SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Apple has been sued over its use of the "Animoji" trademark. Apple uses the name for its iPhone X feature that allows users to control and send emoji using their own facial expressions. Apple claims that the trademark is invalid:
A Japanese company, which owns the trademark for "Animoji" in the US, is suing Apple for using the word to name its iPhone X feature. The Tokyo-based company, Emonster, filed the suit on Wednesday in US federal court, saying, "Apple made the conscious decision to try to pilfer the name for itself." The company's CEO, Enrique Bonansea, is a US citizen living in Japan.
Emonster owns an iOS app called Animoji that launched in 2014, which lets people send emoji that are animated in a loop like GIFs. The app asks you to compose the message kind of like how you would format a line of code in Python or Javascript, with parentheses and brackets that separate the kinds of effects you want to add to text or emoji. The app costs $0.99 on iTunes.
Emonster claims that Apple knew about the trademark and offered to buy it, but was turned down. Emonster has owned the "animoji" trademark since 2015, but Apple filed a petition to cancel the trademark on the grounds that EMONSTER, INC. was dissolved in the State of Washington in 2004 and did not exist when the trademark application was filed on August 20, 2014 by Enrique Bonansea, who identified himself as the President of EMONSTER, INC.
Also at Reuters and AppleInsider.
Previously: Apple's New iPhone X will let You Control the Poo Emoji with Your Face
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Fluffeh on Monday October 23 2017, @04:57AM (5 children)
While I totally agree with the little guy here, it's going to be a case of the little guy getting out-lawyer'ed. Apple clearly has enough money to keep throwing at this till this company is bankrupt many times over. THis just seems to be a case where they don't even want to pay the right amount to just buy the whole company/trademark - just to get away with it.
(Score: 2) by rylyeh on Monday October 23 2017, @05:09AM (3 children)
In ancient times, Apple pretended to be the friend of the individual by making a Personal Computer!
"a vast crenulate shell wherein rode the grey and awful form of primal Nodens, Lord of the Great Abyss."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by lx on Monday October 23 2017, @05:27AM (2 children)
Antitrust the hell out of Apple. At least split up the company into a computer manufacturer, a phone maker and a media company. I'm sure an excuse can be found if there is enough political will.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Mykl on Monday October 23 2017, @05:56AM (1 child)
Surely if Apple really does need to be split up, there will be enough legitimate reasons not to need an "excuse"?
(Score: 2) by lx on Monday October 23 2017, @06:15AM
One person's excuse is another person's legitimate reason. The lines between the two aren't as fixed in politics as they are in law, and ultimately this is a political choice. Do we want companies to exist that are as powerful as Samsung is in South Korea or do we want to limit that power?
In short: I do no have the same trust in the ability of existing laws to limit corporate power that you seem to have.
(Score: 1) by evilcam on Tuesday October 24 2017, @02:32AM
Even when Cisco sued them over the iPhone and IOS trademarks Apple still got what it wanted in the end...
Feel bad for the little guy who is going to end up with nothing.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 23 2017, @06:06AM
Sounds like an open-shut, open-shut, open-shut...case.
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Monday October 23 2017, @06:52AM (1 child)
I don't care how ridiculous their prices are, or whatever other consumer gripe.
Apple is funneling all their influx through Ireland, so they don't pay any (almost none) US taxes.
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0x663EB663D1E7F223
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 23 2017, @06:41PM
They don't pay almost any EU tax either. Isn't it lovely how the richest get most state subsidies?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/30/apple-pay-back-taxes-eu-ruling-ireland-state-aid [theguardian.com]
(Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Monday October 23 2017, @09:12AM
I cannot really comment on the case in question, however, methinks there is a pattern here. Apple being the ying-yang of Microsoft has developed its own version of embrace-extend-extinguish:
Invite (into the walled garden)-wait (if its worthwhile)-rip off (all your bases are belong to us)
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday October 23 2017, @08:00PM
So, a company who asked another company for its trademark, and got denied, is now suing to invalidate it so they can grab it outright ...
I can see that. It's easier to use lawyers than to slap the marketing guy who couldn't come up with an alternate name, I guess.
Yet, taking a step back, and considering the centrality of that feature to their business, the appeal and unquestionably valuable differentiator that this product is... WTF IS WRONG with the guy who said "let's figure out an angle under which we can sue them" ?