Trademark

We had a feeling it would not be long before Apple stepped in and shut down Chinese manufacturer In Icon’s plans to create an extremely realistic Steve Jobs figurine, and today The Telegraph reports the 12-inch doll originally slated for release in February is now facing legal threats from Apple if the company doesn’t cease production plans.

According to the report, Apple claimed it owns the rights to Steve Jobs’ likeness and in a letter to the company claims toys using the Apple logo, a person’s name, or likeness of Jobs is considered a criminal offense.

The 12-inch figurine, which comes complete with Jobs’s trademark blue jeans, sneakers and black turtleneck sweater, was created by Chinese company In Icons and was set for release in February. But ‘their efforts have reportedly met with’ a legal challenge with Apple allegedly threatening to sue the toy maker unless they cease trading.

In Icon’s Tandy Cheung originally told ABC News the company would not stop production in lieu of Apple’s requests, and said the technology company cannot copyright Jobs’ appearance:

“Apple can do anything they like. I will not stop, we already started production…Steve Jobs is not an actor, he’s just a celebrity… There is no copyright protection for a normal person… Steve Jobs is not a product… so I don’t think Apple has the copyright of him.”

This is not the first time Apple has put a stop to Steve Jobs figurines. MICGadget was forced to stop selling their toy in November 2010 after Apple sent the following email (excerpt below):

Expand
Expanding
Close

As noted by MacRumors, Apple has been denied the tradmark for multi-touch, which they applied for on January 9, 2007 after the first iPhone was introduced. Once the decision was reached by the the Board, Apple then filed for an appeal which was then again shot-down. Excerpt from the decision that is embedded after the break:

Again, simply because the applied-for term has been used in association with a highly successful product does not mean the term has acquired distinctiveness. Decision: The examining attorney’s finding that the Section 2(f) showing is insufficient is affirmed.

Apple was denied the trademark simply because it is too broad, and lacks distinctiveness to Apple alone.  As a reference, NYU’s Jeff Han has multiple mentions of Multi-Touch as a generic term in papers from 2005 and before.  Here’s his multi-touch video demonstration more than a year before Apple filed for ‘Multi-Touch’ or released the iPhone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKh1Rv0PlOQ

Expand
Expanding
Close

The image on the left (above) is the logo of Sichuan China-based food company Sichuan Fangguo Food Co., Ltd. It’s also the logo that Apple claims infringes on trademarks related to it’s own iconic Apple logo, according to a report from go chengdoo. (We cant help but feel that it looks more like an Apple logo merged with elements of LG’s logo)

CEO of Fangguo, Zhao Yi’s intial response:

“There’s a leaf so you can tell it’s an apple, but it also contains two Chinese characters. … The orientation is also different, and ours is a totally different shape … .” Besides, he added, “When I started Fangguo, I had never even heard of Apple.”

The company claims to have received a letter on July 19 from Beijing Zhucheng Law on behalf of Apple that gave the company until August 6th to respond to complaints regarding the resemblance of their logo to Apple’s. This was two days before Fangguo’s logo registration application was to be extended. The trademark registration license currently extends to August 19, 2017.
Expand
Expanding
Close