identification of the Apple Marks with Apple. That should be obvious on its face. Lots of companies, for instance, use the term “Apple” in branding for… you know… apples<\/em><\/a>. There have also been other films, more specifically, that make use of the word “apple” in their names. There is one called The Apple<\/em><\/a>. And another called Apples<\/em><\/a>. So what does Apple’s lawyers see as the difference between those films use and Apple-Man<\/em>? \u00af\\_(\u30c4)_\/\u00af\n<\/p>\n

\n

\nJeremy Eche of JPG Legal, who represents Moskalenko, argues \u201capple\u201d isn\u2019t a proprietary word and viewers won\u2019t be misled by the movie.<\/em>\n<\/p>\n

\n\u201cThis is ridiculous,\u201d he tells The Hollywood Reporter. \u201cThey really want to own the word \u2018Apple\u2019 in every industry.\u201d<\/em>\n<\/p>\n

\nEche contends Apple is a \u201ctrademark bully\u201d exploiting the system.<\/em>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nOf that there can be little doubt. So why is Apple even bothering with any of this? Well, outside council is involved, so the term “billable hours” immediately leaps to mind. But Apple’s history of trademark bullying also doesn’t exactly preclude a haphazard and capricious enforcement of its trademarks. The lawyers saw this one, so they went after it.\n<\/p>\n

\nAnd before anyone wants to jump in the comments and point out that Apple makes and provides film content via AppleTV and iTunes… don’t. Doing so does not suddenly mean the company can keep a filmmaker from making a film that uses the word in its title, nor for trademarking the name of that film.\n<\/p>\n

\n
\"Hide<\/p>\n
\n

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone\u2019s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.<\/p>\n

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites \u2014 especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.<\/p>\n

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying\/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support<\/a>. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise \u2014 and every little bit helps. Thank you.<\/p>\n

\u2013The Techdirt Team<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Filed Under: apple man<\/a>, trademark<\/a>, vasyl moskalenko<\/a>
Companies: apple<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n