“Apple Computer is apparently cracking down on the use of the term ‘podcast,’ which refers to audio or video files distributed online, and plays off of the company’s popular iPod player. According to Wired’s Listening Post blog, the company has fired off a letter to start-up Podcast Ready, stating that the terms ‘Podcast Ready’ and ‘myPodder’ infringe on its trademarks,” Margaret Kane blogs for CNET.
Kane writes, “Apple’s legal team is no slouch when it comes to defending trademarks; the company has gone after firms using the ‘pod’ term before. In a stunning turn of events, bloggers did not leap to defend Apple. Some even went so far as to fault the company for its heavy-handed legal tactics.”
Full article here.
Related articles:
iPod Garage to evolve into iProng on May 8th – April 26, 2006
Apple legal team pressures ‘iPodder Lemon’ name change to ‘Juice’ – November 15, 2005
let it go … Apple legal is doing more harm to Apple than good. Seriously, they need to know when to stop. The Apple PR team must HATE Apple legal.
“In a stunning turn of events, bloggers did not leap to defend Apple. Some even went so far as to fault the company for its heavy-handed legal tactics.”
Yeah, rrrrrright. I must have been imagining all the fierce criticism Apple has come under in the past when they’ve sued over trademarks.
Then again it is CNET.
As for the case itself, pretty lame considering the term Podcast was invented by the community, therefore I can’t see it being trademarkable.
they should really welcome the expression, it only ‘advertises’ the ipod as defacto standard
Come on– is THIS really necessary to defend one’s trademark in the 21st century? Do they really HAVE TO go after anything with ‘pod’ in it just to keep their trademark secure?
Seems as though the lawyers may be advising something that Apple really may not WANT to do, but that they’re being told they HAVE to do.
APPLE! You have created a monster with your Apple Legal Team, your killing off your evangelists that have remained so loyal, and destroying the foundations under what this company was built upon.
Nice and smooth, guys! You’re turning into M$!
Yeah this one Apple needs to let this go. But you know those crazy lawyers, They just love to get paid to do crap like this. Come on Apple, feel the love!!!!
Apple legal probably reckon that it’s just a short hop between this use of the ‘Pod’ word and somebody actually trying to use it to sell some sort of MP3 equipment but for the sake of good PR, they should hold their fire until the worst actually happens.
What a stupid waste of time. Apple has a monopoly on the MP3 market and is starting to act like it does.
– Mark
Just checking, I am presently podding some peas, is this legal?
HEADLINE:
“APPLE LEGAL SUES NATIONAL SUPERMARKET CHAIN FOR SELLING PEAS IN A POD.”
The inventor of the term “podcast” very specifically states it was a conjunction of the terms “iPod” and “broadcast” – and Apple owns one of those.
Which doesn’t make their touchiness smart or ‘right’, but does make it defensible.
My own show could be impacted if they go after my host, PodOmatic, but I’ll still have my iTunes feed … even if I need to change providers (or the URL of my provider changes. As my ‘cast is done as a weekly radio show focused on local (local – mainly my wife’s friends and works) theater, I refer to my efforts as “shows”. Apple will not be coming after my personal butt on this any time soon.
Please, Apple let’s not kill the positive image you’ve worked sao DAMN hard and long to establish.
Why not ask for credits or display of the Apple logo or links to the Apple iPod web site instead of sicking the lawyer hounds on the “offending” sites!
Normally I think Apple is smart, but this is just a dumbass move. Why would you not want a word that derives from the very name of your successful product not to be embedded in the national lexicon?
Let it go Apple. Better yet, drown a lawyer, then let it go.
Read this…Someone has finally done some real journalism…
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1252
Actually I probably should read the article before shooting my mouth off.
They are going after a company thats creating a product that uses the word ‘podcast’ as part of its trademark. That’s a different story IMHO. They aren’t going after general use of the word Podcast, which I assumed before I read the article.
No company should be able to use that word I don’t think.
Drowning a lawyer would still be a good idea though I think.
Dimplemonkey, you need to ease up. Apple isn’t “killing off your evangelists that have remained so loyal, and destroying the foundations under what this company was built upon.”
The zealous energy that the Apple base demonstrates is more a matter of smart marketing than it is a founding principle that the company was founded on.
As for “somebody actually trying to use it to sell some sort of MP3 equipment” according to my Sister in law that has already happened. Her Family Dollar has a “kid’s Ipod” that is loaded with kids songs. Nice huh.
Whenever a news channel (or some other form of broadcaster) advertises a sound/movie clip is available for the public to download and view at a later time, most presenters say “…and you can download the podcast from (wherever) to listen to later on…”
This is great advertising for Apple, and ingraines the term ‘podcast’ in the publics conscience.
Much like Hoover has become a generic term for a vacuum cleaner.
If Apple do what Google have done, and banned people from using the term “google-search’ (as in “I’m gonna google it to find out (whatever?)…), insisting they use some other term like ‘web search’ or whatever, then they’ll do more harm than good to the whole ‘pod’ brand.
Do we really want to download Zune-casts…?
Disgusting Apple!
Shame on you
/sarcasm on/
I think Apple is 100% right. zunecast would be a much better name for these things.
/sarcasm off/
As Apple’s development team once said, Lawyers Are Wimps.
Go to hell, Apple legal.
Apple is being stupid. It should welcome everyone using any word that promotes the iPod universe. It’s free advertising! Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.
I think Apple has a bunch of lawyers on their payroll who need to justify their existence. Or maybe they’ve been picked on by the RIAA so much that now they want to take out their frustration on the little guys. Regardless, trying to crack down on anyone who uses the word ‘pod’ in a sentence is going way over the line.
Apple privately probably shares the sentiment of most of these posts.
But from a legal standpoint, they MUST exert authority.
While “podcast” is harmless, many companies would try to exploit the ….pod…. name, if they saw Apple jusyt rolling over.
This isn’t about use of the word “podcast”. This is about companies marketing products by using the word “podcast”. That’s a totally different animal. Apple doesn’t want companies to imply a link between its product and the iPod without their approval.
The term ‘podcast’ is a free advert for Apple and iPod every time is it used.
Apple legal must be out of their tiny minds.
Why not simply check out the user, then issue an ‘Official’ logo if it’s a good operation.
I’ll be surprised if Apple is successful at this. Podcast is a generic term now and has been in the public domain for the last two years. Attempting to cease-and-desist every Tom, Dick, and Harry using the term will be fruitless, though I understand their motivations in trying to solidify the mark with the USPTO.
Perhaps their legal department should have done a better job of solidifying the mark years ago, instead of scrambling to protect its intellectual license (and derriere) now.
A bad tactic either way you scramble the eggs. Riling the public without any chance of success is never a good idea.