Cisco files infringement suit against Apple over iPhone
Marketwatch - January 10, 2007 5:57 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Cisco Systems Inc. late Wednesday said it has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Apple Inc. seeking to prevent Apple from using the iPhone trademark. Cisco said it obtained the iPhone trademark in 2000 after acquiring Infogear. Cisco said Infogear's original filing for the trademark was on March 20, 1996. "There is no doubt that Apple's new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission," said Mark Chandler, Cisco's senior vice president and general counsel, in a statement.

yesterday they were saying that they were close to an agreement. maybe cisco saw how excited people are about the apple iphone and the price went up.

It's kind of amazing that Apple can't win this just by showing that by going up to random people on the street and putting an "i" in front of anything and asking "who created it?" that people will automatically assume the answer is Apple. Cisco may have grabbed "iPhone" first, but Apple made "i___" a term in the first place. It's just too bad for Apple that you can't patent/trademark/whatever a naming convention.

[img][650:488]http://www.blakespot.com/list/images/mp2100.jpg[/img]

is that a newton? they should just become officially an "interface" company.

Yep.

what was the antenna for?

FM radio, dude.

Exactly. Apple v. Apple

Kind of amazing if you know nothing about patent/trademark/whatever law and have really dumb ideas about how it should work.

You take the "kind of amazing" thing way too seriously, Haq. I understand that you can't "patent/trademark/whatever" a naming convention. In the court of public opinion, Cisco lost before this even began. As I said above, I guarantee that if you walked up to most average people and went "iDong - who makes that?" they'd answer "Oh, Apple!" automatically. I'm not saying that legally they have the right to the name, just that i-anything is tied to Apple in the public eye.

heres more from the wall street journal law blog, including a response from an apple spokesman.

source

iLawsuit!

Yesterday afternoon, the litigation-happy Law Blog registered disappointment over the fact that Apple and Cisco appeared to be on the verge of an agreement over the iPhone name. (Cisco has owned the rights to the name dating back to 2000; Apple unveiled its long-awaited tricked-up cell phone yesterday.)

Well, turns out, news of an agreement appears to have been a bit premature. Cisco today announced that it has filed a lawsuit in federal court in California against Apple, seeking to prevent Apple “from infringing upon and deliberately copying and using Cisco’s registered iPhone trademark.” Here’s a link to the story by the WSJ’s Nick Wingfield and Don Clark.

“Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco’s iPhone name,” said Mark Chandler, senior vice president and general counsel, Cisco. “There is no doubt that Apple’s new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission.” With its lawsuit, Cisco is seeking injunctive relief to prevent Apple from copying Cisco’s iPhone trademark.”

Mr. Chandler also posted this on a Cisco blog: “I was surprised and disappointed when Apple decided to go ahead and announce their new product with our trademarked name without reaching an agreement. It was essentially the equivalent of ‘we’re too busy.’”

Cisco spokesman John Earnhardt sent along this comment to the Law Blog: “Intellectual property is the lifeblood of Silicon Valley and we all have to protect our property. The iPhone trademark is owned by Cisco, as noted in your story. We (Cisco) had hoped to reach an agreement to share our trademark with Apple, yet they decided to use the name without our agreement, so we, unfortunately, are having to go to court to stop them from using the name. We still hope we can reach an agreement, but when your neighbor steals your property, you have no recourse other than to call the cops and file a complaint.”

Apple spokesman Steve Dowling called the Cisco lawsuit “silly,” adding there are several companies using the term iPhone for VOIP products, and Cisco’s trademark is “tenuous at best.” “We’re the first company to ever use the iPhone name for a cellphone,” he said. “If Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we’re very confident we’ll prevail.”