Apple accused of harassing an air purifier company

It's no secret that Apple Legal is, ah, aggressive when it comes to protecting its various fruit-flavored intellectual property, but a company called BlueAir just filed a lawsuit accusing Apple's lawyers of outright harassment over BlueAir's AirPOD air purifier, pictured at right. Seems BlueAir has been trying to register a trademark on the product, and instead of filing an opposition with the USPTO based on consumer confusion with the iPod, Apple's attorneys have just been sending BlueAir angry letters and threatening massive legal fees. Of course, that's pretty much what lawyers do, but BlueAir's asked the court to step in and rule definitively on the subject before pursuing their trademark application any further. Seeing how protective Apple's been of the "-pod" suffix in the past, that could lead to some interesting rulings -- we'll be keeping an eye on this one for sure.

Disclaimer: Although Nilay is an attorney, super guy, and snappy dresser, he's not your attorney, and this post is not legal advice or analysis and should not be taken as such.

[James Ollier @ Jan 26th 2008 6:17AM]

Should have called it Whackbook Air

[Melenor @ Jan 26th 2008 6:36AM]

Should've called it MacBook Err.

[Blaktornado @ Jan 26th 2008 9:52AM]

@ ScOObyDoo

It's a consumer electronic... like the iPod.

But really, you'd have to be very dumb to get confused between this and an iPod.

[shelley @ Jan 26th 2008 6:23AM]

AirPOD? That's shameless. Apple has a case

Shelley from SuTree

[chezzo @ Jan 26th 2008 6:41AM]

Thanks, Shelley from SuTree!

[DelSource @ Jan 26th 2008 7:12AM]

Shame Apple weren't the first to use the word "pod" in an electronic device, but never mind, eh? Apple trumps all else, right?

[aguiluz @ Jan 26th 2008 8:16AM]

pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod

Oh noes! I am going to be sued by apple by thirty nine times! What should I do, what SHOULD I do?

[Rocketboy @ Jan 26th 2008 1:37PM]

In other news, Apple is sueing famers for their infringing PeaPods.

[macserv @ Jan 26th 2008 3:21PM]

Yes, aguiluz, you might. You seem to be saying "pod" a lot, but let's clarify. Let me ask you a few questions...

1. Are you planning to bring a new product to market containing the word "Pod" at the end, preceded by a one-syllable word?

2. Does that product look like the basic form factor of an Apple iPod?

If you answered "YES" to both (AND I MEAN BOTH) of these questions, then yes, you are going to get some flak from Apple. And it is right that you should. Building an image on cutting-edge design is a tough game to play. Apple has to do two things: Constantly revise and improve that image to stay ahead, and try to make sure people aren't copying that which makes you unique. They won't always win at that game, but they have to try.

And come on... there's a BILLION ways BlueAir could tweak the name or design of that device to NOT piss Apple off. You know for a FACT that they're deliberately trying to mimic the iPod design, in name and form, and that's gonna incur the wrath of Apple.

[Zeus.:God @ Jan 26th 2008 7:21PM]

I'd hardly call the iPod cutting edge, macserv.

[DelSource @ Jan 27th 2008 1:20PM]

Macserv - nice try, but you're absolutely full of iFanboy crap.

Apple have sued companies who 1) haven't added a single syllable word before "Pod" when using the term in the name of an electronic device; and 2) have made an electronic device with such a name that doesn't look anything like an iPod. And yes, have sued when BOTH these apply.

And again, they weren't the first to use the word "Pod" in the name of an electronic device.

You are the definitive fanboy. Desperately making up crap in order to defend a brand you don't own or are paid to work for. Do get a life.

[OneLove @ Jan 28th 2008 1:48PM]

@macserv:

let me ask you a few questions...take your pills already!

[Jay @ Jan 28th 2008 6:57PM]

@Macserv,

Apple sued the makers of the "Profit Pod", a device which monitors spend on gaming and vending machines.....

Explain that one, why don't you?

[outsiderz @ Jan 26th 2008 6:29AM]

I wonder why apple hasn't sued Macdonalds since they do have the Big "Mac".

[Chino B @ Jan 26th 2008 6:58AM]

Macdonald's is fast food not electronics...

[ScOObyDoo @ Jan 26th 2008 8:57AM]

And an air cleaner is not a computer.

[James Ollier @ Jan 26th 2008 9:12AM]

Because Big Mac's were invented in 1968

[Shane @ Jan 26th 2008 10:33AM]

Yes, but McDonalds has sued people for using the name before although it is a very common family name. A gentleman with the last name of McDonald opened a restaurant and called it McDonald's. The OTHER McDonald's sued. Apparently there were no other trademark infringements involved (i.e. the golden arches or Big Mac) but what was he supposed to do? It's the guy's NAME for heavens sake!

[lance @ Jan 26th 2008 6:30AM]

Yeah, I think Apple has a trademark on all air. Or is that Nike? I should patent atoms.

[Stupidiot @ Jan 26th 2008 10:52AM]

Hmm, in that case I'll patent electrons! No longer will those pesky ions be able to trade their electrons without me getting in on the deal.

[Ellianth @ Jan 26th 2008 8:11PM]

Everyone knows that the real money is in patenting breathing. You can have your lungs, and you can have your air. But if you dare breathe.. you're gonna owe me an arm and a leg. Ah heck, might as well just throw in your first born.

[Jon @ Jan 26th 2008 6:56AM]

Quite how they still garner the support they do is beyond me. In my eyes their legal department seems to be made up of lawyers from SCO.

[ssuk @ Jan 26th 2008 7:08AM]

Something ending with Pod? LAWYERS, ASSEMBLE! Do we have a case? Oh, silly me, we're Apple, a multi-billion dollar corperation and these guys are a small time niché market provider, of COURSE we have a case. LAWYERS, ROLL OUT!

But in seriousness, Apple, you didn't invent the word "Pod", and although it does look highly dubious with that ringed grill on the front of it, I doubt anyone's going to mistake a air purifier with a portable media player. Stop being bullies and live with the popularity you've created.

[randy @ Jan 26th 2008 9:59AM]

Correct, Apple doesn't own the Pod suffix. But hmm, gosh I wonder why the crooks chose to call that thing the 'airPod'?


Hot DAMN, that thing is UGLY. Good luck to Apple.

[Ghen @ Jan 26th 2008 7:11AM]

I love the disclaimers =)

[x20mar @ Jan 26th 2008 7:58AM]

Next week on Engadget:

Apple sues a tree for copyright infringement as it is producing 'fake' apple products. In a statement from Apple's legal department:

"Braeburn Apple is a name that is clearly trying to confuse customers, making them believe that this is one of our products, clearly it's not and we believe that we have a strong case against them."

At the time of going to press it was rumoured that Apple were looking into other copyright infringement cases including peas and people of Scottish heritage. When the Scottish Government was asked about the possible case, they declined to comment.

[Phred @ Jan 28th 2008 5:11PM]

The rumors are true:

"Apple to sue Gregor Mendel, God for "seed pod" trademark infringement:
iPod manufacturer asking for retroactive damages since Carboniferous period"

[Godskitchen @ Jan 26th 2008 8:01AM]

The tide is turning against Apple, big time, over the past few months the Apple bashing has grown 10 fold, not just on here but all over the internet.

Of course you still have the people that defend apple like you have just insulted their best friend, or their mother, for some apple fan boys I am sure their best friend and mother are the same thing. These same people always seem to start sentences with "So" like "So I was sitting at home jerking off to SJ's key note when my mom walked in"

Apple like most large companies steal their ideas from smaller outfits, and when they get taken to court, they just settle. Didnt they do this with the Click wheel? Also just look at Brawns old products from the 70's to see where Apple get their design ideas from.

Of course its not just Apple at this, but it seems their fans think Apple came up with all these ideas on their own.

"So" its only a matter of time before more people wake up to Apple, like claiming to be green because your new, non upgradeable, non user repairable, over priced laptop, uses Recyclable materials??? No using recyclable stuff in your product does not make you green, its the person doing the recycling that takes the credit..........not apple, if they really cared they would have used recycled parts, but of course that would put a dent in their crazy profits.....................but yeah, apple care about their customers.

[Rob Conway @ Jan 26th 2008 11:08AM]

I happen to be an "apple fanboy", and the other "apple fanboys" I talk to seem to agree with me. Most of us don't love Apple as a company. We like their hardware and love their software. I don't think anyone, who is intelligent enough to give a shit about the posts on engadget, really thinks ANY major corporation gives a rat's asshole about the consumers.

[jere @ Jan 26th 2008 11:22PM]

Yeah, if I like apple, it's not some base instinct of mine; experience with their products has made me this way. I don't love steve jobs any more than the next guy, but I do love my macbook.

Oh, and for the record, I am in no way implying I like the macbook air.

[Godskitchen @ Jan 27th 2008 7:13AM]

"but I do love my macbook."

WOW thats a pretty strong statement, so if my girlfriend died, who I love, and your Macbook died, which you love, we would feel the same pain?

Please don't demean words when expressing your liking for a product.

[jere @ Jan 30th 2008 10:17PM]

REVISION: My macbook is my preferred computing experience.

[Phred @ Jan 28th 2008 5:38PM]

I understand your dictional preferences, but "love" can be many things.

Perhaps you love (eros) your girlfriend, love (philia) your brother, love (biblical agape) Jesus, and love (agape's old meaning - look it up) fish and chips. I don't think you would express those the same way (I hope not, in fact).

The latter agape could certainly apply to a possession of which you were fond.

[keithtobin @ Jan 26th 2008 8:42AM]

the whole thing of the tide turning against apple is that apple is a growing business, they aspire to be the best, now to do that they have to turn their backs on the hippy sanfran shortwearin business people thought apple was. Apple is a business. Business men wear suits and want money. Morality and ethics are just PR. thats business. I myself dont like what apple is becoming(has become) but at the same time i dont really care because im on a macbook pro have an early ipod (3G i think i didnt upgrade! oh my!) and to be honest apple make quality products. what they do to keep themselves growing and earning money is their business, literally.

As far as copyright and the like are concerned and harassing small companies, some of it makes sense, they might not have been the first with the name pod on their product but you'd be an idiot to say they didnt popularise it to such an extent that it IS associated with THEM and adding it to a product does associate it with that culture of young ipod holding "savvy" folk. I'm not saying i mind if another company does this though, to me it just cheapens their product. like those fake gi joes or turtles toys ya got as kid. But apple has become a powerful company now and powerful companies get that way the same way america is a powerful country. bullying smaller ones to keep its "freedom". ha.

[randy @ Jan 26th 2008 10:03AM]

Save your rhetoric. Large companies are entitled to protection under the same laws as small companies. If somebody uses a derivation of your work, you are entitled to sue, regardless of your market cap. We don't hate companies in this country just because they are successful, we applaud them.

[Jon @ Jan 26th 2008 1:04PM]

@randy

Apple makes air purifiers? Sounds like bollocks to me.

[Eric @ Jan 26th 2008 7:40PM]

"the whole thing of the tide turning against apple is that apple is a growing business"
No, Apple is lead by a condescending snob whose company preaches one thing and does another.

[Jay @ Jan 29th 2008 6:33AM]

@Ryan,

Sony didn't sue Apple when the latter ripped off the Vaio form (after that wonderful toilet seat contraption bombed).

[Chris Aubeck @ Jan 26th 2008 8:43AM]

Hmm, in Wikipedia we find the following insight:

"The Pod People are indistinguishable from normal people, except for their utter lack of emotion. The pod people work together to secretly spread more pods...in order to replace the entire human race."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_the_Body_Snatchers

[bigdoggie @ Jan 26th 2008 8:50AM]

Hahah, fits them right :D

[Tim @ Jan 26th 2008 8:54AM]

Apple's legal dept sucks.

[rotelle3 @ Jan 26th 2008 9:11AM]

No,actually they're very good at what they do. If I needed an IP lawyer, their team includes some of the best in the US. Ask someone in the legal profession before making stupid comments.

[insertAlias @ Jan 26th 2008 12:13PM]

I don't think that he meant it as if they weren't good at what they do. He probably meant it like "the RIAA sucks" or "you suck."

Still, a mature and useful comment.

[dcny @ Jan 26th 2008 9:17AM]

hey apple go sue NASA they been using stuff thats been called a pod for a long ass time go after them too.

[Byzil Mystwing @ Jan 26th 2008 10:05AM]

Not that I promote rampant suing, but I think a lot of people aren't looking at the picture. I don't think they're suing just because it's called "pod", but look at it head-on, and it looks identical to an ipod nano (or at least the previous generation of one). Well. if you painted it white. But yeah. it's more than just the words, it's the fact that it looks like one too, even if it doesn't have the same functionality. On that note though; I wouldn't bother with suing, it's still a long shot, plus, people see that, and think of the ipod, so, free advertising, right?

[Boss @ Jan 26th 2008 10:14AM]

Lol i love the way apple steal music and other peoples patents and get away with it. They didnt invent the word pod nor did they invent the scroll wheel or touch screen they use but as soon as someone does the same idea they try and sue them even though 95% of there tech is stolen from other peoples patents anyway lol. Jog on Apple. Your a joke

[Ian @ Jan 26th 2008 10:33AM]

I think Apple is upset because the general shape of the device (ie: a small rectangular product with what looks similar to a click-wheel (although we all know it's a fan) sits at the bottom.

If the iPod didn't exist, I doubt the word "Pod" would appear in this product's name, and I don't think the design would look like this. BlueAir just wanted to make the "iPod" of desktop air purifiers.

However, Apple should really just take this as a form of flattery. It's a slight imitation, but in a field where Apple doesn't even play. BlueAir and Apple are not even playing the same sport, so they're not really in conflict.

Apple's legal team should take the week off.

[culdesacked @ Jan 26th 2008 10:52AM]

but liars (I mean lawyers) want to protect the brand from the dumbest na...

[ScOObyDoo @ Jan 26th 2008 10:58AM]

And lets not forget that Apple also "stole" the i in iPod. Compaq was making the iPaq a year before the iPod was even announced.

[rawhead @ Jan 26th 2008 11:24AM]

That, my friend, is the most idiotic thing I've read today. Granted, I just woke up an hour ago, but hey.

Anyway, guess where hp got the "i" for the iPaq from?

Could it be from a wildly popular fruity colored all-in-one computer that a certain fruit-named company released 2 years before the iPaq was introduced?