Apple can't stop Swatch from trying to trademark 'One more thing,' judge rules

Apple can't stop watchmaker Swatch from attempting to trademark Steve Jobs' "One more thing" phrase, a judge in the UK has ruled.

Judge Ian Purvis on Monday said that Swatch's attempt to register the phrase may have been an effort to "annoy" Apple, but ultimately decided that the Cupertino tech giant can't stop Swatch from doing so.

Additionally, Judge Purvis added that a previous court decision that "Swatch's intentions had stepped over the line between the appropriate and inappropriate use of a trade mark" was wrong.

The phrase, famously used by Jobs near the end of keynote events to cue a surprise announcement, probably originated with fictional TV detective Columbo, Judge Purvis said in his ruling.

The dustup over the three words is part of a broader dispute between Apple and Swatch that originated with the launch of the Apple Watch in 2015. At the time, Apple tried to trademark the term "iWatch" in the U.K. but was denied because it was too close to Swatch's existing "iSwatch."

Since then, the battle has extended to other phrases and trademarks. In 2019, for example, Apple lost a bid to stop Swatch from registering the phrase "Tick Different" — a nod to Apple's "Think Different" Mac slogan.

Jobs' successor, Apple CEO Tim Cook, revived the "One more thing" phrase in 2015 when he announced the Apple Watch.

When Swatch attempted to trademark the phrase, Apple's lawyers argued that the move was "bad faith" and sought to parody Apple. On Monday, Judge Purvis said that Apple ultimately failed to come up with examples of concerning parodies.

28 Comments

DAalseth 3045 comments · 6 Years

About 3 years ago

Ok, but step back. Is “One more thing” worthy of trademark? I don’t think such a common phrase should even be trademarkable. It’s like Happy Birthday, or Good Morning, a common phrase that’s been used for ages. Remember Columbo used it before Apple did.

entropys 4303 comments · 13 Years

There is no link to the original story that I can see. Did the judge support the trademark or what?

EsquireCats 1268 comments · 8 Years

This whole affair just looks incredibly juvenile and tone deaf from Swatch. People have moved past plastic disposable fashion. The Apple Watch is not the kind of problem that Swiss watchmakers can just market their way out of - it exists because an entire industry sat on their hands while simultaneously letting quality slide in favour of profit. The very few remaining quality swiss brands will persist, the junky ones won’t hold any prominence.

bageljoey 1997 comments · 18 Years

DAalseth said:

Ok, but step back. Is “One more thing” worthy of trademark? I don’t think such a common phrase should even be trademarkable. It’s like Happy Birthday, or Good Morning, a common phrase that’s been used for ages. Remember Columbo used it before Apple did.

Exactly. I don’t think Apple should be able to prevent others from using the phrase, but I feel much stronger that Swatch has no business “owning” it.

The inconsistency between iWatch/iSwatch (bad) and Think Different/Tick Different (good) is another story, but also annoying... especially because Apple would have been following their naming conventions while Swatch was clearly copying off Apple.