Cisco, Apple Still Wrestling Over iPhone Trademark

The Cisco versus Apple trademark dispute still hasn't been resolved: Cisco is granting Apple's request for more time to reply to the lawsuit filed by the networking giant. "Cisco has agreed to give Apple an extension until Wednesday, Feb. 21. Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution," the company stated in a media release. Cisco spokesman John Noh said the company wasn't seeking money, but wants to negotiate an interoperability agreement with Apple.

On January 10, Cisco announced it had filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent Apple from infringing upon and deliberately copying and using Cisco's registered iPhone trademark. Cisco said it obtained the iPhone trademark in 2000 after completing the acquisition of Infogear which previously owned the mark and sold iPhone products for several years. The original Infogear filing for the iPhone trademark dates to March 20, 1996. Linksys, a division of Cisco, has been shipping a new family of iPhone products since early last year and on December 18, Linksys expanded the iPhone family with additional products. Apple's iPhone is not slated to be available until June.

Link: Forum Discussion (Thanks Hurmoth)
News source: InternetNews

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Mp3tag 2.37e Beta

Next Story

mliPod (Winamp iPod Plugin) 2.02

23 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The iPhone name was a bad choice anyways.

If they chose to call their computers 'Mac' and their music player 'iPod', why on earth are they calling their phone 'phone'?

Even Microsoft has learned from this with the Zune. Apple should come up with a more imaginative name IMHO

So,i agree with you.I like the iPhone multi-touch technology for easy navigation. This will be the next PDA generation. Get iPhone Converter http://www.iphoneconverter.com/

The iPhone name was a bad choice anyways.

If they chose to call their computers 'Mac' and their music player 'iPod', why on earth are they calling their phone 'phone'?

Even Microsoft has learned from this with the Zune. Apple should come up with a more imaginative name IMHO

What a horrible, colorless world we would live in without Apple.

Give me a break!

Even if Cisco doesn't plan on using the trademark they're well within their rights to sue Apple. They own it currently.

I hope Apple get's their ass handed to them, they are becoming a very arrogant and smug company (which i don't like).

And by the way, iTalk sounds better than iPhone anyway. I've gotta hurry up and TradeMark that one!

imobile, imovil there are so many names why apple bother with it, i hope they dont get away with it, and no i dun hate apple in fact i like a lot my ipod shuffle 2g so they just get over it and move on

"Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution"

Good luck Cisco. Apple thinks 'mutually beneficial' means Apple gets everything they want and if the other guy is happy, great, if not, too bad so sad. And if Apple doesn't get everything they want then 'no deal'.

It's all part of the Reality Distortion Field.

C_Guy said,
"Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution"

Good luck Cisco. Apple thinks 'mutually beneficial' means Apple gets everything they want and if the other guy is happy, great, if not, too bad so sad. And if Apple doesn't get everything they want then 'no deal'.

It's all part of the Reality Distortion Field.

Perhaps you should remove your own RDF and try to understand that this is not a black and white case. If a trademark is not used within a certain amount of time it becomes null and void. That is currently the issue and the only reason this is still going on. Cisco knows this, which is why they are trying to come up with a deal.

Chad said,

Perhaps you should remove your own RDF and try to understand that this is not a black and white case. If a trademark is not used within a certain amount of time it becomes null and void. That is currently the issue and the only reason this is still going on. Cisco knows this, which is why they are trying to come up with a deal.

Linksys, a division of Cisco, has been shipping a new family of iPhone products since early last year and on December 18, Linksys expanded the iPhone family with additional products.

They are using the trademark

Chad said,

Perhaps you should remove your own RDF and try to understand that this is not a black and white case. If a trademark is not used within a certain amount of time it becomes null and void. That is currently the issue and the only reason this is still going on. Cisco knows this, which is why they are trying to come up with a deal.

Cisco purchased Infogear and the iPhone trademark in 2000. Trademark registrations last 10 years. If you read the article, Apple's excuse is that other people infringed on it too... Great excuse!

Black: Cisco owns the trademark on iPhone and are actively defending it.
White: Apple created another product with that name knowing it was trademarked.

What other colors would you care to have?

GreyWolfSC said,
Cisco purchased Infogear and the iPhone trademark in 2000. Trademark registrations last 10 years. If you read the article, Apple's excuse is that other people infringed on it too... Great excuse!

Black: Cisco owns the trademark on iPhone and are actively defending it.
White: Apple created another product with that name knowing it was trademarked.

What other colors would you care to have?

Actually it is a great excuse. To keep a trademark you have to actively defend it. If others have been using it without Cisco interference, then Apple's odds just increased.

GreyWolfSC said,

Cisco purchased Infogear and the iPhone trademark in 2000. Trademark registrations last 10 years. If you read the article, Apple's excuse is that other people infringed on it too... Great excuse!

Black: Cisco owns the trademark on iPhone and are actively defending it.
White: Apple created another product with that name knowing it was trademarked.

What other colors would you care to have?

No. The Cisco iPhone trademark was registered 11/16/1999. In order to keep a trademark registration active, you have to file a Declaration of Use on or before the sixth anniversary of the registration date, in which you state, under penalty of perjury, that you have been using the trademark continuously during that period. The sixth anniversary would have been 11/16/2005. You then have another 6 months of 'grace period' to file this declaration which would have expired on 05/16/2006. Cisco filed theirs on 05/04/06. HOWEVER, Cisco had NEVER used the term 'iPhone' on ANY product until December 2006, when Apple contacted them.

What did we learn from this GreyWolfSC? Cisco is sol.

Apple knew it was stealing the name and went ahead with it anyway. I hope they get slammed, but I guarantee they'll just end up paying Cisco Xmillion and getting the name. Cisco wouldn't hand over the name, so Apple just took it. Way to play Apple.

Cisco lost that trademark and they know it. They're just delaying the eventual outcome.

Right or wrong, Apple's playing this pretty smartly: they have nothing to lose. If they win it, they'll have their name. If they lose this, they'll just change the name, and the public will *still* call it the iPhone.

Its just Apple being arsey they assume just because everything else is called i<product> they can just make any new thing they want and use it.

Cisco dont need the trademark most likely but the fact that Apple is taking the "Screw It" attitude mean they deserve everything they get

I agree. It's extremely weird that Apple announced a product with a name they haven't been able to claim yet. One would think that things normally work the other way around. :confused:

Apple could just rename the thing to "Apple Phone" to match their "Apple TV" altho "iPhone" has a nicer ring to it.