Sounds like someone from management needs to head down to legal and tell them that maybe now might not be the best time in the world to make themselves look like a bunch of courtroom bullies as billions (with a b) of dollars are riding on their pending cases. (Public opinion notwithstanding)<p>The job of management is to tell legal that sometimes even though you <i>can</i> do something, you probably <i>shouldn't</i>. I'm sure in this case some sharp legal tack will start in with something about defending trademarks to keep them in force etc. <i>This is where a manager takes some responsibility and decides that that's a acceptable risk in order to keep the company from looking like a cosmic dick.</i>
This is a trademark dispute - and there is one simple rule in International trademarks. If you stop defending your trademark <i>every time</i>, then you lose it.<p>No-one at apple seriously thinks a polish supermarket is going to trade on the apple brand. But because it's close enough, they must sue. Otherwise the polish laptop maker who releases pomme d'terre range will be able to get in.<p>If you don't beleve me, paint a red triangle outside your stall in Dar es salaam and see how fast the nabisco lawyers hit you.<p>It's life.<p>What is bad is there is not a word of damage control from Apple - with Jobs gone they no longer get the benefit of the doubt - and so IMO should explain every piece of evil / seeming evil they do very clearly. Just not in their DNA though.
No, that's correct. Apple obviously invented everything round, be it rounded icons or apples. And everything starting with a and having "pl" somewhere in it's name.<p>Actually, i think Apple should sue everyone selling real apples or eating apples and every company that uses the words application, apprentice, appointment but also everything containing jobs, steve and silverish designs.<p>But also they should be able to sue everyone for this but use LTE technology for free. Or the shitload of stuff others invented, like the smartphone or GSM.
Apple just given much more publicity to A.pl, than it could ever buy with its marketing budget :)<p>Also the case will take 5 years and nothing will come out of it. That's how Polish courts work, and that's why nobody sues over stupid details like this in Poland.
This reminds me of a few years ago when Apple tried to get Woolworths (a supermarket chain in Australia) to stop using their new logo (a "W" styled in the shape of an apple)[1].<p>Apple lost that one, and I suspect that they'll probably lose this one, too.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/technology/biz-tech/apple-claims-woolies-is-getting-fresh-with-new-logo-20091004-ghxe.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.smh.com.au/technology/biz-tech/apple-claims-wooli...</a>
The update, that isn't in the title: It may actually be the logo. The logo has the leaf in exactly the same place, and the h is similar to the missing bite of the apple. The h being there looks fairly ugly, it does seem intentional to me.
<p><pre><code> The Polish website Telepolis is reporting that Apple demanded that the
Urząd Patentowy Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej (Poland’s Patent Office)
cancel the trademark belonging to A.PL Internet SA. The first meeting
actually took place on August 29, but it was adjourned and deferred to
a later date.
</code></pre>
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Does the Polish patent office really deal with the award of trademarks?<p><i></i><i>Postscript</i><i></i> - Indeed it does: <a href="http://www.uprp.pl/znaki-towarowe-informacje-podstawowe/Lead05,30,1707,4,index,pl,text/" rel="nofollow">http://www.uprp.pl/znaki-towarowe-informacje-podstawowe/Lead...</a> (there's a translation tool embedded in the page).
What I find amusing is that Apple has almost certainly just raised the profile of a.pl and given them a boost.<p>In the UK online food delivery is very competitive and businesses like this come and go fairly frequently. As soon as supermarkets get involved in home delivery these companies all start struggling.<p>I think it is fairly obvious a.pl has nothing to do with Apple or their brand. If Apple had waiting there was a less than insignificant chance the company would run out steam anyway..
Apparently this may be about one of a.pl's brands, fresh24.pl, whose logo looks like this:<p><a href="http://fresh24.pl/Images/logo.png" rel="nofollow">http://fresh24.pl/Images/logo.png</a><p>Personally, I think this is a storm in a teacup; Apple have to enforce their trademark, and be shown to be doing so in order to maintain their trademark rights.
That's the problem with a company heavily based on the charisma, creativity and the aura of a single person, no matter how great he or her was. When that person passes away the company loses confidence, and poor decisions ensue.
I thought trademark issues were only relevant in the same sector.
I mean apple cannot forbid you to put the word "apple" or an apple logo if you are selling the fruit no ?
Logo is veryyyy simlary to Apple is all about Apple logo<p><a href="http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/4c/1a/be/z12458572X.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/4c/1a/be/z12458572X.jpg</a>
It is not about letter "a", but letters "A'pl", witch is different.<p>I could be as angry as the next guy from Apple patenting geometric shapes and natural gestures and tech that was already invented 20 years ago, but this is a typical case of trademark dispute, and Apple could be right here. A pl could sound like Apple and so Apple needs to protect their trademark, or they could loose it, as someone already stated.
I think Apple is very thuggish, but can we lose the link-baity and dramatic titles ("Apple sues Polish grocery store over the letter A")?<p>I'm skeptical that even "A.pl" around a giant "a" with leaves coming out of it is enough to infringe on Apple's trade mark, but it's a much closer call than merely the letter a.
It's a trademark dispute. Apple doesn't have a choice, they have to defend their trademark or they will lose it. And they aren't disputing use of the letter 'A'. The article's been updated to show the Polish companies logo is an Apple, similar to Apple's own logo.
This reminds me a Steve Blank's funny story about the letter "e" and Microsoft:
<a href="http://steveblank.com/2012/08/20/when-microsoft-sued-us-over-the-letter-e/" rel="nofollow">http://steveblank.com/2012/08/20/when-microsoft-sued-us-over...</a>
Erm, anybody remember Apple Corps vs Apple Computers[1]?<p>So, how's them… ah, forget it.<p>[1]: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer</a>
Can't wait for this to bubble up to Polish mainstream media. (And it will, it's the perfect link bait / eyeball magnet.)<p>Hasn't Apple heard what Poland did to ACTA? We love it when some big American entity comes pushing around and stepping on the little guy. We've got our pitchforks and torches always ready. Come, Apple, come.
It's a supermarket; they're an electronics company. There is no possibility of confusion. They wouldn't have a case even against a supermarket chain just opened in the States named 'Apple'. (That's not to say they wouldn't win, because money makes people nod their heads.)<p>Apple is awful.