Filed under: Business + Politics | Tags: Apple, Bloomberg, disputes, GreeNYC, legal, NYC, trademark
New York City began a green initiative called GreeNYC in May 2007 to promote environmental awareness. Mayor Bloomberg launched the campaign with the goal of lowering the city’s carbon emissions by 30% by 2030. The logo, a green curvilinear apple, has shown up hybrid taxis, whole foods reusable bags, bus shelters, and other places around the city.
GreeNYC is attempting to trademark the logo which does not sit well with Apple Inc. Every trademark application goes through a 30 day opposition phase and Apple is disputing the logo claiming it will “seriously injure” their reputation.
I see why Apple has an interest in maintaining the uniqueness of their logo and brand image, it does have mystifying effects on the mind after all. But an apple is one of the most basic and universal shapes and Apple will be hard pressed to find legal grounds to counter the GreeNYC logo. Hopefully the two will come to some sort of an agreement. Defeating the GreeNYC logo will certainly put frowns on the faces of environmentalists and Apple fans alike. It may end up tarnishing Apple’s environmental image.
I’m surprised Washington Apples made it past Apple’s legal team.
via: Daily Tech
Bobby Grace
2 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Bobby,
It always intrigues me how corporates respond to the slightest whiff of brand infringement. Of course, I know it’s all about safeguarding established names and reputations etc., but looking at the GreenNYC logo, I’m not sure if one can make the connection with the Apple brand. Frankly speaking, the logo itself looks confusing – hardly like any green “apple” I know, which then had me looking if there was an “NY” symbol represented, or both, and I just don’t see either.
It looks more like something from a Cyrillic alaphabet, and possibly even harder to imagine what subliminal messages could emanate from that. My take then is that the city should have opted for a logo that’s not as confusing, and secondly that Apple ought not to have even bothered with legal action as there’s not much of a resemblance in any event to its trademark brand.
-Denzyl
Comment by denzylj April 9, 2008 @ 3:49 pmI agree with Denzyl. Apple has more to worry about with Greenpeace then Green Apples.
Comment by j500 April 29, 2008 @ 8:45 pmSimran