Quantcast
Subscribe to magazine
You are not logged in, click here to log in.
Up to Discussions in Story Discussion
23 Replies Last post: Feb 18, 2007 2:00 PM by jmincey   1 2 Previous Next
Click to view MW Forums's profile New Member
MW Forums
12,220 posts since
Aug 2, 2004
Reply

Feb 16, 2007 4:40 AM

Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone response

Cisco Systems has given Apple a further extension on the deadline to respond to its lawsuit concerning the iPhone name, the company said Friday. more
Reply
Click to view kwill's profile Member
kwill
364 posts since
Jun 4, 2004
1. Feb 16, 2007 10:40 AM in response to: MW Forums
Open letter to Steve Jobs
Dear Mr. Jobs,

As an Apple shareholder, I urge you not to waste money attempting to secure the iPhone brand name. Its recognition has already been diluted by other products.

Reports indicate that interoperability is the key issue. Perhaps this is just a matter of providing Cisco with Mac drivers for its networking products or some sort of native AirPort support for Linksys. Such connectivity may not be all bad. Of course, not knowing the behind-the-scenes details, what is termed "interoperability" may be a veiled request to provide a wireless component for iTV which Cisco could then market under its own brand or some similar product cannibalization maneuver.

Apple has a history of striving for interoperability since you resumed the helm as iCEO. Users are amazed at how well Macs join Windows networks. Bootcamp is yet another example, as is multi-platform iTunes. For the most part, shareholders trust your ability to achieve interoperability while maintaining necessary proprietary technology. If it seems in Apple's best interest to offer better connectivity between Apple and Cisco products I am certain this would be done without being shackled to any iPhone deal.

Sure the iPhone brand has received considerable free press associated with Apple in recent months. Switching to another name would garner just as much press. Numerous other product names have been offered by forum posters which I am certain have come to your attention. In the end, the Apple brand, Mac OS, wireless network speed (read: 3G), and legendary simple UI will impact sales more than the name. (Expandable memory and user-replaceable battery wouldn't hurt either.)

In the big picture, further opposition to the iPhone name is ahead in Canada so agreements reached with Cisco may be a symbolic battle win in a larger war. Customers would much rather have a less expensive phone than see Apple waste millions on frivolous lawsuits in an attempt to secure an already diluted name.
Reply
Click to view sigma8's profile Member
sigma8
575 posts since
Aug 30, 2004
2. Feb 16, 2007 10:56 AM in response to: kwill
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
Hope you sent that to Apple. Stuff here is only fodder for the forum flames.

Anyway, I don't think it will matter much. Cisco's grip on the name is tenuous at best. Even a relatively small settlement will be worth more than continuing to use the name and selling no phones. A LinkSys iPhone is not going to be a major seller, based on the name alone. They can settle for a million (or even less), change the name, and come out ahead.

Heck, even if Apple gave them $10 for rights to the name, they'd probably make more money than if they didn't sell the name to Apple. They'll only push this as hard as they think their case has merit, which probably has a decent amount of merit. One is a VoIP phone, and the other is a cell phone, but I think the judge would conclude they are both indeed phones.

I don't think LinkSys wants to irritate Apple too much though. It's bad press to attack Apple.
Reply
Click to view aestival's profile Member
aestival
246 posts since
Oct 4, 2004
3. Feb 16, 2007 11:26 AM in response to: kwill
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
Quote:<hr />
In the big picture, further opposition to the iPhone name is ahead in Canada...

<hr />


Ha... hahahahaha! Obviously you are unaware that, with the possible exception of the Blackberry, Canada is a giant sinkhole of antiquated cellphone technology -- introducing the iPhone here any time soon would require our cellphone service providers to be something more active than comatose. Now that would be a revolution!
Reply
Click to view jmincey's profile Old Hand
jmincey
3,924 posts since
Aug 27, 2004
4. Feb 16, 2007 11:33 AM in response to: kwill
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
"As an Apple shareholder, I urge you not to waste money attempting to secure the iPhone brand name. Its recognition has already been diluted by other products."

Your letter is well written and you are well spoken, but I disagree with you on both counts. I neither regard the battle over the trademark as a waste of money nor do I agree the iPhone name has been diluted by other products. I contend that even though the Apple iPhone hasn't been released yet, among those who have heard the name, the vast majority already associate it will Apple.

Except for geeks, network engineers, industry analysts, and IT personnel, most people have never even HEARD of Cisco -- and this is especially true of Apple's target consumer market for the iPhone.

I think Apple is in a strong legal position in this contention over the product name. Being first is not everything -- not to mention that Cisco itself was not the first company to use or register the iPhone name.

Apple has far too much invested in the iPhone name to abandon it now. Sure, there is a time to cut one's losses and move on, but it's premature to reach that conclusion at this point.

Apple should stand fast on this for the time being.
Reply
Click to view Polly's profile New Member
Polly
26 posts since
Aug 31, 2004
5. Feb 16, 2007 12:23 PM in response to: MW Forums
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone response
Change the name of the damn phone already. Haven' we had enough of the "i" moniker anyway?
Reply
Click to view kwill's profile Member
kwill
364 posts since
Jun 4, 2004
6. Feb 16, 2007 1:03 PM in response to: jmincey
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
Quote:<hr />
"As an Apple shareholder, I urge you not to waste money attempting to secure the iPhone brand name. Its recognition has already been diluted by other products."

Your letter is well written and you are well spoken, but I disagree with you on both counts. I neither regard the battle over the trademark as a waste of money nor do I agree the iPhone name has been diluted by other products. I contend that even though the Apple iPhone hasn't been released yet, among those who have heard the name, the vast majority already associate it will Apple...

<hr />
Divergent opinions no doubt contribute to the protracted negotiations. I maintain the position that iPhone is an uphill battle for which precious resources could be elsewhere utilized. If the name can be internationally secured with minimal sacrifice (read: cannibalization of other Apple products and financial investment), so be it. On the other hand, changing the name as early as next week will result in much more publicity between then an its release than has occurred over the past month since it was officially announced.
Reply
Click to view jmincey's profile Old Hand
jmincey
3,924 posts since
Aug 27, 2004
7. Feb 16, 2007 1:17 PM in response to: kwill
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
"On the other hand, changing the name as early as next week will result in much more publicity between then an its release than has occurred over the past month since it was officially announced."

I don't agree with that, but let's say you are right that Apple would receive even more publicity with a name change. Yes indeed -- BAD publicity.
Reply
Click to view vfx2k4's profile Member
vfx2k4
186 posts since
Sep 29, 2004
8. Feb 16, 2007 1:34 PM in response to: jmincey
Re: Open letter to Steve Jobs
Quote:<hr />
I don't agree with that, but let's say you are right that Apple would receive even more publicity with a name change. Yes indeed -- BAD publicity.

<hr />


How so? What's innovative about this product is the technology and UI, not the name. Cisco should be honored it has even a tenuously minor piece of what will be a huge product. They look totally ridiculous right now, "No really Steve, we'll give you another week to pay us for absolutely nothing." Bwahahah. Apple can start calling it the the Talking Banana for all I care, I'm getting it. And I don't think I'm alone...
Reply
Click to view Steve_S's profile Enthusiast
Steve_S
1,000 posts since
Sep 9, 2004
9. Feb 16, 2007 4:14 PM in response to: Polly
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
Quote:<hr />
Change the name of the damn phone already. Haven' we had enough of the "i" moniker anyway?

<hr />


Probably, but it was pretty shameless of Cisco to use that naming convention for their product in the first place. In any case, it seems as though they haven't done a good job in protecting the trademark as it is.

They're apparently not looking for money but the ability to take part in the iPhone's success as a third party vendor. I would think Apple could and probably should work something out with them. But, I also suspect Cicso knows it's not standing on solid ground. Why else would they keep extending their self imposed deadlines for Apple to comply? It's like saying "STOP.... or I'll say Stop again!".

Steve
Reply
Click to view Sloggeth's profile New Member
Sloggeth
10 posts since
Feb 16, 2007
10. Feb 16, 2007 5:04 PM in response to: Polly
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
Quote:<hr />
Except for geeks, network engineers, industry analysts, and IT personnel, most people have never even HEARD of Cisco

<hr />


Most people who have been around computers for a few years know about Cisco. It's not like Cisco is some tiny company. They're huge and they've been around for a long time. They are also a very respected company due to the simple fact that they make quality products and sell them at reasonable prices.

Quote:<hr />
-- and this is especially true of Apple's target consumer market for the iPhone.

<hr />


Now that's just a silly statement... unless you're trying to say that Apples target telephone market is completely clueless about anything in the IT industry that resides outside the Apple trademark.
Reply
Click to view jmincey's profile Old Hand
jmincey
3,924 posts since
Aug 27, 2004
11. Feb 16, 2007 5:26 PM in response to: Sloggeth
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
"Most people who have been around computers for a few years know about Cisco."

This all depends on what you mean by "been around computers." There are plenty of large companies that most people have never heard of. Most consumers of computers are not "INTO" computers as such. They simply use them. And so it goes for most things -- cameras, cars, etc. People use devices all the time without understanding all the supplemental manufacturers involved.

I think you are just so close to the industry you have lost your perspective. There are legions of people who use computers every day who have no idea what a router is at all to say nothing of Cisco routers specifically. Most computer users don't know the difference between a hub, router, and switch. Most people just use MS Office, or balance their checkbook, or they use web browsing and e-mail, or they play games.

Cisco is not a consumer company. And unless you are an investor or IT person, even most business people don't know about Cisco.

Apple is an extremely well known brand worldwide. Cisco pales by comparison.
Reply
Click to view Sloggeth's profile New Member
Sloggeth
10 posts since
Feb 16, 2007
12. Feb 16, 2007 5:55 PM in response to: jmincey
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
Quote:<hr />

Cisco is not a consumer company. And unless you are an investor or IT person, even most business people don't know about Cisco.

Apple is an extremely well known brand worldwide. Cisco pales by comparison.

<hr />


I'm willing to bet that there are as many, or more Cisco routers being used in American homes than there are Apple computers in American homes.

I don't know many people using cable internet access that don't use a router to share that access... and most of them use a Linksys model to do so.

Anyone that uses a computer and hasn't heard of Linksys (or wireless router technology for that matter) is pretty clueless about the capabilities of the tool they are using.

Almost everyone that has a laptop, understands what a wireless router is because it's the first question a new laptop owner wants to know... "How do I hook up to the net wireless?" Answer, get a 60$ Linksys.

Apple and Cisco have a lot in common and they are both strong leaders in certain areas. Apple is to the portable music player - what Cisco is to wireless internet access. They are both nearly synonymous with their top selling products. They both hit the consumer technology scene at about the same time - 1984, sure apple was created before that but they didn't really offer a real marketable computer until 1984.

So, to hint that Cisco a powerless, unknown company with no leverage to defend it's ownership of a trademarked name against Apple Inc, is just silly. They trademarked the name first. It's theirs. That's the way the law works. If Apple wants it they have to either licence it or buy it, either way, It's up to Cisco, not Apple.
Reply
Click to view jmincey's profile Old Hand
jmincey
3,924 posts since
Aug 27, 2004
13. Feb 16, 2007 6:04 PM in response to: Sloggeth
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
"I don't know many people using cable internet access that don't use a router to share that access... and most of them use a Linksys model to do so."

Right, and how many people know Cisco owns Link-sys? How many people know which company owns CNN? I agree that the Link-sys name is fairly well known -- though I think it still pales in comparison to the Apple brand -- even among Windows PC users. But we haven't been talking about the Linksys name; we are talking about Cisco, and I submit that Cisco is lesser known.

At the end of the day, this is speculation on our part; I have no study I can cite or data to point to, so it's just a gut feeling.

"So, to hint that Cisco a powerless, unknown company with no leverage to defend it's ownership of a trademarked name against Apple Inc, is just silly."

These are your own interpretations of my words. I'm saying only that the Cisco position is not rock solid and that the Cisco name is not well known.
Reply
Click to view Sloggeth's profile New Member
Sloggeth
10 posts since
Feb 16, 2007
14. Feb 16, 2007 6:18 PM in response to: jmincey
Re: Cisco gives Apple more time for iPhone respons
Quote:<hr />
I'm saying only that the Cisco position is not rock solid and that the Cisco name is not well known.

<hr />


Semantics.

First of all, Cisco is selling iPhones under their legally trademarked name "iPhone". Apple can not because they do not have a legal ownership of the name. If they do, they will be breaking the law and will owe Cisco $$. That's pretty darn "rock solid".

Linksys is as well known as iAnything unless you're living in a closet and your only technology input is Macworld or some other pro-macfanboi website.
Reply
Go to original post 1 2 Previous Next

Actions

More Like This

Macworld powered by Jive Software's Clearspace ® -1.10.1 (Version: {3}) - Submit product feedback
© Jive Software