1-10-07 Cisco sues Apple over use of iPhone name

[Rangoric]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

So why don't you just call it a phone?

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: ScottMac
Apple tried to sue McIntosh Labs (creators / producers of high-end audio equipment since 1947) for the name after they came out with their mini-Lisa.

There's nothing that new, neat, exciting, or different about Apple's stylish new cell phone aside from the styling). I hope Cisco puts the screws to 'em and gives them a taste of their own medicine.

I think Apple's product is a HUGE leap forward in terms of convergence technologies...there isn't a phone out there that does most of what the iPhone does...don't let that anti-Apple fanboyism get away from you. That said, Cisco is clearly in the right here.

Ohh bullcrap.

My PPC6700 has stereo Bluetooth, 802.11B, can fit a 2GB+ MiniSD card (mp3), can stream from any source (ORB from my PC, and streaming radio), it can also connect and control my computer via various programs such as LogMeIn, it has Word, Excel, Adobe, Outlook (Push), can get bluetooth GPS, bluetooth keyboard, and has full 3G wireless broadband. It has a full keyboard, camera, address book, syncs with my PC. There are also slingbox apps for the PPC WM5 phones, a user replaceable battery (including large batts 2x the capacity of the OEM one, allowing much longer talk time than the iPhone). I(t can be hacked, cracked, reg edited, tweaked, and overclocked (625mhz for the win), in a multitude more ways than your vaunted iPhone.


Now, there is a whole ton of stuff that the iPhone can't even touch and it didn't even cost me $600, it only cost me $75 after a 2-year contract. You can shove your stupid 2.5G, half-arse implemented, fixed battery, limited carriers, limited functionality, and proprietary phone where the sun don't shine because the greatest trick Jobs ever pulled was convincing every tool out there that he was the greatest thing since sliced bread. You doofs swallow it like a crackwhore looking for a fix and you don't even question reality.

If there was a more sad bunch of lemmings in the history of product development, I don't know who they are. Not even Bose suckers are as bad as you and I can tell that just from your silly statement above.

LOL, I don't agree with much of what you say LK elsewhere here in P&N, but as a connoisseur of rants I say I couldn't have said it better myself. I was going to refer to my prior PPC6601 and my current Cingular 8525, close relatives of your PPC6700. FYI, if you haven't tried ORB, give it a shot...it really turns our phones into a multi-media powerhouse.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

So why don't you just call it a phone?

Duh, 'cuz it sound waaaaay cooler when you say "iPhone".........

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

You must be new.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

You must be new.

I'm sure you're right Dave. His ignorance of your mental retardation is excusable though.




.....and I apologize to the mentally challenged whom I may have offended by the referenced association to Dave.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

You must be new.

I'm sure you're right Dave. His ignorance of your mental retardation is excusable though.




.....and I apologize to the mentally challenged whom I may have offended by the referenced association to Dave.

heh

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I refer to my VoIP (Vonage) phone as my iPhone everyday to people.

A lot better than saying Voice Over IP Phone or VOIP phone.

You using it as such does not make it a "Common Word".

So why don't you just call it a phone?

Because then he'd have to admit that he's got no argument and the summary in the o/p is just his usual drivel. It's better to invent some BS and save face...

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I've said this day is coming and it is here big time.

I knew the use of turning ordinary generic words into some great super device would cause this kind of rift.

Dave, that "DAY" has been here for a long time........

Copyright attornies didn't just pop up last week.

Since Apple started negotiating with Cisco for the word, they knew it belonged to Cisco. Aside from Apple demonstarting some audacity - no doubt on the advice of their attornies (from whence spring all problems), I view this a negioitaing tactic for the rights.

Fern

 

[kile22]

I was just wondered what everyone thinks of the whole apple cisco debate over the iphone name.

---

This is the op from a second thread on this topic. All posts moved to this thread.

Mod

 

[UberNeuman]

idon't know....

 

[Stunt]

cisco is in the right.
apple will find a way to use the name.
cisco will be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Cisco bought the rights a few years ago. Apple knew this. THey also know they now need to write a large check.

 

[marvdmartian]

I think Apple was foolish for even wanting the name, especially when they could've come up with something clever, like iTalk. I am, however, exceedingly glad to see such a smug bunch of SOB's get taken down a notch by a company like Cisco, who's big enough to not be bullied by the likes of Apple. Yeah, they'll be laughing all the way to the bank!

I, for one, am going to trademark the name "iPooP" for a toilet, so that when Apple decides to make one with an integrated mp3 player, they'll have to pay me HUGE!!!

 

[Jeff7]

Maybe a month ago, my roommate, an avid fan of Apple's products, said that they'd never use the name "iPhone" because Cisco already held that name for something else. If he knew, Apple had to know, and they had to have anticipated something like this.

Originally posted by: Stunt
cisco is in the right.
apple will find a way to use the name.
cisco will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Exactly.
Cisco had it first, and Apple had to know this.

 

[spidey07]

heh, I met a Cisco VP today. He pretty much said "yeah, we're gonna own them"

 

[Ferocious]

I sorta wonder if this is scam of sorts....Cisco and Apple in a clever scheme!

What will happen...is what was going to happen...an agreement will be reached soon.

But now with MILLIONS in free advertising for both parties that would not have happened without this suit!

 

[theslickvik]

I was just waiting for this thread to open up

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: ScottMac
Apple tried to sue McIntosh Labs (creators / producers of high-end audio equipment since 1947) for the name after they came out with their mini-Lisa.

There's nothing that new, neat, exciting, or different about Apple's stylish new cell phone aside from the styling). I hope Cisco puts the screws to 'em and gives them a taste of their own medicine.

I think Apple's product is a HUGE leap forward in terms of convergence technologies...there isn't a phone out there that does most of what the iPhone does...don't let that anti-Apple fanboyism get away from you. That said, Cisco is clearly in the right here.

Wrong most WM5 phones will do more than the Iphone.


The iPHONE will flop because you cant sync it with exchange over the air. no message push = novelty flop.

Bigwig lawyers and bankers only care about getting their email on their phone

 

[extra]

Hate to say it here but Cisco has the rights to the name, like it or not. Apple could... you know... NAME THE PHONE SOMETHING ELSE if they don't want to pay. The iphone name was taken before there even was iAnything from apple. Apple can cry more. Besides, the iphone is a crippled product anyway, unfortunately . Woohoo for locked up phones that won't let you take real advantage of their hardware. Course, cingular wouldn't want you to be able to install VoIP apps, that would be a travesty.

".there isn't a phone out there that does most of what the iPhone does."

K.

 

[foghorn67]

Apple is stupid and arrogant. Not just for using the trademarked name, but also for bailing out after the weeks of their counselors talking to one another. They were close to an agreement. Things were looking okay until CES. After the iphone show, Apple wouldn't even answer Cisco's legal counselor's phone calls.
Apple is dumb.

 

[aidanjm]

According to this link (below), Cisco is breaking the law. they have been sitting on the iphone name, but not using it. you can't do that. 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." (Presumably these kinds of laws prevent wealthy companies from buying up huge numbers of product names, not to use them, but just to prevent other companies from using them - which is exactly what Cisco appears to be doing). According to the link, Cisco haven't been using the iphone name over the past 6 years - however, they provided "photochopped" photographs of packaging material of their CIT200 product - with the name "iphone" added to old packaging - as 'proof' they had been using the term. This is obviously grossly deceptive. In fact, they only started using the term "iphone" in Dec 2006, when it became clear Apple would be releasing their mobile phone product.

LINK:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=236

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
According to this link (below), Cisco is breaking the law. they have been sitting on the iphone name, but not using it.

Umm... They haven't???

What Is iPhone?
iPhone is about a new age of communications, with voice applications at the core. An age that is about more than just dialing a phone number and waiting to see if someone on the other end answers. Devices in this new age are expected to deliver more than just a connection to friends, loved ones, and colleagues. They now must deliver on the promise of particular types of content tailored to your specific needs.
The variety of features available on Linksys iPhones will change the way you communicate with friends and family. iPhone products offer compelling internet services using popular clients like Skype and Yahoo! Messenger with Voice that display real-time contact list and presence information letting you know if the party you want to call is available. Enjoy access to personal content like music, photos, and live video cameras from sources on the Internet. In short, Linksys iPhones give you the ability to do more with your phone than talk!

iPhone and Linksys are registered trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc.

 

[sandorski]

iPhone my Mom, iPhone the pizza guy, hell, I use "iPhone" all the time!!!