This was just posted a couple of hours ago[1]. Some things to note that were brought up there:
- Apple already filed for this trademark in 2011 in the US and China.[2] They were granted a preliminary trademark pending a routine examination period where people can object to the trademark. The objection window began in 2012[3] and objections were filed. In March of this year, the USPTO mailed a "non final action" to Apple, starting a 6 month window in which Apple gets to respond to the objections. That window apparently closes next month.[4]
- The trademark filed in Australia is under the same international registration as the ones in the US and China filed in 2011: 1081614. The international registration is important to this particular case because it's Apple exercising its rights under the Madrid System[5][6], which allows companies to secure their trademarks in any Madrid Union member state by filing a simple application. Australia, China, and the US are all Madrid Union member states.[7]
- It's specifically for "Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, and consumer electronic devices, and demonstration of products relating thereto", indicating Apple intends to launch some sort of retail service called "Apple Startup" or similar.
- With a few exceptions[8], trademarks are restricted to the areas covered in the application. Assuming Apple is granted the trademark, it does not mean that they now own the word "Startup".
> Assuming Apple is granted the trademark, it does not mean that they now own the word "Startup".
They already pretend they own the word "apple" and any logos of apples, even when they are not used by tech-related companies. I wouldn't put it past them to continue being a bully as they accumulate more words and symbols that they think they "own".
The problem, I think, is that trademarks, once registered, create a pressure to enforce. So if you register a trademark you must be willing to widely enforce it. If you don't enforce it you risk losing it, and so you enforce as widely as you can. If they want to trademark "Apple Startup" no objections but "Startup" is dangerous.
This being said, if I got a call from their attorneys on this, I would be sorely tempted to respond with something like:
"We are a business startup and will consider your request. At the moment though I am eating an apple, while writing something up in EMACS though not on an eMac. I will call you back in a few from my Linksys iPhone."
It is absolutely untrue that you risk losing a mark if you do not enforce it widely. There is an obligation to enforce against third party uses which would undermine the distinctiveness of the mark/confuse the public, however not every third party use falls in this category.
Many uses will be completely acceptable and if you do not enforce against them you will not lose your right to enforce against unacceptable uses.
Unfortunately, anyone's future use of startup, where startup is in the same position of the product name/feature will be subject to threats and such. After all, if the product is successful at Apple the only possible reason someone else used startup in a name is because of Apple.
As in, their lawyers won't think twice trying to intimidate someone and will most likely knee jerk react to every use.
I agree that there is a risk that all uses will be pursued and as you allude to, potential damage to a brand is in the eye of the beholder. However you're making a leap from a use which could conceivably harm the distinctiveness of a mark to taking action against every use and appear to attribute this to the lawyers' over-eagerness.
In my experience, most lawyers are reasonable people who will understand the limits of a trade mark better than anyone else. It's often the commercial people who are telling the lawyers to pursue an infringement against the lawyer's advice.
> It is absolutely untrue that you risk losing a mark if you do not enforce it widely. There is an obligation to enforce against third party uses which would undermine the distinctiveness of the mark/confuse the public, however not every third party use falls in this category.
Actually you only have to enforce it in the cases where someone else might argue undermines your trademark, which is far wider.
- Apple already filed for this trademark in 2011 in the US and China.[2] They were granted a preliminary trademark pending a routine examination period where people can object to the trademark. The objection window began in 2012[3] and objections were filed. In March of this year, the USPTO mailed a "non final action" to Apple, starting a 6 month window in which Apple gets to respond to the objections. That window apparently closes next month.[4]
- The trademark filed in Australia is under the same international registration as the ones in the US and China filed in 2011: 1081614. The international registration is important to this particular case because it's Apple exercising its rights under the Madrid System[5][6], which allows companies to secure their trademarks in any Madrid Union member state by filing a simple application. Australia, China, and the US are all Madrid Union member states.[7]
- It's specifically for "Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, and consumer electronic devices, and demonstration of products relating thereto", indicating Apple intends to launch some sort of retail service called "Apple Startup" or similar.
- With a few exceptions[8], trademarks are restricted to the areas covered in the application. Assuming Apple is granted the trademark, it does not mean that they now own the word "Startup".
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6288217
[2]: http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/04/apple-fi...
[3]: http://trademarks.justia.com/852/96/startup-85296886.html
[4]: http://www.trademarkia.com/startup-85296886.html
[5]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid_system
[6]: http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/
[7]: http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/en/documents/p...
[8]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6288395