Deja Vu: Apple Sues Someone Because Their Logo Looks Like Fruit
As part of a legal manoeuvre worthy of Monster Cable, Apple has set its lawyers on Australia’s largest supermarket chain because their new logo is a little tad too similar to their own.
Exhibit A, Woolworths newly redesigned logo, is on the left. Apple’s iconic apple logo is on the right. Not that similar at all, but the real issue, at least with Apple, is probably that Woolworths might expand its retail business into electronics and somehow threaten that lucrative iPod business.
“While we can’t rule [computers, musical players, or other devices] out, we haven’t got any plans at the moment,” said a Woolworths spokesman in a statement to AppleInsider.
To Apple’s credit, they’ve moved up from suing school systems to supermarket megachains. Bigger fish, and all that. [AppleInsider]
- Next Post: Full Flash For Everyone But iPhone, Actually Playable HD Vids »
- « Previous Post: If Apple Made Audio Components They Would Look Like The EK Amp
Comments (AU Comments | US Comments)
Umm . . . Wow,
Really Apple? Woolworths?
Great work on the image there… MS Paint?!
Better?
I always thought the new Woolworths logo looked more like a pumpkin than an apple. A green pumpkin. Yeah, I know, I’m stupid.
I’d say this was hard to believe, but it’s Apple. Kind of like expecting the “Church” of Scientology not to sue you when you use inverted commas over the word “church”.
I don’t know if my knowledge of our legal system is up to scratch… but can’t Apple only take action under trademark law if the entity they’re taking action against is in the same industry as them? Which Woolworths are most assuredly not!
Also, really Apple? You want to own the image of an apple, however it’s drawn? Why not start suing 6 year olds who draw apples when asked to draw something starting with A. That’s almost as bad as ANZ owning the colour blue and Cadbury owning the colour purple.
ask monster cables about that one
This is the most ridiculous thing! I can’t believe such an innovative company can be so stupid. Who has the right to ownership over natural elements? Apple think THEY created green apples now?? Besides, the Woolies logo looks more like peeled apple to me.
I have NEVER bought anything from Apple because of their aggressive cult-like practices.
I can understand why Apple is worried, Woolworths does own one of Australia’s largest electronic chains ‘Dick Smith Electronic’ and they did remove the ‘Dick Smith’ logo last year.
It wouldn’t be hard to imagine woolworth eventually bringing all its stores under one umbrella eventually.
Especially since ‘Walmart’ is trying to get their foot into the Australian market. If they do Woolworth would have to open a similar competitive store to try and keep their market share.
I never even noticed,even though I drove past millions of their trucks. With a closer look it does look very similar- will be interested to see how this pans out
I think they’re just covering their arses. If Woolworths redesigns their logo in the future to look closer to the Apple logo, there’ll be record of Apple defending their logo in the past.
Good grief. If and maybe if Woolies logo had a bite out of their apple on the right, Apple might have a case. But to claim that no other company can use an apple for their logo? Apples only have one shape. Get used to it Apple. An apple is an apple is an apple!
You are all wrong.. it’s a green “W” :P
Stupid, even for Apple.
So when is Apple going to sue the apple growing industry? Don’t their products look just like Apple’s logo?
Maybe the apple growers should sue Apple for using their product as a logo?
Actually, it IS a ‘W’ stylized to look like produce. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, this highlights the point people have been making – Apple is no different from any other ‘evil’ company. None of them (inclusing MS) are really evil. But Apple’s no saint. About time people started noticing.
This is right up there with ugh boots and chocolate crackles. thankfully hey shouldn’t win and will just lose money and look like douchebags.
If pharmaceutical companies think they can patent MY genes why wouldn’t apple think they can own all apples. patent/copyright law needs a major overhaul globally.
If a company invests time and money in something and then innovates something new from it regardless of the industry then it should be able to protect its investment with a patent. The way you say “MY genes” makes it sound like they ripped your hair out and used your specific set of genes. Anyway the whole “big pharma is evil” line is old and really untrue.
Spose you oppose vaccinations to.
In regards to the article Apple is being ludicrous as has been mentioned previously the “apple” in question is a stylised “W” and really all Apple is doing is protecting its trademark even though it has no case. It is silly but they obviously feel the need to do it. They should lose in court though. I don’t think that Woolworths is going to bend over in this one.
yeah, i’m pretty sure it’s the fault of everyone’s favourite current affairs show… today tonight (maybe a current affair). they had a segment on the old guy who created the new woolworths image. then when asked about his favourite logo of all time, he said he liked the apple logo the best.
This just in … Apple sues God/Universe over creation of fruit that resembles their logo … Duh – WTF?!
The fundamental differences in these two logos, that all professional logo designers are aware of, should mean a “win” for Woolsworth. The Apple logo is a common shape we know as an apple. Yet, just to name one difference, the Woolsworth logo is subliminally a “W” and an apple.