Apple continues to send 'Cease and Desist' letters for using the term App Store

Apple has recently received quite a lot of attention from parties, due to its usage of the term 'App Store'. The Cupertino-based company opposed Microsoft's usage of the term, claiming it to be an abbreviation of 'Apple Store', as opposed to 'App Store', which the majority of people likely assumed it to be. Unsurprisingly, the Californian company was opposed for taking this stance, but they remained firm. As reported by MacRumors, the company continues to remain firm against the usage of what Microsoft argued was a 'generic term'.

A small company called Amahi was recently served with a cease and desist letter from Apple for using the same term. The small, open-source start-up is relatively unknown, though Apple sent the official letter to the owner regardless. The owner of the company has now turned to his own users, asking them to help create a non-infringing name for the company application marketplace instead. Apple has also targeted smaller groups still, including the owner of a website called "pcappstore.com". This domain has been the property of the site owner since November 2008, shortly after Apple's debut of the 'App Store' for iDevices. Apple has not yet received the term 'App Store' as a registered trademark, having requested it in July 2008. The Patent and Trademark Office agreed to tentatively grant the trademark in January 2010, but published it for opposition. Microsoft appears to be leading the charge for opposition. Apple has also demanded control of the "pcappstore.com" domain, stating that there is a potential for customer confusion.

These actions may appeal somewhat harsh, and the company has provided Amahi with a letter requesting a halt to the usage of the term "App Store", as well as asking them to "refrain from such uses in the future". Amahi themselves had the following to say:

Why Amahi? Why pick on such a small target when there are so many people using the app store term? Amahi is a Open Source startup, and is not even in the mobile space. We may never know ...

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Rumor: Details about next Rainbow Six game revealed?

Next Story

Australian TV network worker caught running Bitcoins server

27 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Amazon is just trying to **** off Apple. They made succesful the application stores and now they are using it because of that

I have never once, even slightly, considered that App Store was an abbreviation of Apple Store. If it was an abbreviation it would be for Application Store.

well i think bugs bunny, porky pig, daffy duck and the rest of the looney tunes gang should sue apple and send them a cease and desist letter for using the word "tunes" in iTunes. i might be confusing for folks like my self to think i can get all my road runner and wile e coyote "tunes" and gear from there.
better yet god/adam and eve should sue apple for using apple cuz it was the first one to use that word in the bible. it might stump the average folk in that the apple store is your one stop shop for all your forbidden fruit needs.

claiming it to be an abbreviation of 'Apple Store', as opposed to 'App Store'

They thought that's what that meant? How cute of them. Let's try this out.

"The app store is where I go to buy all the apples for my phone."

Hmm.... nope, doesn't work.

Ned said,

They thought that's what that meant? How cute of them. Let's try this out.

"The app store is where I go to buy all the apples for my phone."

Hmm.... nope, doesn't work.

There's an apple for that.

Apple coined the term and it became a de facto term for referring to the iOS app store. They have every right to defend it vigorously and the only reason other vendors are trying to use it is to gain an advantage as being "the same thing". Same reason companies besides Apple use the "iSomething" naming scheme, to try and borrow some of the marketing popularity of the iPhone/iPod/iPad. Not one valid reason Apple should not protect the investments they have made in their products. I'd expect the same from say... Google if Microsoft suddenly renamed Hotmail to HMail. If the judge, who probably doesn't get the issue anyway, says they can't use the term exclusively then they should and will stop sending letters, until then vigorously defending your intellectual investments is not only wise, it's an expectation from your share holders and therefore an obligation.

bob_c_b said,

Same reason companies besides Apple use the "iSomething" naming scheme, to try
and borrow some of the marketing popularity of the iPhone/iPod/iPad.
Not one valid reason Apple should not protect the
investments they have made in their products.

I'm surprised Apple having tried suing the BBC for using the term "iPlayer" yet!

Apple has also demanded control of the "pcappstore.com" domain, stating that there is a potential for customer confusion.

WTF, how would you confuse "App Store" with "PC App Store"?

Are Apple now stating that the Mac is in fact a PC, something that most of us knew already. Oh, I get it "PC App Store" must stand for "PC Apple Store"!!!

Just like Apple conflicts with the trademark of Apple Records I guess.

You tech companies are getting flipping silly.

I have a separate 'Apple Store' app by Apple,Inc. on my iPhone which is used for officially purchasing iProducts from the apple store online.. This app is placed right next to my default 'App Store' app.. So these two apps basically have the same name i.e Apple Store? BS! You cant be cheesy with this one Apple..everyone knows that its 'Application' Store.

Here I was always think App Store was short for Application. Seems like their marketing team didn't get the memo though, they still offer 'Apples' for their products.

mollick2 said,
Here I was always think App Store was short for Application. Seems like their marketing team didn't get the memo though, they still offer 'Apples' for their products.

The control freaks of Cupertino would have you believe that when THEY said "There's an app' for that" what they actually meant was "There is an apple for that". Yes it makes that much sense.

That is the basis of THEIR defence. What a croc. And I don't mean crocodile.

TogoP said,

The control freaks of Cupertino would have you believe that when THEY said "There's an app' for that" what they actually meant was "There is an apple for that". Yes it makes that much sense.

That is the basis of THEIR defence. What a croc. And I don't mean crocodile.

I always laughed at that argument Apple put out, such that the following: "Get your Apps at the Apple App Store" would become "Get your Apples at the Apple Apple Store"

/Amuses me greatly

Sraf said,

I always laughed at that argument Apple put out, such that the following: "Get your Apps at the Apple App Store" would become "Get your Apples at the Apple Apple Store"
/Amuses me greatly

Isn't that the same as saying atm Machine?

Atm stannds for Automated Teller Machine

johnnyq3 said,
Isn't that the same as saying atm Machine?

Atm stannds for Automated Teller Machine

Well you don't get sued for saying ATM machine

mollick2 said,
Here I was always think App Store was short for Application. Seems like their marketing team didn't get the memo though, they still offer 'Apples' for their products.

The argument that App is short for Apple is completely fail because if that were the case (if App Store is an abbreviation of Apple Store) then the App Store would refer to this store, right here: http://store.apple.com/us

But it doesn't refer to that store, in fact it refers to the iOS application store that is part of the iTunes store.

Ok, correct me if I am wrong...but Apple has no right to App Store (yet) and there has been no ruling on it yet. So what gives them the right to send out these letters?

And for some of you...this is a question, thats it.

techbeck said,
Ok, correct me if I am wrong...but Apple has no right to App Store (yet) and there has been no ruling on it yet. So what gives them the right to send out these letters?

And for some of you...this is a question, thats it.

They tentatively have it. Nothing stops them from sending out the letters. Most companies will just drop the name because they do not have the money to fight it.

techbeck said,
Ok, correct me if I am wrong...but Apple has no right to App Store (yet) and there has been no ruling on it yet. So what gives them the right to send out these letters?

And for some of you...this is a question, thats it.

They tentatively have it. Nothing stops them from sending out the letters. Most companies will just drop the name because they do not have the money to fight it.

techbeck said,
Ok, correct me if I am wrong...but Apple has no right to App Store (yet) and there has been no ruling on it yet. So what gives them the right to send out these letters?

And for some of you...this is a question, thats it.

They 'tentatively' have it for the moment so I guess that's enough in their eyes. However it's beyond me as to why they would even bother pcappstore.com, it's a very minor site and why would apple want anything with pc in the name? Isn't it pretty common jargon that pc is thought of as a Windows based computer and Macs are Apple based? Pretty pointless.

Hollow.Droid said,
Isn't it pretty common jargon that pc is thought of as a Windows based computer and Macs are Apple based?

Apple pretty much established that jargon…

Hollow.Droid said,

They 'tentatively' have it for the moment so I guess that's enough in their eyes. However it's beyond me as to why they would even bother pcappstore.com, it's a very minor site and why would apple want anything with pc in the name? Isn't it pretty common jargon that pc is thought of as a Windows based computer and Macs are Apple based? Pretty pointless.


Apple doesnt want it. Apple just wants it dead because its 'competition'. Makes perfect sense to me.

On the topic: I am pretty sure the latest news in the apple vs amazon case had apple loosing (so far) because Amazon's full name is 'Amazon app store for android' which is quite clearly different than its named on iOS. Apple's argument is the naming causes confusion however (IMO and likely what the judge will rule) is that its on an entirely different platform with a very different name so its highly unlikely to cause the confusion apple is arguing, thus little ground to stand.