Apple SLaps Amahi WIth Cease and Desist

In this case, that's the end that says you have to defend a trademark or lose it.

I strongly suspect that Apple will lose it anyway, but they certainly can't keep it if they don't defend it.

Out of interest, have Apple actually successfully registered "App Store" as a trademark anywhere?

Not yet, AFAIK.

I think if they have an application pending, they still need to act as if it's been granted in order to keep it. Now, whether they have standing to do so is an interesting question. They may have to settle for just asking nicely, and document the attempt. Dino, your opinion?

Even if they don't have an application pending, but...

if you read the story, you'll see that they have applied for a registered trademark, and that Microsoft has objected to it being granted on the grounds that it's generic.

Sounds like we need MORE people using the term "App Store", to help pre-empt it being stupidly trademarked by publically emphasizing the term's generic nature...

Pretty much, yes. Even Apple can't sue everyone.

IIRC correctly, you need to register a trademark in every domain in which you intend to protect it.

I presumed, in the article, that they were referring to US trademark registration.

Have they tried to to register it anywhere else?

@skelband --

You don't actually need to register a trademark, but...you should.

There's a neat little story they told in my Trademarks class in law school about McDonald's restaurants. No -- not the ones you're thinking of, but a tiny little chain here in Illinois that was using the name before the giant chain and had thus carved itself out a little hole in the Trademark coverage.

I like the story of when some scotswoman started up a little organic deli/sandwich shop in Buckinghamshire, England) and called it McMunchies Sandwich Bar.

McDonald's eventually took her to court for trademark infringement (arguing that people would get confused over whether she was a MacDonald's franchise). Apparently McDonald's in not only in the habit of registering any name starting with "Mc" as a trademark, but also launches suites over the mere use of an "Mc" prefix -- they haven't a legal leg to stand on, but use there financial/legal might to intimidate or steamroller legitimate defendants into ceding their rights (sounds awfully familiar, doesn't it?)

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-02-02/news/970202027...

This got into the news, and as a result a white knight came to her defence -- namely one Lord Macdonald of Macdonald, premier clan chief of Clan Donald, who raised a few... interesting... issues about name and trademark (including, apparently, that his family had owned a small, very posh hunting-lodge (with restaurant) for a century or two).

IIRC, Ms Blair eventually gave in and changed the name, but McDonald's (the restaurant) only dropped the case after MacDonald's (the clan) established a public campaign to pressure McDonald's to back off.