MacsimumNews - Your Leading Apple News Alternative

J. Scott Anderson Says:

Several points that I would like to make on this:

• I seem to recall that you can “own” AdWords if you pay enough money. So, if Apple and any other company is doing that, it is their business and Google’s. Google is offering the service and Apple is buying it.

• Second, it seems foolish to me that Apple would outright buy the word “apple”, since the word has so many potential relationships that have nothing to do with anything Apple Computer might be doing.

• Google, while the most popular today, in mind share if not actual market share, is not the only game in town for this type of advertising. Yahoo, for one, has a similar advertising offer. So, while Apple may have purchased (or forced Google through legal means) to prevent Apple from being used in the advertising, that does not prevent someone from using the word “apple” in advertising on Yahoo’s service.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Ron Evry Says:

What if I want to sell my Apple Records collection on Google?

What if I’m selling real edible Apples?
You know, Granny Smith, Rome, Delicious, McIntosh?

Posted on October 21, 2005

J. Scott Anderson Says:

I agree, Mr. Evry. However, exclusivity contracts are not unusual. And, provided Apple purchased the word “apple”, then it is a pure business decision on Google’s part. They have to decide if they’ll make more money selling the word to Apple Computer or declining to do so in the hopes of making more money off someone wanting to sell edible apples, etc.

If this is a legal issue, then I have to assume that Google’s sophisticated search technology would be used to allow ads that are not related to Apple Computer to pass muster and be displayed. Of course, that begs the question about whether or not authorized resellers of Apple Computers and accessories are going to be hurt by this or not.

Posted on October 21, 2005

hmurchison Says:

Google’s model has always been “Don’t be evil” lately they’ve kinda of walked a fine line between being the hip company everyone wants to work for to being a tad sleazy.

Apple clearly doesn’t own the overall trademark for “Apple” as they are being sued by Apple Records.

Google is simply being a co-conspirator in a total trademark abuse sham. Shame

Posted on October 21, 2005

J. Scott Anderson Says:

Hello, Murchison!

I agree that Google is walking a lot of fine lines lately. But two points, first, if they are being forced to assist in maintaining Apple’s legitimate trademarks, then that is not evil. In fact, I would content the opposite.

Second, you are correct in Apple not owning the trademark for all things Apple. But I do not know if that is what is happening with Google’s AdWord. They may be filtering for just things about Apple Computer. But then, I have no facts either way. If someone does have a source of more information, I would love to see it. The details can clear up, for better or worse, what is happening here.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Hadley Stern Says:

I’m pretty sure this is unrelated to Apple as a company, and has to do with trademarked words in general. For example, if I wanted to use Coke, or Pepsi, in an ad Google would also highlight it. Same if I wanted to use Miata, or Mustang (ie, products within a brand). In this way iPod is the same.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Ian O Says:

Perhaps the ‘community’ should develop codes that everyone will eventually understand. Like refer to the “Brayburn” computer manufacturer and the “Peapod” music player. There are more ways to kill a cat than stuffing its neck with canaries.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Steve Philips Says:

Just curious. If YOU were famous and lots of people decided to set up websites using your name to make money - for themselves - would you be happy about the name recognition (that you would already have, being “famous” or would you be concerned that some of those sites were flakey and could potentially damage the way people thought of you. “So and So in nude romp!”, “free iPod” etc.  add to that that they are making $ on your name but you’re not getting any. (of the $ I mean!) How would you react - if you had the power to actually do it?
Just curious. I would personally try to stop them until I could see what they were doing and if I approved. (And if I could get a cut!!!)

Posted on October 21, 2005

MWLewis Says:

someone said:
[[Apple clearly doesn’t own the overall trademark for “Apple” as they are being sued by Apple Records.]]

Apple owns the trademark when applied to markets that they do business in. The suit with Apple Records is a long-standing settlement that is, largely, ancient history. Except that Apple Records would like a cut of everything that Apple Computer does that touches music. Like anyone is confused by Apple Records and Apple Computer. Show of hands? I thought so.

I doubt that Google has contacted Harry and David and told them to pull their ads for “juicy Washington apples. iPod is an Apple Computer TRADEMARK. So it the Apple logo (in some surveys the most recognized in the world.) Apple has the right to control their logo. And no one is saying that companies cannot USE Apple or iPod in their ad, if they in fact have a RIGHT TO DO SO. Apple has allowed companies to use both Apple and Macintosh in their advertising forever, as long as you follow the guidelines they set. It isn’t *brainless* but it is easy, as long as you play by the rules. Apple and Google didn’t make the rules, they are just following and enforcing them. Their right, their privilege.

Posted on October 21, 2005

MWLewis Says:

this comment:
[[Perhaps the ‘community’ should develop codes that everyone will eventually understand. Like refer to the “Brayburn” computer manufacturer and the “Peapod” music player.]]
is just this side of absolute idiocy. What is the point? To develop doublespeak like that will somehow make things better for the “community?” How would THAT work? It sounds like more trouble than applying and receiving permission to use the logo and name! Businesses don’t want to steal intellectual property or trademarks because the law that prohibits this protects THEM as well. And it is more essential to a small business than a GIANT COMPANY like Apple Computer.

“Hey, watch this. There, I just cut off my left index finger. How do you like THAT, you big mean company. Thattal teachya! Damn right!”

Please understand something about business, Ian, before advocating a popular revolution that would hurt the people you seem to be advocating for more than the big company you want to dis.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Sprocket999 Says:

[Apple and Google didn’t make the rules, they are just following and enforcing them.]

Whoa. Who didn’t make the rules? Unless I am completely mistaken here, we ARE talking about the adwords that Apple buys/rents (whatever) from Google who created this concept of adwords within THEIR search facility in the first place, yes? Following that line of thought, Google sure as hell DID make the rules and Apple is taking FULL advantage of the situation by acting upon them with the same shark-like vigor one would normally associate with the ‘owner of the other 95% of the digital age’.

Let’s be clear here—“adwords” have NOTHING to do with the Trade Mark Office or logos, or anything outside of the realm of Google.

Posted on October 21, 2005

Dennis De Mars Says:

OK, I have to clear up some misconceptions in the comments I am reading. I am a shareware developer and I have used Google AdWords ads for a year or so now, and all of my ads have recently been disallowed due to this action by Apple.

The main misconception seems to be that advertisers have been barred from using “Apple” and “Mac”, etc. as “AdWords”, that is, the keywords you use to match searches so that your ad can appear when users do a search that uses that keyword.

This is not true; there is no restriction on using these keywords. The restriction is, the words “Apple” and “Mac” may not be used in the _text_ of the ad, that is, the ad that the use sees. So I, as a shareware software developer, cannot mention that my software is specifically for the Macintosh.

The other misconception is that this is somehow comparable to restrictions on ads in other media or even other web ads. I don’t think it is. Have you ever seen a software ad in a magazine or on the web for a Mac application that didn’t mention the Mac, or an iPod accessory that didn’t mention the iPod? As long as the ad explicitly acknowledges the words as Apple trademarks, I don’t think each of these advertisers have to get explicit permission from Apple to use the words.

Google suggests that we use other terms that Apple hasn’t requested them to ban, such as “OS X”. I find this less than satisfactory because I am sure “OS X” is an Apple trademark and I have no guarantee that Apple won’t request Google to ban this from ads also at any arbitrary moment. I prefer to eschew Google AdWords ads completely until Apple and Google arrive at an arrangement that treats third party providers of software and accessories for Apple products in a more reasonable manner.

Posted on October 22, 2005

dtroxell Says:

[Apple has allowed companies to use both Apple and Macintosh in their advertising forever, as long as you follow the guidelines they set.]

A couple weeks ago, Google stopped our adwords ads which contained the word “Mac.” We now advertise our “Mac” software as “for OS X” just to get around Google.

We contacted Apple SW Licensing, but received no reply to our request for Google’s required letter on Apple letterhead.

Google’s new policy makes it difficult to differentiate our software as a Mac only product.  If this is an Apple driven policy it seems short sighted…

Posted on October 22, 2005

Bill Says:

Actually, all this bru-ha-ha has a simple solution. The trademark laws in SWITZERLAND and a few eastern european countries allowed Apple to pull the ads. The rule only applies to those adwords which are displayed in those countries. So since MOST adwords are setup to display in “All Countries” they got killed.

To fix the problem, don’t display in Switzerland or eastern European countries. Resubmit your ad and tell Google Support the offending countries have been removed, and presto, your ads are reactivated. No big whup.

Posted on October 22, 2005

How Goes It Says:

Years ago my Dad was approached by a local newspaper. They said they wanted to do an article about his company. They wanted pay for this. So what you would of had, is an ad posing as an article.

Back around 85, I built a very unique house for a developer. It was on the local T.V. news here in L.A.. I heard there was a fair amount of money exchanged for this NEWS article.

So, do you think this type of thing rarely happens with newspapers, cable news companies, or whatever type of news service ?!

I guess some figure Apple should get their cut if their name were used in a way similar to what I mentioned above. It would be interesting to see Apple demanding their cut from news agencies. What if the news people said, no we ain’t paying. Apple sues, and let’s say they win. Think the news people would want to plug anything Apple?! Apple would likely have to change their policy real fast - that is, they would realize there is a little give and take in the real world.

This endless web could go on for quite a ways.

I have been a diehard Mac user since 86. I would have to agree with the previous 2 guys—at some point - Apple needs to back off. I guess, the exact point, will have people talking for quite some time. But realize this, there is the letter of the law - and then, there is reality. As a self employed business man, I have learned to live in REALITY.

Long story short - whether in the right or wrong—some big companies try to get away with as much as they can. How about when Apple threatened suing sites for any talk whatsoever about future products. That surely wasn’t a pretty thing.

Posted on October 22, 2005

EU dealer Says:

I work for an authorized dealership in the EU. Apple has HUUUGE problems with grey marketing of product into these markets.  The retail prices of Apple products are sometimes 50% more than in the US (ipods especially) Consumers aren’t stupid (especially in Eastern Europe) so they search for suppliers in the U.S. online and order...sometimes in quantity and then they re-sell it.  The Apple Store online won’t ship out of the US, but they’ve never been able to stop other companies from selling Apple outside the U.S., so Apple may be trying this “trademark” approach to kill companies who do this. So instead of adjusting the pricing, they’ve gone into control freak mode. In the Czech Republic for example, it is now impossible to find anything on google relating to apple that isn’t apple.cz. 
It’s the “great swathe” approach and I don’t think it’s wise...a surgical approach would be better…

Posted on November 26, 2005