What's in a name? Would an app store by any other name smell as sweet?

June 22, 2011 11:17 AM

Who owns the term "app store"? Apple wants to, but Amazon and Microsoft, among others, think it is generic. Will Steve Jobs's own words come to haunt him? In any case, the first casualty of the fight between giants seems to be Amahi, a small open-source media server.

Some previous Apple-related trademark scuffles: Woolworth's, the Big Apple, DOPi, Cisco, and of course the Beatles.

posted by kmz (94 comments total)

It wasn't a trademark scuffle, but Butt Head Astronomer really deserves to be mentioned.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:24 AM on June 22, 2011 [5 favorites]

Wait till they run into my clever trademark on "a store"!
posted by Stonestock Relentless at 11:25 AM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

I think the new term "Appl Store" as suggested in the Amahi blog comments sounds like a winner. "Appl" is of course just short for "application".
posted by lantius at 11:26 AM on June 22, 2011 [6 favorites]

Still waiting for my human centIpad
posted by Renoroc at 11:28 AM on June 22, 2011 [10 favorites]

Sure seems like a generic to me.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:29 AM on June 22, 2011

The dictionary people made a huge mistake not getting their copyright paperwork filed.
posted by TwelveTwo at 11:31 AM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Hey, call it whatever you want so long as my phone can still tell me where to find that truck that sells pulled pork sandwiches.
posted by Hoopo at 11:34 AM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

Was anybody else calling applications running on mobile phones "apps" before the iPhone came along?
posted by gyc at 11:34 AM on June 22, 2011

'App' has been shorthand for 'application' for decades, though.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:36 AM on June 22, 2011

Still waiting for my human centIpad

You'll need the patience of Jobs.
posted by hal9k at 11:38 AM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

gyc, I've heard people talking about "apps" since the mid-80's. Using the term to "app" to describe an app which happens to be running on a mobile phone, which happens to be a miniature computer, is completely obvious.
posted by Mars Saxman at 11:40 AM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

So? Container has been in use for decades as well, but there's a trademarked business called "The Container Store." Apple should get the trademark.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:41 AM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

I have no opinion on that topic, entropicamericana, just trying to provide a historical perspective.

Come to think of it, there was a development tool called AppMaker back in the '90s, published by Bowers Development. Long before smartphones. There was also a toolkit called MacApp. It's an old, old term.
posted by Mars Saxman at 11:44 AM on June 22, 2011

The bar to trademark things should be raised not lowered. Fuck Apple for making the world a slightly worse place.
posted by Peztopiary at 11:47 AM on June 22, 2011 [8 favorites]

If humankind is really serious about selling off our common vocabulary, shouldn't the words at least go to the highest bidder? And shouldn't we all get a share?
posted by dephlogisticated at 11:48 AM on June 22, 2011 [5 favorites]

I don't think it makes any sense to say 'Fuck Apple,' which is mostly an abstract entity. I disagree that they should get the patent, but I fully understand why they'd pursue it.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:49 AM on June 22, 2011

Was anybody else calling applications running on mobile phones "apps" before the iPhone came along?

Handango was calling them apps when I owned a Palm M130 (and several subsequent palmOS devices) back in 2000. I don't recall them using the specific phrase "app store" at the time though.
posted by ArkhanJG at 11:49 AM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

BUT WHERE ON THE MENU WILL I FIND MY MOZZARELLA JALAPENO CRUNCH STIX NOW?!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 11:50 AM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

The word "app" is not the issue; the phrase "app store" is.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:50 AM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Steve Jobs called Apple's app store 'the easiest-to-use, largest app store in the world, preloaded on every iPhone.'

If even Jobs himself uses it as a generic term in Apple press releases, that does strike me as pretty generic. I'm sure plenty of lawyers will make lots of money arguing the toss for the next few years though.
posted by ArkhanJG at 11:53 AM on June 22, 2011 [5 favorites]

If "app" is an accepted generic term, then I don't see how "app store" as a trademark has a leg to stand on. What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:56 AM on June 22, 2011

Apple's overreaching here. Amazon called its product "Android AppStore" (no spaces, distinguishing leading word), compared to Apple's "App Store". If you don't want your trademark to be edged in to, don't to trademark the most generic possible phrase you can think of.

They're trying to have their trademark cake (no you can't use that term it's ours) and eat it too (easy to remember, no marketing/branding required).
posted by 0xFCAF at 11:56 AM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

entropicamericana raises a good point with The Container Store, though. I think the only difference I can find is that 'container store' hasn't ever really been a generic usage as far as I'm aware.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:59 AM on June 22, 2011

meh. They'll call it a fish tank if they have to, apps will get sold, lawyers will bill obscene rates for 120 hours a week, etc, etc ad infinitum.
posted by GuyZero at 11:59 AM on June 22, 2011

If "app" is an accepted generic term, then I don't see how "app store" as a trademark has a leg to stand on. What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?

An app shop? *runs off to trademark that, just in case*
posted by lesbiassparrow at 12:05 PM on June 22, 2011

What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?

App shop, App market(place), App catalog are all ones I've seen in the PalmOS and windows mobile days; but then store isn't really used by the British, where I did my app shopping back in the day. I'd be surprised if Apple was really the first ever to use App Store for business in America.

That all said, there's no reason App Store can't be a trademark; After all, both Apple and Windows are pretty generic words, but that doesn't stop them being trademarks.
posted by ArkhanJG at 12:05 PM on June 22, 2011

But 0xFCAF, who wouldn't want to own the trademark on "store"?
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:06 PM on June 22, 2011

Apple getting to trademark "App Store" would be exactly as bad as MicroSoft was getting the trademark on "Windows". They're going to have a realy problem with trademark dilution though: just ask Kleenex and Xerox.
posted by bonehead at 12:06 PM on June 22, 2011

If "app" is an accepted generic term, then I don't see how "app store" as a trademark has a leg to stand on. What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?

iAppStore
posted by ryoshu at 12:08 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

After all, both Apple and Windows are pretty generic words, but that doesn't stop them being trademarks.

Yes, but not for apples or windows.
posted by schoolgirl report at 12:08 PM on June 22, 2011 [9 favorites]

A Wonderful and Magical App Boutique©?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:09 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

But 0xFCAF, who wouldn't want to own the trademark on "store"?

Not Apple. The application expressly disclaimed "store" by itself.
posted by jedicus at 12:10 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?

Windows Marketplace.

I got no dog in this beef, but I think "app store" is generic. "iTunes Store" is not.
posted by mrgrimm at 12:19 PM on June 22, 2011

Fwap Store.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:24 PM on June 22, 2011

They should just call it the iStore.

Also, kudos for the Butt Head Astronomer info, that was great!
posted by Mister_A at 12:30 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is iStore not good enough for Apple these days?
posted by ceribus peribus at 12:31 PM on June 22, 2011

If "app" is an accepted generic term, then I don't see how "app store" as a trademark has a leg to stand on. What else would you call an online store where you sell apps?

My Palm Pre connects to the "App Catalog." Yeah, doesn't quite roll off the tongue like App Store does it?
posted by The Deej at 12:31 PM on June 22, 2011

App Haberdashery
App Bodega
App Mall
App Bazaar
App Warehouse
App Mart

Now to fill out the trademark paperwork...
posted by The Power Nap at 12:33 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Is iStore not good enough for Apple these days?

That's not a generic enough term to be the basis for anticompetitive lawsuits.
posted by kafziel at 12:33 PM on June 22, 2011 [6 favorites]

What they don't realize is that I've already trademarked the terms "Cell phone" and "Mobile Phone". I am going to be RICHHHHHH!
posted by eas98 at 12:38 PM on June 22, 2011

I'm not claiming to be a trademark expert or anything, but it seems like most of us don't understand trademarks at all. This thread is so much noise.

It is my understanding that you have to use and protect a trademark in order to continue possession. App Store seems as legitimate as The Container Store. And Jobs said "app store" in a generic fashion on stage during a presentation whereas the press releases appear to refer to "application stores." I'm not sure but I imagine a slip-up like that isn't enough to invalidate the trademark.

I don't like the state of IP law, but this just feels like more anti-Apple bigotry.
posted by polyhedron at 12:46 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Perhaps, polyhedron, but it's also a dick move by Apple.
posted by verb at 12:58 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

I jumped in here to throw in "App Bodega", but The Power Nap just beat me to it.

Which is kind of a metaphor for this whole stupid IP business anyways. Ideas are quite often thought of independently by multiple inventors within a short time frame of each other. Alexander Graham Bell and Antonio Meucci being the classic example. So it just becomes a race to the patent office. Great for lawyers, not so great for innovation and economic output, because there is lost work in the duplicate efforts.
posted by formless at 12:59 PM on June 22, 2011

It's not enough to invalidate the trademark, but it's evidence that what logically would be a generic term - the common word for applications plus a common word for a place where you can buy things - is in fact being used as a generic term for a place where you can buy mobile applications.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:06 PM on June 22, 2011

Appadashery©
Storelications©
Appodega©
Appazaar©
Apporium©
Appotique©
Appery©
Marklications©
Superappmart©

this is fun
posted by DaddyNewt at 1:10 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's the job of many lawyers to be official dicks for a company, exploring possible advantages that can be had legally, without philosophical or ethical constraints.

Lawyers are not the source of innovation, inspiration or quality at Apple. This is not the turn to the dark side or evidence that it has already happened.

That turn to the dark side may be yet come, we still may have to face Darth Jobs in the third act. But this is just some busy work for lawyers, and my guess is that in the long run it will be as significant as Compton's claims to having a patent on multimedia.
posted by KS at 1:14 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

People are already using the term generically. The barn door's open and the cows are gone.

Apropros of an earlier FPP today: If only we had zero tolerance rules about dickhead CEOs....
posted by Benny Andajetz at 1:19 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

this just feels like more anti-Apple bigotry.

More like anti-asshole bigotry.
posted by inigo2 at 1:28 PM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

Well this is inconvenient:

http://www.usa.gov/Mobile/AppStore/FAQs.shtml
posted by ryoshu at 1:33 PM on June 22, 2011

App Store History
posted by blue_beetle at 1:35 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

Blue Beetle's comment is actually very interesting. Looking at that graph it's pretty obvious that the 'App Store' term in particular didn't become common until Apple launched it and met with success. At that point lots of other things began to be referred to as "So-and-so's App Store" or "The Such-and-such Platform App Store."

Things were definitely referred to as Apps, and they were sold in stores, but "The App Store" isn't something that was necessarily in use.
posted by verb at 1:41 PM on June 22, 2011

If the timeline matters, here are the launch dates based on the respective Wikipedia articles:

Apple App Store - July 10, 2008
Android Market - October 22, 2008
BlackBerry App World - April 1, 2009
Palm App Catalog - June 6, 2009
Windows Marketplace for Mobile - October 6, 2009

The trademark application for "APP STORE" was filed July 17, 2008, it seems that Apple was ahead of the curve.

That being said, if you're the CEO of a company that's talking about one of your trademarked products or services, why refer to it in seemingly general terms? Saying that Apple's App Store is "the largest app store in the world" indicates that there are other, smaller app stores out there.

Also, the third link in the original post refers to two trademark applications - one for "APP STORE" and another for "APPSTORE". A quick search using TESS seems to indicate that there have been two applications to trademark "APPSTORE", both of which have been abandoned. You'd better get on that, Amazon.
posted by youngergirl44 at 1:41 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

The Appetizer© "When You're Hungry for Apps"
posted by dephlogisticated at 1:57 PM on June 22, 2011 [4 favorites]

Apple's App Corps©

Oh wait...
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 1:58 PM on June 22, 2011

this just feels like more anti-Apple bigotry.

Speaking of diluting the language...
posted by MCMikeNamara at 1:58 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Apple-directed intolerance? Apple-centric animosity? Maybe you don't like the word bigotry being used to describe the manifestation of consumer predilections, but whatever this is it isn't a problem Apple created -- it's the way our system works. Irrational hatred of Apple isn't a new thing and it's rather tiresome. I suppose I'll try to use less charged language in the future.
posted by polyhedron at 2:03 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

Please, please stop using the © symbol. That's for copyrights. You want ® or ™.
posted by schoolgirl report at 2:12 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Bias is probably the (accurate) word you are looking for.
posted by entropicamericana at 2:12 PM on June 22, 2011 [4 favorites]

The system works the way it works because people use it that way. It's pretty rational to blame a company for playing the game when we don't like the game. Otherwise, we have no way to criticize Xe for corruption, any big corp for rent-seeking and extortion of local government, or BP for drilling unsafe wells.
posted by Lemurrhea at 2:12 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

this just feels like more anti-Apple bigotry

That's a bit strong, as it is more like reflexive animosity to anything Apple does, put forth regardless of the actual, factual details around the history of the mark.

We should probably just link to blue_beetle's delightfully succinct comment (as well as youngergirl44's) and just close this thread up.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:14 PM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

Appmonger©
posted by itsjustanalias at 2:14 PM on June 22, 2011

CrApp store.
posted by schmod at 2:17 PM on June 22, 2011

I'm for changing the system. And yes, bias is a more appropriate word.
posted by polyhedron at 2:17 PM on June 22, 2011

HERF DURF™
posted by entropicamericana at 2:18 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

Aside from the combination of app and store which is one matter, there are indeed people suggesting that the word app alone was not in use until Apple used it. I was watching a Season 3 X-Files recently and the word a character used to describe an application was "app".

In Canada we have the Beer Store, which no other place can use so I suspect Apple will get exclusive use of it in commercial terms and it won't be a big deal. It doesn't prevent anyone from calling other beer stores beer stores, as it were.
posted by juiceCake at 2:20 PM on June 22, 2011

In ONTARIO we have the Beer Store. And no one else wants to use the name because no one else can sell beer. Your analogy is the exact opposite of what you want to prove as in Ontario there are no other beer stores.
posted by GuyZero at 2:22 PM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

<obligatory>Is this something I'd need to own an expensive fashion accessory that may or may not make phone calls to understand?</obligatory>
posted by Dark Messiah at 2:24 PM on June 22, 2011

Things like that are never actually obligatory.
posted by shakespeherian at 2:31 PM on June 22, 2011 [4 favorites]

Christ, what an app store.
posted by chavenet at 2:35 PM on June 22, 2011 [3 favorites]

Is this something I'd need to own an expensive fashion accessory that may or may not make phone calls to understand?

You can get an iPhone on Verizon now, so it will actually make phone calls.
posted by ryoshu at 2:36 PM on June 22, 2011

Aside from the combination of app and store which is one matter, there are indeed people suggesting that the word app alone was not in use until Apple used it.

Do you mean in this thread? I can't find any. The closest is one person who asked whether others had been using the word previously. Responses in the thread were pretty unanimous that others had, in fact, been using the word 'App' long before 'App Store.'

If there are people suggesting that the word 'App' is unique to Apple, they don't appear to be in this thread. Just clarifying.
posted by verb at 2:53 PM on June 22, 2011

I think there may be some people that are confused by the situation, as I was before reading the thread. When I first heard the term "app store", I had no idea that it was Apple-related or Apple-specific; it seemed immediately evident that it was a generic term for a possibly-for-pay possibly-proprietary package manager. I didn't even know that the term was intentionally coined by anyone so much as spontaneously emerging as the most natural way to express a possibly-for-pay possibly-proprietary package manager*. And it's really surprising and counterintuitive that someone should be able to trademark such a term.

That's not to say that they legally can't. I have no idea whether they can or not, or whether they should or not. It just seems weird. This isn't intended as an argument one way or another- just an attempt at a vitriol-free, bigotry-free explanation of one viewpoint.

*About a year after I first heard the term, I was working on some software that needed an app store. One of my coworkers said "I know this is copying Apple, but I think we should call this the 'app store'. It's just for the intranet so no one's going to complain." I had no idea what he meant by "copying Apple"; we had apps, we wanted to provide a store for them, done deal. That was my first inkling that anyone thought that Apple "owned" the term.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 3:21 PM on June 22, 2011

"App" is the most annoying word in the English language.
posted by joannemullen at 3:38 PM on June 22, 2011

"App" is the most annoying word in the English language.

I vote for "sibling".
posted by chavenet at 3:40 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Oh! I got one! Fall Into The App.

Back in a moment; establishing prior art
posted by Spatch at 3:45 PM on June 22, 2011

I will open a store for pornographic apps and it will be called the

Fapp Store©
posted by Hairy Lobster at 4:13 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

"App" is the most annoying word in the English language.

How about "transition" as a verb?
posted by Hoopo at 4:34 PM on June 22, 2011

'Option' as a verb is worse.
posted by shakespeherian at 4:41 PM on June 22, 2011

The Appothecary or the App Souk
posted by SpaceWarp13 at 4:42 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

App is short for Application, which is (or, rather, was) Applish for Program.

That said, snooze = lose.
posted by Sys Rq at 5:41 PM on June 22, 2011

Instead of Apps I'll call them "progs" for Programs and I'll distribute them via ROMs. They'll be ProgROMs. That's a catchy name.
posted by GuyZero at 5:43 PM on June 22, 2011

In Canada we have the Beer Store, which no other place can use so I suspect Apple will get exclusive use of it in commercial terms and it won't be a big deal. It doesn't prevent anyone from calling other beer stores beer stores, as it were.

The Beer Store is a collusive enterprise owned by Molson and Labatt, with a dash of Sleeman for good measure, and has had a monopoly on the entire domestic beer retail industry in Ontario since the end of prohibition.

There aren't any other beer stores in Ontario, except the government-run liquor stores.
posted by Sys Rq at 5:55 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

"App" is the most annoying word in the English language.

Irregardless, I would guesstimate that most of the sheeple in the blogosphere will end up literally exploding with butthurt over this legal fracas.
posted by dephlogisticated at 5:59 PM on June 22, 2011 [6 favorites]

I simultaneously want to favorite that comment and murder it.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 6:24 PM on June 22, 2011 [2 favorites]

Horselover Phattie: "Here's the one to watch."

How many finger touch was that kid using to grope that girl in Big Bear and does Jobs have a patent on that?
posted by symbioid at 6:37 PM on June 22, 2011

Why would you want to use the term "app store"? If you were Google or Amazon, wouldn't you want to differentiate yourself?
posted by fungible at 6:46 PM on June 22, 2011

The Beer Store is a collusive enterprise owned by Molson and Labatt

Holy crap! I lived there for 29 years and did not realize this. It does explain the dearth of local brews in T.O. (versus Victoria) I experienced on a recent visit back there.

As you were....
posted by not_that_epiphanius at 7:04 PM on June 22, 2011 [1 favorite]

It is my understanding that you have to use and protect a trademark in order to continue possession. App Store seems as legitimate as The Container Store. And Jobs said "app store" in a generic fashion on stage during a presentation whereas the press releases appear to refer to "application stores." I'm not sure but I imagine a slip-up like that isn't enough to invalidate the trademark.

Well it was a substantive statement. He said that Apple had the largest app store in the world. If App Store is the name for Apple's software repository, then this is an information-free sentence. He obviously said it with intent to communicate, in my mind that makes it relevant.

I don't like the state of IP law, but this just feels like more anti-Apple bigotry.

Oh give it a REST. I could take the pedantic route here and decry using a word like bigotry when describing people speaking against a gigantic multinational corporation. But I think people would be just as upset, and have been, over any other huge corporation attempting to trademark something unreasonably generic-seeming.
posted by JHarris at 7:30 PM on June 22, 2011

There may very well be a thing called "The Container Store" (which I'd never heard of before this thread) but, you know, trademark offices will generally accept any old thing you throw money at them to register. It probably just means that nobody has ever had anything to gain by challenging the trademark.

You don't have to be remotely anti-Apple to think that "app" is a generic term and "store" is a generic term and "app store" is a generic, descriptive term which there is no rational reason for allowing a single company to own. I propose a campaign of insurgency: seed the Internet with references to the "Google app store", the "Windows app store", the "Steam app store" etc. Together, we can free the words "app" and "store" and return them to the people!
posted by A Thousand Baited Hooks at 9:27 PM on June 22, 2011

If you were Google or Amazon, wouldn't you want to differentiate yourself?

With a couple exceptions, nearly everything these guys do is derivative of Apple in this space. If they differentiate themselves, they run the risk of people just going to the real thing, which hurts their market share. The more they copy Apple, the more they weaken their only real competition, which is why this dispute exists in the courts in the first place.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:50 AM on June 23, 2011 [1 favorite]

nearly everything these guys do is derivative of Apple in this space. If they differentiate themselves, they run the risk of people just going to the real thing, which hurts their market share.

Surely this is the wrong way around. Failure to differentiate makes them appear derivative, so why not buy the "real thing"?
posted by howfar at 4:48 AM on June 23, 2011

Price.

You can get as good as the "real thing" or simply "good enough" for much less than Apple charges. There are a few Android devices that are iPhone/iPad competitors, but there's lots of money to be made with higher volume, cheaper devices. Aside from the affluent, the majority can't justify Apple's prices.

Apple makes BMWs. Toyota's compacts are inferior by every performace metric to an M3, but outsell them by a large margin.
posted by bonehead at 8:17 AM on June 23, 2011

U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton said today after a hearing in Oakland, California, that she is “probably” going to deny the motion* because Apple hasn’t demonstrated confusion among consumers. Hamilton said she will review court filings before issuing a final decision.

Apple’s difficulty demonstrating “real evidence of actual confusion” among consumers is a “stumbling block for Apple,” Hamilton said in court. “I’m troubled by the showing that you’ve made so far, but that’s where you’re likely not to prevail at this early juncture.”


* Apple's motion is for an injunction to stop Amazon using the term "app store"; Apple Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc., 11-01327, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland). Amazon's argument is it's too generic a phrase for Apple to have exclusive rights, and even if iso, Apple can’t show that consumers would confuse the two services because Apple’s service only sells downloads for the iPhone and other Apple devices. The judge appears to be siding with Amazon on the latter argument at this point.
posted by ArkhanJG at 1:06 PM on June 23, 2011

Mullered the links there; story is here, and here.
posted by ArkhanJG at 1:20 PM on June 23, 2011