Its official: Apple's iPhone takes it in the butt by Cisco

[Schema]

Saw this message when I logged in to the Cisco employee website this morning....;

Quote:
Message from Mark Chandler: Cisco Acts to Block Use of Its Trademark
CEC Posting Date: 2007-Jan-10

Yesterday during the MacWorld Apple user conference in San Francisco, Apple introduced a new product under the iPhone name. The iPhone trademark belongs to Cisco, not just in the United States, but in Europe as well, and in fact Cisco has been marketing products under the iPhone name.
Apple had approached Cisco many times to acquire rights to use the mark, acknowleding Cisco’s rights to the trademark. As you know, our culture is one of supporting and promoting open industry standards and collaborating with other companies that produce innovations and technology that ultimately benefit customers. We entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith and with the full intention of finding a way for the two companies to share Cisco’s iPhone trademark. There is no doubt that Apple’s new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission.
Today Cisco has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court against Apple seeking to prevent Apple from using Cisco’s registered iPhone trademark. The trademark, which we hold, dates back to 1996, before Apple had shipped iMacs or iPods. Cisco itself has owned this trademark since 2000 with its acquisition of InfoGear, which has shipped iPhone products for a number of years. Linksys iPhone began using the iPhone name on its products last spring.
Today’s iPhone is not tomorrow’s iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why the protection of Cisco’s brands is of paramount importance to our business. The action we have taken today is about protecting our intellectual property and our brands by standing up to business practices that are intentionally undertaken with no respect for the rights of others.

__________________

[Schema]

From Rochester's Local paper

Cisco Sues Apple Over Use of iPhone Name
By JORDAN ROBERTSON

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Apple Inc.'s much-ballyhooed iPhone was unveiled this week after 30 months and millions of dollars in top-secret development. But the sleek new iPod-cellular phone combination could wind up costing the company a lot more.
Cisco Systems Inc., the world's largest networking equipment maker, sued Apple in San Francisco federal court on Wednesday, claiming that Apple's iPhone violates its trademark.
Cisco is asking the court to forbid Apple from using the name "iPhone," which Cisco has held a trademark on since 2000 and used to brand a line of its own Internet-enabled phones that began shipping last spring and officially launched three weeks ago.
Cisco said Apple approached the company several years ago seeking to use the name, and the two Silicon Valley tech giants have been negotiating ever since to hammer out a licensing agreement.
But Cisco said the talks broke down just hours before Apple's chief executive, Steve Jobs, took to the stage Tuesday at the annual Macworld Conference and Expo to introduce the multimedia device.
Apple's iPhone is a touch-screen-controlled cell phone device that plays music, surfs the Web and delivers voicemail and e-mail. The product still needs FCC approval.
While Jobs was holding court in front of thousands of Apple devotees, Cisco had given Apple lawyers until the end of the business day to finalize the contract.
The deadline came and went, and Cisco filed the lawsuit Wednesday seeking injunctive relief to prevent Apple from copying Cisco's iPhone trademark.
"We certainly expected that since they had gone ahead and announced a product without receiving permission to use the brand, that meant that the negotiation was concluded," said Mark Chandler, Cisco senior vice president and general counsel.
Apple argues it's entitled to use the name iPhone because the products are materially different.
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris called Cisco's lawsuit "silly" and said there are already several other companies using the name iPhone for products like Cisco's that use the increasingly popular Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP.
"We believe that Cisco's U.S. trademark registration is tenuous at best," she said. "Apple's the first company to use the iPhone name for a cell phone. And if Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we're very confident we will prevail."
Cisco executives argue that, despite the current dissimilarities between the Cisco and Apple iPhone, both phones could take on new features or work on different networks than they do today.
Erik Suppiger, networking specialist at Pacific Growth Equities, said that argument is sound in an era of "convergence," when the Internet is increasingly used as a telephone network.
"I'd envision that Cisco would be inclined to add cellular functionality to its iPhone. I would not be surprised to see them add additional memory for supporting whatever media functions you might want, either - they'd be logical extensions," Suppiger said. "The phones may not overlap right now, but they would over the foreseeable future."
The lawsuit may be more than just a semantic scuffle.
Cisco has been on an aggressive acquisition binge in the past year, and CEO John Chambers has been ambitious about building the company's brand name and producing more consumer electronics - not just the esoteric networking gear that chief information officers purchased at great expense.
The lawsuit could be an attempt to embroil Apple into a legal morass because Cisco is set on developing a competing product, said Eve Griliches, program manager at Framingham, Mass.-based research firm IDC.
"Cisco is a very, very smart company, and anything they can do to slow Apple out of the gate might give them an advantage at the negotiating table," Griliches said. "Chances are both companies knew this lawsuit was going to happen - the real question is, what's really behind it?"
But not everyone agrees that the lawsuit is strategic or even productive for Cisco, the most richly valued company in Silicon Valley with a market capitalization of more than $174 billion.
"Bottom line is that you'd think Cisco had a better use of its time and money than suing Apple over a word," said Samuel Wilson, analyst at JMP Securities.
Before the lawsuit was announced, Apple's shares closed up $4.43 to $97 during regular trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market. Apple shares fell 40 cents to $96.60 in after-hours trading.
Cisco's shares closed up 21 cents to $28.68 on the Nasdaq Stock Market. In after-hours trading, Cisco shares gained 9 cents to $28.77

[slwrthnu]

Originally Posted by Schema

The trademark, which we hold, dates back to 1996, before Apple had shipped iMacs or iPods. Cisco itself has owned this trademark since 2000 with its acquisition of InfoGear, which has shipped iPhone products for a number of years.

i was gonna say they need to fuck off untill i read this. i figureed they were like everyone else and copied the i from apple to make money. but if this is the case, even being hte apple sack rider i am (and let me tell you their sack tastes great) they have every right to sue.

[mikecentola]

Saw this coming a mile away...

[Cossey]

Apple should call it the 'iCell'

The only problem I could see with that is a prison sueing them.

*bah-boo tsss"

[Celtic1982citleC]

I was listening to 810 talk radio on my way into work and heard this story. Apparently Apple is already considering a name change to the Apple "Core" as the new phone is designed to be the "Core" of any individuals communication. I thought the name was quite ingenious. I guess there could be an announcement as early as next week to re-advertise the launch of the all new Apple iCore...who knows. Take it for what its worth...which is some crazy dude rambling on for the entire hour drive into work this morning

[GranMassaX]

iCore would be a cool name.

but you def need something better to listen to in the morning. if I had a drive like that, I'd get Sirius