Apple loses exclusive 'iPhone' trademark rights in Brazil
Last updated
Apple's popular handset may soon be joined by other "iPhone"-branded products in Brazil, as regulators have ruled that the company does not own the exclusive rights to the trademark in that country.
Brazil's National Industrial Property Institute (INPI) recently rejected Apple's claim to exclusivity on the iPhone trademark, confirming earlier reports that it was preparing to do so. Apple will now share the iPhone brand with Gradiente Electronica, a Brazilian company that registered the iPhone name in that country seven years before Apple.
Apple had been arguing in the case that it should have exclusive rights over "iPhone," since Gradiente â even though it has held the trademark since 2000 â did not release a product using the moniker until December of 2012.
Gradiente's Android-based iphone. | Source: Gradiente
The INPI pointed out that its decision applied only to handheld electronics. Apple retains exclusive rights to the iPhone brand for t-shirts, publications, and software.
Also, Apple can continue to sell its smartphone products in Brazil. Gradiente, though, does have the option of suing for exclusivity over the iPhone brand.
Gradiente's iPhone is an Android-powered device that launched in December of 2012. Earlier this month, representatives from Gradiente told reporters that Apple had not contacted them regarding the trademark dispute. Speaking with Bloomberg, chairman Eugenio Staub declared his company's openness to discussion.
"We're open to a dialogue for anything, anytime," he said. "We're not radicals."
18 Comments
As I wrote elsewhere, this is called application of law as it is supposed to happen in any civilized nation out there.
In fact, Apple and its partners have a huge interest in Brazil, for obvious reasons...the country is the 6th largest economy in the world and the natural leader of the Southern Hemisphere - in other words, a key market for Apple, as already confirmed by Cook and others.
But no, we do not speak Spanish nor are we part of the prejudiced and nonsensical US-invented "latino" community. So for those with some knowledge of Brazilian Portuguese, you may check this "explanatory" video by Gradiente - they say that the idea behind "IPHONE" came from "INTERNET PHONE" back then (whether one believes that or not is irrelevant now): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkRf6...layer_embedded
Ultimately, the INPI has simply applied the provisions of Law 9279 - Apple has stated that it may appeal on "removal for non use" grounds. However, this is a lost cause, as it is clear that IGB DID release something since the registration was finally granted to that company in 2008 (the five-year period counts from effective registration and NOT deposit of the request).
As I said before, Apple will have to shut up and pay; simple as that.
Translation: You can have the name but it'll cost you. Just a cost of doing business. Apple can buy the naming rights and show everyone they are spending their cash hoard. Everybody wins.
brlawyer, your argument sounded pretty nice, right up until the derogatory remarks about the US. Perhaps you need to learn to temper your emotions a tad. The "US-invented latino community" has benefited "minorities" very nicely in the US for some time. And I'm proud to be a part of that so-called community.
[quote name="brlawyer" url="/t/155967/apple-loses-exclusive-iphone-trademark-rights-in-brazil#post_2277415"]As I said before, Apple will have to shut up and pay; simple as that. [/quote] Not at all. Apple has another option. While they don't get exclusive rights, it sounds like they are able to use the iPhone name on a non-exclusive basis. They may be willing to live with that. And what's with all the font tags in your post? It makes quoting very difficult.
Regarding the headline, how could Apple lose something that they never had? Also, Gradiente was selling Nokia-style "iPhones" in 2000 so their first "iPhone" was not released in 2012 as claimed in this article. A Google image search for 'gradiente iphone 2000' shows many results with the original green and white ad from 2000.