macnn.com — Cisco and Apple today announced that they have resolved their dispute involving the "iPhone" trademark. After more than a month of public sparring, the companies recently agreed to several legal extensions, following the Cisco lawsuit over the iPhone trademark (in the US as well as the UK). Under the agreement, both companies are free to use the "i
Feb 22, 2007 View in Crawl 4
supafupaFeb 22, 2007
Interoperability my eye. Apple is built on the concept of incompatibility. We already made it perfect. why would you want to use anything else? The language stated that the companies would LOOK INTO interoperability. Yes the ipod works on windows. But do you think they would have even broke a million if it was Mac exclusive? Its compatible with windows, but not competitors mp3 players. Theres no way their going to give competitors mac software in a competing market.
mikepictorFeb 22, 2007
that's google's new phone.Which is written as a joke, but I would not be surprised to see it happen before long.
voodixFeb 22, 2007
as soon as the name Apple is involved, people start crawling out of their fancy caves screaming at everyone, leaving behind their common sense and the neutral/objective point of view...Cisco did not want any money from Apple, they wanted interoperatibility/compatibility. Apple called the lawsuit silly and obviously didn't like the idea. Now they got an agreement and for me it looks like Cisco won this thing. Actually it's not about winners or losers. Apple can use the name 'iphone'. But so does Cisco. That means Cisco 'allows' Apple to use the name but Apple has no rights whatsoever. Since Cisco didn't want any money they surely did get other stuff they wanted, otherwise there would not have been an agreement. The last point would be that 2 months ago, most people on the internet where thinking about Apple when hearing the name 'iphone'. Nowadays, people know that there was a problem with that name and that Cisco owns the right on this name and even has phones with that name on the market. You see, Cisco made 3 good points. Apple certainly also got what they wanted but to me it seems as people here really think that Apple is the center of the world. Remember, without Cisco none of us would be on this website, writing stupid comments... Just because Cisco never had an aggressive marketing strategy before and uneducated people just didn't know what they were doing doesn't mean that they are somewhat small and unimportant... you guys have no idea who you are talking about here.
ravenpenFeb 22, 2007
"Apple must have had the upper hand ... Why else let someone use your name?"I don't think it anything to do with anyone having the "upper hand".Cisco owned the "iPhone" trademark in the U.S. and Apple owned the trademark in the U.K., Europe, and a couple other places.It sounds like it was probably just an exchange. Cisco lends their U.S. rights and Apple lends their rights for Europe. Everyone walks away happy.
bradleylandFeb 22, 2007
I don't know, but every Apple product I've ever bought has "Designed by Apple in California" printed in fine print somewhere. Maybe they've got a thing for geography.
ehelbushFeb 22, 2007
Some post a new article when they get word of the payout, until then stop the speculative argument.
Closed AccountFeb 23, 2007
"Apple obviously offered something big enough for Cisco to let them use the trademark. It probably had very little to do with Apple's "amazing lawyers""Ummm, When you say "Apple" offered something big enough you are probably actually talking about those "Amazing Lawyers" you seem to be denying...Last time I checked it was the "amazing lawyers" job to handle lawsuits and patents.
sitseller52Dec 15, 2008
With all of this Iphone Hype you wonder if its worth all of the money they want. Im trying to win one right now, they provide proof of people who won. You could always try your luck, like me. You never know until you try.<a class="user" href="http://bells-reviews.com/iphone-winners/winners.html">http://bells-reviews.com/iphone-winners/winners.ht ...</a>Best of luck