November 15, 2005 2:10 PM PST
Apple threat prompted name change, coders say
- Related Stories
-
Suit filed over Nano scratches
October 21, 2005 -
Former exec sues Apple over dismissal
March 1, 2005 -
Apple sues over loose Tiger
December 21, 2004 -
Beatles group sues Apple over trademark
September 12, 2003 -
Tibco sues Apple over trademark
August 28, 2003 -
Apple sues former contractor
December 11, 2002 -
Software firm sues Apple over use of OS 9 name
September 3, 1999 -
Apple bears down on iMac knockoffs
August 25, 1999
iPodder Lemon was a free application distributed under the General Public License, or GPL, that allows users to manage their podcasts--audio and video programs downloaded from the Internet to an MP3 player.
The product supports more than 15 languages and has a built-in directory with thousands of podcasts feeds. It automatically downloads new podcasts when they become available.
The application's developers say Apple's legal team asked the open-source group to drop the name of the software because it suggested a connection to the company's flagship iPod device. The developers have changed the name of the product to Juice.
Scott Grayban, a Juice developer who also works on a similar product called CastPodder, denied Apple's claim that iPodder's name would confuse consumers.
"It's disappointing to see a large company such as Apple go after a small open-source project, and just shortly after we had over 1 million downloads," Grayban added.
"In fact, if anything we helped their sales of iPod because that was one of the MP3 players iPodder could sync to," he said.
Apple declined to comment for this story.
In a Web posting, developer Garth T. Kidd said the name change was inconvenient but could have been worse.
"Fortunately for us, Apple's lawyers were polite almost to the point of being apologetic--and entirely reasonable. It's not appropriate for me to go into the details of our arrangement, but I can say I don't feel hard done by. Sure, I wouldn't have minded not having to change our name, but that couldn't really be avoided," he wrote.
Karen Gomm of ZDNet UK reported from London.
See more CNET content tagged:
podcast,
Apple Computer,
GPL,
lawyer,
open source
It's like if someone came out with an app called Windower.
name sound much better anyway. But it seem sad to have open
source developer wasting time to make such a program when
itunes already done so well.
provacative headline above an article that doesn't support the
attempted hysteria. "Apple Threat..." There is not a single word
in the story that supports the contention that a threat was
levied. On the contrary, the coder mentioned states, "Fortunately
for us, Apple's lawyers were polite almost to the point of being
apologetic--and entirely reasonable." That doesn't jive with the
picture of fire-breathing lawyers that the headline conjures.
Look, it is incumbent upon owners of tradenames to protect the
use of those names. There is nothing mean-spirited about it.
The fact is that if a tradename owner does not take action when
its tradename is misused or appropriated, the owner can lose
the rights to that tradename. I once received a letter from
Dupont attornies because in a 40 page brochure we accidentally
failed to print a ® after the word Teflon®. They actually DID
threaten to make us destroy 5,000 copies of that brochure if we
beg forgiveness and promise never to let it happen again. It
doesn't sound like the Juice coders, who state "...I can say I don't
feel hard done by," were treated this way by Apple.
Hey C/net editors, why not just make a headline that reads,
"Software developer changes name of product at Apple's
request"? That would have been more accurate and I would have
still read the article.
The association between the mark "ipod" and Apple's music players didn't happen by accident. It cost Apple (in $, years and effort)to build that association in the minds of consumers. Maintaining this association and the marks value continues to cost Apple. If a company stops protecting its trademarks, the trademarks lose their value, and eventually the company risks losing its ownership of them.
Mr.Grayban says he sees Apple's action to protect its trademark as dissappointing. But why does he expect Apple to allow the dilution of its hard-earned trademark for the benefit of himself and his program?
describe a category of product. I also still see Apple leading that
category.