Coffeehouse Thread

20 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

So no outrage over Apple trademarking "podcast"?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    blowdart

    If that had been an MS action the board would be filled with bile.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    blowdart wrote:
    If that had been an MS action the board would be filled with bile.


    You're right.  It would, maybe we should all pop over to the Apple forum and enter the conversation over there about why they are doing it? Wink

    What is there to say? It is a *very* stupid move, and it'll bite them before they get any benefit out of it.  Alternatively maybe no-one is complaining because nobody cares?

  • User profile image
    Minh

    Actually, Apple tried but not yet granted the trademark "iPodcast"

    And we haven't heard the whole story behind PodReady just yet.

    I suspect Apple will raise token challenges to the "pods" --- but I doubt if they'd do anything serious.

  • User profile image
    Tensor

    So if I were to want to make a plaster impression of a group of whales, what could i describe it as?

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Minh wrote:


    I suspect Apple will raise token challenges to the "pods" --- but I doubt if they'd do anything serious.


    They've already started. The problem will be trademark dilution. By getting iPodcast they can argue that Podcast is too close, and sue. This is the basis for the cease & desist letters floating around right now.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    blowdart wrote:
    The problem will be trademark dilution. By getting iPodcast they can argue that Podcast is too close, and sue. This is the basis for the cease & desist letters floating around right now.


    You're not suggesting that Microsoft would be quite happy for me to use ZuneCast though are you?  All companies try and defend their trademarks, and this one ( iPodCast) is obviously derivative of iPod (which is  great name for a trademark) - I can see how it would go too far though.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    Tensor wrote:
    So if I were to want to make a plaster impression of a group of whales, what could i describe it as?


    +1, Funny

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Tensor wrote:
    So if I were to want to make a plaster impression of a group of whales, what could i describe it as?


    Now you're being silly. How would you do that?


    They wriggle around too much.

  • User profile image
    Sabot

    If the word 'podcast' is successfully trademarked by Apple then I can see the word disappearing like water in bright sunshine from all over the Intaweb.

    ... so the point is ?

    Trademarking 'iPodcast' I can see the point in ... and I have never heard the expression before in my life so I care not.

    Hmmm ... what does this do to Scobles company? I can see a rename to 'ScobleTech'.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Sabot wrote:
    If the word 'podcast' is successfully trademarked by Apple then I can see the word disappearing like water in bright sunshine from all over the Intaweb.

    ... so the point is ?

    Trademarking 'iPodcast' I can see the point in ... and I have never heard the expression before in my life so I care not.


    You misunderstand I think. They've appled for iPodcast as a trademark, but they are sending cease and desists to people using Podcast, because it's too close to iPodcast and dilutes the trademark

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    blowdart wrote:
    
    Sabot wrote:If the word 'podcast' is successfully trademarked by Apple then I can see the word disappearing like water in bright sunshine from all over the Intaweb.

    ... so the point is ?

    Trademarking 'iPodcast' I can see the point in ... and I have never heard the expression before in my life so I care not.


    You misunderstand I think. They've appled for iPodcast as a trademark, but they are sending cease and desists to people using Podcast, because it's too close to iPodcast and dilutes the trademark


    I thought Apple was encouraging use of "podcast" since it raises the iPod's ubuiquitness.

    Here's the true story anyway.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    How many other ridiculous trademarks and patents are already registered?



    http://www.uspto.gov/main/search.html

  • User profile image
    JohnAskew

    Fadcast ®

    I was poddy ®  trained long ago, and since then have poddy ® trained my kids.

  • User profile image
    Jason Cox

    Say it with me folks, webcasts, not podcasts.
    Tongue Out

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Jason Cox wrote:
    Say it with me folks, webcasts, not podcasts.


    I thought webcasts were any kind of broadcast accessible via the web, podcasts would be a subset of webcasts, ditto ShoutCasts, Match Broadcasting, any form of Streaming Media, etc...

  • User profile image
    JasonOlson

    W3bbo wrote:
    
    blowdart wrote: 
    Sabot wrote: If the word 'podcast' is successfully trademarked by Apple then I can see the word disappearing like water in bright sunshine from all over the Intaweb.

    ... so the point is ?

    Trademarking 'iPodcast' I can see the point in ... and I have never heard the expression before in my life so I care not.


    You misunderstand I think. They've appled for iPodcast as a trademark, but they are sending cease and desists to people using Podcast, because it's too close to iPodcast and dilutes the trademark


    I thought Apple was encouraging use of "podcast" since it raises the iPod's ubuiquitness.

    Here's the true story anyway.


    Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer, so disregard this if you may Smiley.

    While it might be good to "raise the value" of the iPod brand, it's dangerous ground because you also have to actively protect your trademark and brand identity. If they let it continue, they could face losing their trademark. It's the same reason that Google is actively fighting against "googling" being a common word that is not necessarily associated with Google (one of the reasons that I thought it was clever they got the definition of To Google in the dictionary as "using the Google search engine to....").

    So, in the end, they have to do these kind of things or face losing their trademark. Ultimately, I think it's stupid. But then again, I also think software patents and the entire trend of our patent system is utterly stupid as well. But that's another rant for another time Smiley.

  • User profile image
    JasonOlson

    And I do think it's rather silly that there is not nearly the amount of uproar as there would be if Microsoft were to do something like this. It's definitely a dual-standard situation.

    [/me puts on Flame-Retardent Suit]

    But then again, everyone tends to come swinging at you when you are leading the pack Tongue Out.

  • User profile image
    Heywood_J

    Rossj wrote:
    maybe no-one is complaining because nobody cares?


    Never listened to a "podcast" and probably never will.   If you can't give me a plain old mp3 file that I can download, then I'm not interested.


Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.