PDA

View Full Version : Google sued for 'stealing' Android name



I-75
May 2nd, 2009, 12:32 AM
Google sued for 'stealing' Android name

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/01/google_android_trademark/

By Rik Myslewski in San Francisco

Posted in Mobile, 1st May 2009 19:22 GMT



Google and 47 other international corporations have been sued in a US District Court for trademark infringement over their use of the word "Android."


In addition to Google, the defendants cited in his 71-page filing include the Open Handset Alliance, China Mobile, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile, Vodafone, ARM, Broadcom, Intel, Nvidia, Texas Instruments, Motorola, Samsung, Toshiba, and Wind River - among others.

lisati
May 2nd, 2009, 12:36 AM
That's daft! Next we'll be seeing people being sued for the use of everyday words!

A similar story can be found here: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU0904/S00634.htm

Giant Speck
May 2nd, 2009, 12:38 AM
Didn't this also happen to YouTube?

winjeel
May 2nd, 2009, 12:50 AM
I think the same for iPhone, by a company called "I Phone", according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iphone#Intellectual_property), but the entry looks suspiciously different to how I read it months ago.

Paqman
May 2nd, 2009, 01:02 AM
Officially Gmail isn't Gmail in the UK, it's "Googlemail". Somebody else had nabbed Gmail a while back.

So it seems there really are things which even the invincible juggernaut Google can't make bend to it's will.

lisati
May 2nd, 2009, 01:04 AM
Officially Gmail isn't Gmail in the UK, it's "Googlemail". Somebody else had nabbed Gmail a while back.

So it seems there really are things which even the invincible juggernaut Google can't make bend to it's will.

I had wondered why some of the onscreen guides for setting up a pop3/imap client referred to googlemail.....

SunnyRabbiera
May 2nd, 2009, 01:48 AM
This is stupid, whats next hes gonna sue sci fi authors?

gymophett
May 2nd, 2009, 02:00 AM
This is ridiculous! Are they gonna start sueing people for having the same names as others?
How did this even get through?!

CharmyBee
May 2nd, 2009, 02:03 AM
Lt. Commander Data is an android. Are Gene Roddenberry's ashes going to be sued for that too?

cz8
May 2nd, 2009, 02:10 AM
That does sound a bit daft!

Icehuck
May 2nd, 2009, 02:20 AM
They tried to get a trademark,was denied, and used the name anyway. Seems like Google was just being stupid in this case.

Polygon
May 2nd, 2009, 07:19 AM
android is a common word, they can't possibly sue over using that. They cant patent it, or sue over it....

lethalfang
May 2nd, 2009, 07:35 AM
This is ridiculous! Are they gonna start sueing people for having the same names as others?
How did this even get through?!

Microsoft has once sued a guy named Michael with a website named Michaelsoft.

ninjapirate89
May 2nd, 2009, 07:42 AM
I doubt any one person (or average company) has enough lawyers to successfully sue Google. They could probably get away with murder....

t0p
May 2nd, 2009, 09:44 AM
This kind of case is not unusual. For many years, Apple (the computer manufacturers) and Apple (the music label set up by the Beatles) were tussling over the name "Apple". The fact that "apple" is a common noun did not affect the case at all.

In the end, Apple and Apple came to an agreement: both companies could carry on using the name so long as Apple (the computer manufacturer) didn't start selling music and Apple (the record label) didn't move into the computer manufacturing/selling business. That way there'd be no danger of customers mistaking one Apple for the other. Everybody wins (especially the lawyers)!

Since then, Apple (the computer manufacturer) has moved into the music business with its iTunes division. I don't know what Apple (the record label set up by the Beatles) are doing about this. Maybe they'll start selling computers in retaliation.

lethalfang
May 2nd, 2009, 09:54 AM
This kind of case is not unusual. For many years, Apple (the computer manufacturers) and Apple (the music label set up by the Beatles) were tussling over the name "Apple". The fact that "apple" is a common noun did not affect the case at all.

In the end, Apple and Apple came to an agreement: both companies could carry on using the name so long as Apple (the computer manufacturer) didn't start selling music and Apple (the record label) didn't move into the computer manufacturing/selling business. That way there'd be no danger of customers mistaking one Apple for the other. Everybody wins (especially the lawyers)!

Since then, Apple (the computer manufacturer) has moved into the music business with its iTunes division. I don't know what Apple (the record label set up by the Beatles) are doing about this. Maybe they'll start selling computers in retaliation.

I remember reading a couple of years back that Apple Computer was sued.... I think they have settle since then.

t0p
May 2nd, 2009, 09:58 AM
It seems to me (IANAL) that Google are in the wrong and will have to settle big time. Google knew someone else owned the Android trademark applied for the trademark and were knocked back. So they used it anyway. Bad Google!

The point is that Android Data were/are in the computing/technology industry. So Android Data's "fear" that the public might mistake one for the other is not outside the realms of possibility.

The fact that "android" is a commonly used word amongst science fiction aficionados is neither here or there. Common words are used as trademarks all the time. Look at Orange (the cellphone service provider), Virgin (airline, recording label, space flight, cellphone service), Windows... need I go on? The point isn't who "invented" the word - it's who was first to register/use it as a trademark. In the case of "android", it would seem clear cut that Android Data were first. To me anyway (and IANAL).

sqrooup
May 2nd, 2009, 10:10 AM
The Apple v Apple case; the music Apple lost the case!

SunnyRabbiera
May 2nd, 2009, 10:20 AM
It seems to me (IANAL) that Google are in the wrong and will have to settle big time. Google knew someone else owned the Android trademark applied for the trademark and were knocked back. So they used it anyway. Bad Google!

The point is that Android Data were/are in the computing/technology industry. So Android Data's "fear" that the public might mistake one for the other is not outside the realms of possibility.

But Googles android serves a different function, bah this is the crap we get in the US patent system.

lethalfang
May 2nd, 2009, 10:41 AM
But Googles android serves a different function, bah this is the crap we get in the US patent system.

This is a different issue. It's an issue of trademarks, not intellectual properties.

pwnst*r
May 2nd, 2009, 12:41 PM
suing: the great american past time.

Orlsend
May 2nd, 2009, 03:27 PM
This is stupid, whats next hes gonna sue sci fi authors?

You know George Lucas owns the Trade mark for the word "droid". I doubt he will get sued, thankfully Star Trek could be :D

Kareeser
May 2nd, 2009, 05:21 PM
Microsoft has once sued a guy named Michael with a website named Michaelsoft.

Actually, the kid's name was "Mike Rowe", with his website http://www.mikerowesoft.com

===

An interesting tidbit of information:
You are legally allowed to sue someone with your own name. For example, if Coke defamed your name in a coke ad without telling anyone, you could sue them.

Now, on the other hand, Coke could "buy" the use of a name, usually for a pittance.

Charmin, for example, found a "George Whipple", and paid him a dollar to sell his name for their ad.

In this case, George Whipple represented all George Whipples in the world. :)

LightB
May 2nd, 2009, 05:32 PM
And I thought common dictionary words could not be trademarked.

Spiritous
May 2nd, 2009, 05:49 PM
Bill: I'm bored
Paul: Same...
Bill: Hey! Lets go sue someone! That'll make me sleep at night :cool:
Paul: Yh lol. Who? What about that Micheal dude with the Michealsoft.com domain?
Bill: YH XD!!! FAP..

A typical day at Microsoft, Redmond, USA

zmjjmz
May 2nd, 2009, 05:51 PM
In Google's defense, the company had been dissolved for 3 years prior to the suit.

Orlsend
May 2nd, 2009, 07:09 PM
Actually, the kid's name was "Mike Rowe", with his website http://www.mikerowesoft.com

===

An interesting tidbit of information:
You are legally allowed to sue someone with your own name. For example, if Coke defamed your name in a coke ad without telling anyone, you could sue them.

Now, on the other hand, Coke could "buy" the use of a name, usually for a pittance.

Charmin, for example, found a "George Whipple", and paid him a dollar to sell his name for their ad.

In this case, George Whipple represented all George Whipples in the world. :)

"A settlement was eventually reached, with Rowe granting ownership of the domain to Microsoft in exchange for training and gifts."

That guy Rowe is sure an Idiot, he traded his domain for a book of how to code in C and some Jelly beans

Mehall
May 2nd, 2009, 07:43 PM
Actually, he got an XBox (original, 360 wasn't released back then)

Then he put up a video (somewhere) of him taking a sledgehammer to the XBox

CharmyBee
May 2nd, 2009, 07:59 PM
That guy Rowe is sure an Idiot,

He makes Dirty Jobs look fun though.