01/11/2007, 3:05pm, EST
Thursday, January 11th
Apple calls Cisco iPhone lawsuit "silly"
On Wednesday, Cisco filed for an injunction to prevent Apple from using the iPhone name, which is currently used for VOIP-based devices from its consumer wireless division. The companies were reportedly on the verge of an agreement after several weeks of negotiations.
"Intellectual property is the lifeblood of Silicon Valley and we all have to protect our property. The iPhone trademark is owned by Cisco, as noted in your story," a Cisco spokesperson told the WSJ. "We (Cisco) had hoped to reach an agreement to share our trademark with Apple, yet they decided to use the name without our agreement, so we, unfortunately, are having to go to court to stop them from using the name. We still hope we can reach an agreement, but when your neighbor steals your property, you have no recourse other than to call the cops and file a complaint."
Mark Chandler, Cisco's SVP and General Counsel, on Apple's infringement of Cisco's iPhone trademark, also said in his blog that he was surprised when Apple announced the iPhone without an agreement, because they were open to sharing the iPhone brand with Apple.
"For the last few weeks, we have been in serious discussions with Apple over how the two companies could work together and share the iPhone trademark," Chandler wrote in his blog. "We genuinely believed that we were going to be able to reach an agreement and Apple's communications with us suggested they supported that goal. We negotiated in good faith with every intention to reach a reasonable agreement with Apple by which we would share the iPhone brand."
"So, I was surprised and disappointed when Apple decided to go ahead and announce their new product with our trademarked name without reaching an agreement," he continued.
The refusal by Apple was taken as a slight against the Silicon Valley values of intellectual property and good faith negotiations, according to Cisco's executive: "It was essentially the equivalent of 'we're too busy.'"
Filed under: Apple
, 
, 15
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
Or if they really want "i" in the name call it the [iFone]
that does not infringe on Cisco's trademark of the name iPhone_
2. What makes you think Apple would delay a MacWorld introduction over unfinished paperwork? Apple is not going to delay an announcement this big just to make you happy.
3. Trying to trademark iPhone in the first place was plain stupid. You and everyone else in the world knows that an "i" anything is going to be used by Apple, and they have precendence.
4. You do not have an exclusive hold on the "iPhone" name. It's a diluted reference.
5. Is it even possible to sue someone over a product that doesn't even exist yet?
6. Get back to making routers & switches. You're not making a cell phone anyway.
Apple, you could probably easily prevail in this lawsuit, but why bother? Play nice with Cisco, be a good neighbor, be reasonable and continue negotiations with Cisco so the sharks can go swim in some other ocean.
D
You must have just woken up to computer world when iMac just came along.
Bottom line, the timing of Cisco's iPhone announcement seems suspicious. As if they now all of a sudden decided to release their "iPhone" speculating they'd be able to blackmail Apple out of some cash.
However, the law is the law and Cisco has the upper hand in court right now. They cannot claim Apple iPhone is hurting their sales, as Creative did before, but they can ask for banning Apple iPhone from entering the market. I presume the case will be settled out of the court with Apple paying some fixed amount of money and Cisco promising they won't sue Apple for their current generation of iPhone.