Kevin Bostic
A digital hearing aid company has filed suit against Apple, claiming that the EarPod headphones the iPhone maker sells violate the trademark of a similarly named product: HearPods.
As The Next Web reported on Monday, Randolph Divisions filed suit in the Hawaii District Court in Honolulu last week, claiming that the EarPods' name is too close to that of Randolph's own HearPods digital hearing aids. Randolph owns the HearPod corporation, which is based out of Nevada, and filed for the "HearPod" trademark in late 2005, receiving a subsequent registration in 2007.
Randolph Divisions' suit seeks a permanent injunction based on "trademark infringement, unfair competition and dilution." It calls for the matter to be decided by a jury with a goal of destroying all Apple materials associated with the EarPod mark.
Apple introduced the EarPods in September of last year alongside the company's newest iPhone and iPod models. The $29 headphones also include a remote to control an iOS device and a microphone. Apple owns US trademarks for "EarPods" and "Apple EarPods," both of which were registered in 2013.
Prior to revealing the devices, though, Apple failed to secure the domain names for earpod.com and earpods.com. Earpod.com currently redirects to MyHearPod.com, a site for Randolph's HearPods.
William Gallagher
Charles Martin
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
Malcolm Owen
Andrew Orr
Sponsored Content
32 Comments
These guys don't stand a chance. Particularly in light of what has just occurred over Apple's own "iPad Mini" trademark ruling.
Ear is ear. And Hear is hear. They are two different english words. "pod" is simply generalized descriptor.
I see a hand of Samsung on all the companies filing lawsuits on Apple. SamScum has a dedicated wing to search for all the things that are capable of filing a lawsuit on Apple and provoking companies to do so. :D :D
[quote name="isaidso" url="/t/156783/apple-sued-over-earpods-trademark-by-hearing-aid-company#post_2303989"]These guys don't stand a chance. Particularly in light of what has just occurred over Apple's own "iPad Mini" trademark ruling. Ear is ear. And Hear is hear. They are two different english words. "pod" is simply generalized descriptor. [/quote] I think they have a case. HearPods could be mistaken by EarPods. Although, Apple might be able to argue that their 2005 domain registrar date (earliest evidence I could find of their existence) as proof they created their name from the iPod fame.
[quote name="SolipsismX" url="/t/156783/apple-sued-over-earpods-trademark-by-hearing-aid-company#post_2304000"] I think they have a case. HearPods could be mistaken by EarPods. Apple might be able to argue that their 2005 domain registrar date (earliest evidence I could find their existence) as proof they created their name from the iPod fame.[/quote] I think it's the opposite. They clearly tried to grab onto Apple's cache by using the "pod" descriptor for an audio device. It's Randolph's trademark that should be invalidated, (in my less than legal opinion).
All I know is I'm tired of reading about lawsuits every day.