LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Apple did not prove that App Store
was famous and not descriptive, therefore Apple failed to establish a
likelihood of success at trial. On July
6, 2011 US District Judge Phyllis Hamilton denied Apple's request to enjoin
Amazon from using "App Store" as she ruled that it was unlikely that there
would be any confusion between customers of Apple and Amazon.
Actually the standard to obtain a
temporary injunction is so high they are rarely granted.
Apple needed to prove that it had
irreparable harm, money damages would not suffice, and it would ultimately win
at trial. Which meant that at the trial Apple would have to prove "trademark
infringement, Apple must show ownership of a legally protectable mark and a
likelihood of confusion arising from Amazon's use." Amazon's defense was that
App Store is a generic mark "because Apple's App Store is simply an online
store where consumers can search for, choose, and download apps."
In January 2011 Apple
announced that more than 10 billion apps were downloaded so Judge
Hamilton's ruling may have an interesting impact on the future for Apple and
the app world!
Visit Peter Vogel's Internet,
Information Technology and e-Discovery Blog
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us
through our corporate