Slash Lane
The filings, issued last week and highlighted on Thursday by GigaOm, demand that an Amazon executive testify why the online retailer removed the words "for Android" from the Amazon Appstore name. The filing asserts that Amazon's decision to minimize the use of "for Android" in the name is "highly relevant" to the case.
"Amazon has steadfastly refused to produce documents and information regarding the use of 'for Android' in connection with its service..." the filing reads. "Amazon has filed to produce a witness who can testify regarding the decision not to use 'for Android' with the Amazon Appstore Service outside the context of the Kindle Fire, despite clear evidence that Amazon frequently does not use 'for Android' in conjunction with its Service."
Apple first filed suit against Amazon last year, asserting that Amazon has violated the "App Store" trademark for which Apple has applied. But Apple doesn't yet own that trademark, and other major technology companies, such as Microsoft, have sought to block Apple's application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Microsoft, Amazon and others believe the term "app store" is too generic to be fairly registered, while Apple believes its iOS platform popularized the word "app" and most customers associate the words "app store" with the iOS App Store. In one court filing last year, Apple shot back at Microsoft and said that the "App Store" trademark is no less generic than Microsoft's ownership of "Windows."
One study released this March found that the Amazon Appstore, available on Android-based devices as well as the Kindle Fire tablet, is more profitable for developers on an active-user basis than Google Play, Google's own digital storefront for Android. However, analytics firm Flurry also found that Apple's iOS App Store remains the market leader in terms of profitability.
Amber Neely
Malcolm Owen
Christine McKee
Chip Loder
Marko Zivkovic
Wesley Hilliard
77 Comments
Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
They're not burning bridges. Look how they fucked over Apple (the music label) by using the Apple name in violation of their previous agreement. That ended up with Apple (the no-longer computer company) having the opportunity to sell the Beatles catalog.
If the past is any indication of the future, Apple can do whatever underhanded crap they want and still make more profits than before. Don't bet against them. Money talks.
Apple and their lawsuits.. burning bridges everywhere they go.
(1) Apple should aggressively, unrelentingly, repeatedly go after the copyists to protect its IP. There is no point in seeking IP protection if you can't defend its use. (2) No need to weep for Apple. There are no relevant bridges being burnt (except those that the trolls are protecting).
..Apple can do whatever underhanded crap they want and still make more profits than before. Don't bet against them. Money talks.
Oh, grow up.
PS: Fandroid alert! (Expect more to jump in soon).
[quote name="anantksundaram" url="/t/151541/apple-stepping-up-trademark-fight-against-amazon-appstore#post_2154804"](1) Apple should aggressively, unrelentingly, repeatedly go after the copyists to protect its IP.[/quote] They should, but I don't think Amazon Appstore is too confusing to violate Apple's trademark.