If you’re thinking of opening a store with a glass front and a rectangular pattern design, you might want to look at Apple’s latest trademark registration. The company is making what seems likely to be a doomed attempt to stop knock-off stores.
Apple has registered a trademark not on a logo, but rather “the design and layout of a retail store.” It’s a complicated topic as Apple lawyers have clearly tried to make the drawing and description specific enough that the trademark is considered valid, but not so detailed that you can get away with ripping it off by simply making a couple of minor tweaks.
According to the filing, an Apple store:
features a clear glass storefront surrounded by a paneled facade consisting of large, rectangular horizontal panels over the top of the glass front, and two narrower panels stacked on either side of the storefront. Within the store, rectangular recessed lighting units traverse the length of the store’s ceiling. There are cantilevered shelves below recessed display spaces along the side walls, and rectangular tables arranged in a line in the middle of the store parallel to the walls and extending from the storefront to the back of the store. There is multi-tiered shelving along the side walls, and a oblong table with stools located at the back of the store, set below video screens flush mounted on the back wall.
The filing also notes that the trademark doesn’t cover the appearance of individual items such as the lighting or walls, but does cover their placement. The trademark doesn’t try to protect Apple’s color scheme.
It’s third time lucky for Apple, which has had two previous applications rejected by the US Patent and Trademark office for being too generic.
Whether this will make any real difference remains to be seen. It’s hard to imagine a court finding against a US store that innocently “breached” the trademark: there are only so many ways you can combine tables and shelves in a practical manner. Meanwhile those stores that are an intentional attempt to rip off Apple are mainly based in China where this particular trademark has no effect.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

 
Top