Apple pays woman not to use 'Pod'
updated 10:05 am EDT, Tue September 5, 2006
Apple pays for trademark
Apple will reportedly pay a New Jersey woman to stop using the word "pod" in the name of a protective case she designed for laptop computers, according to The China Post. Terry Wilson, 53, who sells the "TightPod" over the Internet, said Apple contacted her after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said she would soon receive a trademark for the product. The woman wouldn't say how much Apple agreed to pay toward costs of the name change; however, Apple was seeking to keep her trademark from diluting the iPod brand and also protect its own trademarks: "I'm going to be changing the name," Wilson, of Medford Lakes, New Jersey, said yesterday in a phone interview with the publication. "I know that sounds like I'm a sell-out, but I don't have the resources to litigate a trademark case." Apple spokesman Steve Dowling wouldn't comment, according to the report.
Crazy...
09/05, 11:05am reply delete
Has Apple gone completely loopy with the whole "pod" issue? Many, many everyday things have been called something with a "pod" in them since the word has existed.
It's a generic word, and is often used to denote products that enclose a person or machine. Perhaps Apple shouldn't have chosen such a common term if it was so concerned with "dilution". Geez.
Gabriel Morales
Joined:
i agree
09/05, 01:32pm reply
How are Apple getting away with this and why are people giving in to them? I just don't get it. If Apple have trademarked "iPod" then what gives them the right to go after anyone using the "pod" word? I'd love to know the full legalities of what's going on.
videoboy22
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Sep 2006
It's simple extortion
09/05, 01:53pm reply
All they do is say "give in to our BS or we'll make sure you pay us money for the rest of your life". Sounds like gangster protection-money tactics to me.
I won't comment on her "pair" as she's a woman just like me, but I will say she's a coward and a wimp. People giving in to this sort of thing is precisely why it keeps happening!
Buran
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: May 2000
Were it not for the iPod
09/05, 03:17pm reply
she probably would *not* have come up with the name 'TightPod'. Who's playing on names here? Besides, it's not like Apple sued her, they approached her and she agreed. She could have said no. Besides, she'll probably make more money from Apple than she will with the cases anyway. She could call it 'TightSkin' and probably be just fine.
busterswt
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Sep 2006
To all you idiots...
09/05, 10:13pm reply
...claiming that Apple is strong-arming this woman, and how she lacks balls to stand up to 'The Man', you all need a dose of reality (and the ability to read)
The article clearly said that she was about to be granted a trademark on her porduct name, which is why Apple approached and most likely offered her a nice sum of money to part with the name.
That's called a 'business transaction', not 'strong-arm tactics'.
Good for her, I say.
ZinkDifferent
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jan 2005
what?
09/06, 08:41am reply
She's better off calling her product a different name anyway because people will start assuming it's for their ipod, regardless of what it's for.
By calling the case a different name, she can appeal to a much larger consumer base.
Although, I have seen companies pay off people to get rid of certain websites that trashed the offended company. Perhaps she was smart by doing what she did by generating early income before the sale of her initial product.
Raccoon
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Nov 2005