With "pod" on lockdown, Apple goes after "podcast"
By Evan Blass 
posted September 24th 2006 7:15PM
posted September 24th 2006 7:15PM
Now that Apple's lawyers have scared the pants off of small entrepreneurs selling products like the Profit Pod and TightPod -- items that have nothing to with portable audio in any way, mind you -- it seems that the next targets are companies that have the audacity to use the word "podcast" in their names. Wired's Listening Post blog is reporting that Steve's legal eagles have sent one of those scary cease and desist letters to a company called Podcast Ready, whose premier product, myPodder, gives users an automated way to download 'casts to their portable devices. CEO Russel Holliman claims that he'd consider changing the name of the program if necessary, but seems to be justifiably reticent about rebranding his entire business, considering the fact that "podcast" may not be "owned" by Apple nor even a derivative of "iPod" in the first place. Robert Scoble -- whose own company, PodTech, may be at risk in this witch hunt -- has weighed in on the issue by suggesting that the tech community as a whole adopt other terms like "audiocast" and "videocast" (or alternately, "audcast" and "vidcast") to describe this type of content, while other folks feel that fighting Apple and generating a ton of negative press for Cupertino is the best solution. Our take? Apple should be happy that its golden goose is getting so much free publicity, and if it isn't, we know of several companies that probably wouldn't mind if zencast, zunecast, or sansacast became the preferred terminology.Update: BBHub's own Russell Shaw delves into this issue a little further over at ZDnet, and finds that Apple is having trouble getting certain iPod-related phrases trademarked, including the word "iPodcasting."
Read- Apple's nastygram
Read- Scoble's take
[Via calacanis.com]
Crap, m ssed one. That’s going to cost me.
Was that an attempt at removing lower case I's from your posts?
next: steve jobs sues every company in the U.S. for using the word 'jobs' when looking for workers.
what's the chances of two guys called 'Russell' being mentioned to the same article? (different spelling I know)
has anyone asked Russell Crowe what he thinks?
what about going after burger king for thier newest invention the "frypod" http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Aug/bma20060816038055.htm
Don't think differently. Accept Apple's every lawsuit. Woot! Don't think differently. Accept Apple's every lawsuit. Woot!
Corporate, bean-counting bastards ....
Woot!
"To hoover" is directly taken from the brand Hoover. They are immortal now.
I though Apple was good in advertising? This move is moronic and then some. If they're smart they'd shut up and the whole world'll keep playing ******** on their zunes, sansas and creatives.
Subtle vicories (the sweetest of all)are apparently not appreciated at "round, hard fruit that grows on a tree and can be red or green"
check out "genericide" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark
My name is David Podimac
I have nightmares every night thinking Apple might sue me in order to strip me of my name : - First for Pod, then for iMac !!
Perhaps I should change my name to David Megazune ... There is little chance MS will sue me (their product will never take off), and at least in Quebec, it might help me picking up women !
What I find ironic is in Nerds 2.0.1, Jobs says something to the effect of, "The great thing about the internet is that, Microsoft doesn't own it."
Now I think to myself, "The great thing about the internet is Apple doesn't own it. Because if they did, they would have sued people who make fishing nets..."
While I don't like the whole concept, Apple may be limiting themselves to going after certain usages of "podcast."
PodcastReady's myPodder product downloads podcasts, which is something that Apple's own iTunes already does. I don't buy for a second that "podcast" isn't a derivative of iPod. Since that's the case, Apple has a responsibility (right or wrong) to try to vigorously defend the iPod/iTunes brand from a competing product. If the software in question downloaded "MP3 feeds from RSS" or something to that effect, and not "podcasts," I don't think there would be any problem.
I don't think Apple will ever go against iPod/iTunes-friendly usages of the term "podcast," such as Scoble's PodTech.net. Scoble's site doesn't offer competing software like myPodder, simply podcasts that can be used by iPods or other MP3 players. I doubt Apple has a problem with that. PodcastReady's situation is entirely different.
Having read the C&D letter sent to Podcast Ready, Here is what Apple or at least their lawyers said regarding "podcast"
"While Apple, of course, has no general objection to proper use of the descriptive term "podcast" as part of a trademark for goods and services offered in the podcasting field, it cannot allow marks that go beyond this legitimate use and infringe an Apple's rights in POD and IPOD."
Remember Apple sent this letter not because they use the term "podcast" but because they applied for a trademark and they felt the use was outside of the normal use of podcast. I think in this case "Podcast Ready" is not out of the normal use - but "mypodder" is going to be dropped. as it is phonetically confusing. But that is IMHO.
Apple is not yet and nor does it look like it will be going after anyone using the term "Pod" or "Podcast" in their name - as long as the use is in the field of "podcasting" So I think "podshow" and "podtech" are fine as is "podcast411" which I have a lot personally invested in.
Rob @ podCast411
While I think this is a stupid thing for Apple to do, I think this has more to do with stupid American trademark laws. Pretty much, if you don't defend your trademark, you lose your trademark.
It doesn't sound like this is really a C&D, but more of a "we can't stop you from using 'podcast', but don't forget iPod belongs to us".
But, man, this is stupid. If Apple wants to lose the "hip" factor they worked so hard on creating, there's no faster way of doing it than alienating the dedicated people that use your product. How bout we start calling it the "AnythingButAppleCast". I think the last thing Apple wants to do is make people aware that there are other cheaper, open, alternatives out there.
So so far this week I've decided not to never buy an iPod or a PS3 (thanks to that article about Gran Turismo HD on /. )...what other blunders in the consumer electroncis market await us?
I'll be waiting by patiently with my iRiver and my DSL, thank you.
Fuck Apple. Their products suck and now they have to go after people over a stupid name. So glad I don't support them. I urge others to do the same. Stop buying their iPODS and anything else they make.
This pod-thing and Robert Scoble's suggestion of "videocast" and "audiocast" in place of "podcast" reminds me of France's futile attempt to control the French language. The Academie Francaise (http://www.academie-francaise.fr/) once suggested "le baladeur" (http://atilf.atilf.fr/dendien/scripts/generic/cherche.exe?15;s=2105692590;;) instead of "le walkman". You know that never caught on. "podcast" is part of the culture now. Apple should consider it a way to keep its iPod in the public's mind.
WTF!!! The word "Pod", is a dictionary word, and part of the English language! NO ONE can trademark a dictionary word! Not even the "mighty Apple". GET OVER it!
Podcasting, iPod, Pod... This is all FREE ADVERTISING. Is Apple Inc really so stupid and jaded, that they can't see that? After that thing in China, they should really clean up their act.
Apple seems so keen on flexing their legal muscles for stupid reasons. iTunes v. 7.0 is a disgrace, there are thousands of complaints at disscussions.apple.com. People are losing complete functionality and music. These are just the iPod owners who even know what a forum is, what about all those kids whose $300 suddenly broke. They're probably 'in trouble' with their parents, because the parents aren't tech savvy enough to know that iTunes is the culprit, not their kids.
I haven't downloaded this piece of junk, yet Apple keeps prompting me to. Jerks.
I started a petition: www.petitiononline.com/iSTOP/petition.html read and sign it please, then it's going to the California Consumer Protection Agency and Attorney General
Time to call the legal eagles at Apple to the carpet. I am sick of hitech companies selling crap that hasn't gone through adequate quality control. Remember "Service Packs"???
The entire notion of a "podcast" is ridiculous to me - it's an audio stream, and the concept predates the iPod. To me, using the name podcast only implies that someone would be most likely to use an iPod to listen to it, so I don't know why Apple would have such a problem with it. That being said, I've got a problem with it - all "podcast" seems to do is give Apple credit for putting a name on an existing idea. If Apple wants to be so petty, why should we continue to use the term "podcast" and essentially market the iPod for them?
I think that they may have a problem. By searching the US Patents and Trademarks database for "podcast" I found this.
Word Mark PODCAST
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: SOUND RECORDING FEATURING AUDIO INFORMATION FOR DOWNLOAD-SPOKEN WORD AND MUSIC. FIRST USE: 20060202. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20060222
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Design Search Code
Serial Number 78831795
Filing Date March 8, 2006
Current Filing Basis 1A;1B
Original Filing Basis 1A;1B
Owner (APPLICANT) Paul Fowlie CORPORATION NEW JERSEY 830 Mountain Way Morris Plains NEW JERSEY 07950
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
Sorry Apply, Podcast is trademarked legally since March 2006.
You didn't read enough of the page. Fowlie's did not trademark the term. He attempted to and was denied, didn't get to first base. Even now, two years later I keep hearing this misinformation.
I hope that Line6 is still irritated enough at Apple after they purchased eMagic and discontinued the PC version of the Pod interface program to stop this stupidity. They came out with the Pod (mentioned below, it's a guitar and/or bass recording and amp modelling device) 2-3 years before the iPod.
In related news, Al Gore is aggressively going after several large companies such as NetZero and Netflix who use the term ‘net’ in their name. “Everyone knows I invented the internet,” says Gore. “These companies’ names are confusing consumers and taking away from the integrity of my invention.” Meanwhile, Gore has revealed plans to trademark the term “iInternet”.
I am an Apple Fanboy to be sure, but Apple can kiss MY FAT PODASS with this new round of BS. I mean, just what universe are they living in? Maybe they need to sue the city of London for calling the cars in that large ferris wheel of thiers "pods." Sue the Queen! Stupid Apple.
The people who made the POD FPS game back in the day before the Ipod could sue Apple for using the POD name. So apple should really just STFU.
http://media.libsyn.com/media/podcast411/411_060925.mp3
Here is the rest of the story. This story has really been mis-reported online and it does not look good for Blogging as a whole.
When you look at the actual letter and talk to the USPTO - the story becomes much clearer.
I guess it is true when everyone in the Blog world agrees on something it must be wrong.
Lets hope next time Endgadget, CNET, ZDNET and others will do a little research before posting.
Rob @ podCast411
http://www.podcast411.com
In a related move, Apple is planning to sue Bogen for their use of the word "tripod" or any derivatives thereof.
I don't think this has anything to do with podcasting or apple trying to go after the rights to the word or act of podcasting. I think they're going after the "myPod" thing, which is probably legit, and this company issued a press release trying to equate it with podcasting.
This is just a stinky pile of FUD.
Here is the history of podcasting. Apple had nothing to do with the creation of the term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_podcasting
Read the letter at Wired, people: http://blog.wired.com/music/index.blog?entry_id=1562695. Apple specifically said they have no objection to the use of the term "podcasting", even in trademarks. Their objections were over other terms.
I think it more likely that when brought all the way to the Supreme Court (which you know it will) that the court will find that "Pod" like Kleenex and Coke, is more than a brand it is a generic lable that can not be owned.
P.s., I refer to my Zen and any other non-iPod mp3 player as a "faux-pod".
No, bad story..... The reason being, is that Apple only went after their usage of the "mypodder" term... they has not gone against the term podcast at all, it was just a big media blowup..
I think apple is going overboard with their "POD" issue. They should then sue all the sci-fi movies/animation where they have "escape pod" too! I mean - just because their iPod was a hit doesn't mean they can go put a copyright on the word 'pod' - cuz they didn't invent the word 'pod' in the first place!
I support what Ryan F said, is apple gonna sue famous "Line 6" - the guiter processor & amp builder? I think their "POD" series guiter processor became a sensation due to their looks & quality. Now, these *pod* were on the market even before there was any hard disk based MP3 players on the market, let alone iPod!!!
check the pods out there: http://www.line6.com/products/pods/
I heard Creative will be suing Buddhists over use of the word Zen.
Apple is an overblown company...they only get support because they fight the "evil empire" of Microsoft. If they were the bigger player we'd be having the same gripes with them.
I have an iPod and im constantly tempted to smash it to pieces, definitely going to try something new.
how about 'netcasting' ?
I'd think it would take off, as a word, just as much as 'podcasting', its generic and describes the job being done.
I suppose what they're after is iTunes being the only 'podcast' software out there.
Or how about 'popcasting', to describe the fact that anyone can do it using the internet as an essentially free way to get your creations out there, hence the medium's quickly established popularity...?
Who needs to enhance Apple's brand? And for how long will people be happy to do that anyway....?
Seems a shame, all this. I note with interest that Apple(R) has a device called the Airport(R), not to be confused with an Airport(FAA). I'm sure their marketing chaps and lasses had a Eureka(R) moment when they thought of it: a wireless device that is at once a "port" and uses the wireless "air" waves. Quite clever really. Nothing to do with aircraft, of course, nor does it imply it is a device that only works at airports(FAA). Perhaps LAX should invest in some high powered legal help. And the FAA. Who knows? Soon some Apple(R) lawyer will be standing in court saying that a reasonable consumer might think the movie "Airport" is easily confused with a training audio-visual presentation for an Apple(R) device of the same name so the movie should be retitled. When we start these things they are so hard to stop. Where do you draw the line?
Apple(R). Related to Apple Records(R) perhaps? Or Apple Corp(R) (established 1968) by the Beatles. Check it out.
Where's the love? That's what I want to know.
I really appreciate your help.
http://www.edhardyclub.com/
My grandson's ipod melted somehow--he called me and said the insurance he bought on the thing wo'nt help him get a new one./ What's up with that? help //granny