That was easy: Apple buys iPad trademark from Fujitsu

There's no indication as to what sort of wildness went on behind closed doors, but Apple is now the proud new owner of a slightly used "iPad" trademark. Fujitsu, who filed for ownership in March of 2003 to cover a Windows CE device for point-of-sale, doesn't seem to have put up much of a fight, and after a mere seven years of ownership (with a bit of a hazy period in 2009) has assigned the name to Apple. We don't know why, but we assume a nice pile of cash, or maybe some somehow legitimate legal threats as well, had something to do with it. This is all well and good, particularly for any iPad pre-orderers afraid they'd have to scratch off the iPad branding if Apple failed to score the name, but like we said in January when Fujitsu was still asserting its ownership of the mark: why can't Apple ever learn to have these conversations ahead of time?

[Lord Vader Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:08PM]

@tonyunreal. I find your sentence's lack of sense disturbing

[commenter7 Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:08PM]

@reader1

wow, it took about 4 minutes before your comment was ranked down into oblivion...
thats a personal best, congratulations!

[AltairDusk Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:09PM]

Too bad, it actually would have been very interesting to see what Apple would have done if Fujitsu refused to sell. Maybe they would learn to sort out their trademarks ahead of time.

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:15PM]

@AltairDusk

Maybe they did and you just don'r know about it? Imagine that, eh?

[AltairDusk Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:37PM]

@pukerocket

I see the snarky Apple defenders are out in full force today.

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:42PM]

@AltairDusk

Not really defending Apple. I'm just point out that you don't know as much as you would like to think.

[lv2bll54 Posted Mar 26th 2010 7:48PM]

@AltairDusk
Apple would've dug up a 10th year old patent that Fujitsu infriged on.(we would'nt be suprised would we)

[Tohe Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:11PM]

What is next? a buyout of the "wings" trademark lol

[mellerad Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:11PM]

@reader1 must be snorting coke off an iPad

[oawalker Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:12PM]

loool

[freefx Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:12PM]

If Apple was going to buy a trademarked name, why the hell couldn't they just buy iSlate?

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:14PM]

@freefx

Cos iSlate is horrible and clumsy?

[freefx Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:17PM]

@pukerocket
"Cos" iPad is so comfortable and absorptive?

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:19PM]

@freefx

I think I've heard that joke before. About a billion times.

Seriously. If you're not a funny guy, don't keep trying to be

[freefx Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:44PM]

@pukerocket
You're missing the point.
If the first thing people think about when they hear your product name is female hygiene products, instead of say, a cutting edge piece of technology, then you've made some mistakes. Product names should help you formulate what that product is, or at least, be neutral. iPod, iTouch, iPhone; they all do this. Sure, the iPad does this too. Unfortunately "pad" already has a meaning that I wouldn't think that Apple would want their products associated with.
Can Apple get away with this and not have it affect sales? Sure, it's Apple.
Does that make it a good name? No

[onlymyrailgun Posted Mar 27th 2010 2:16AM]

@freefx
Unfortunately, when I heard the name, it did not conjure up an image of feminine hygiene products to me. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pad
With so many different "pads", I don't know why some people have to insist on the sanitary pad connotation...

Maybe it is so for females. But if guys are going to crack this joke, I think the joke could be on you.

[BergerFan Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:13PM]

'iPad' was always the obvious name.
What other name should it have been?
iSlate? Puhlease.
iTablet? Hell naw.

What else?

[octoberasian Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:15PM]

Think the company behind MaxiPad sue Apple over this? I kid, I kid.

[Guardius Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:15PM]

Probably because this wasn't the name that Apple wanted to begin with. I suspect they had another name that they really wanted but then realized that they couldn't use it because someone else had a product with it (like Slate) and therefore ended up picking something at the last minute without fully researching it.

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:17PM]

@Guardius

Hehe. So funny. So naive.

A kid at college does something without full researching, Apple doesn't

[Dr Blight Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:23PM]

@pukerocket

If Apple does research, why don't we have Flash on these devices?

[pukerocket Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:28PM]

@Dr Blight

We don't have Flash on many devices. Apple is powerful enough to change the market, hence the reason all the big sites are making alternative versions for Iphone and Ipad.

[bullshitexpresscom Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:40PM]

@Dr Blight Because it's buggy tech. It works, but barely and clogs the shit out of FF on my W7 machine.

[onlymyrailgun Posted Mar 27th 2010 1:43AM]

@Dr Blight
Maybe it's because they did research and "we/you" didn't. That's why our views differ.

[Guardius Posted Mar 27th 2010 8:45PM]

@pukerocket If what you're saying is true, Apple must have one of the most incompetent legal departments out there since they didn't find that they had announced a product that someone else already had a trademark for (and which they were being threatened with a lawsuit over).

So I guess you're saying that their legal department has less skill that college students?

[Edobe Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:21PM]

@Lord Vader
Apple: *waves hands* you wish to give us the iPad trademark. You do not require any payment.

Fujitsu: We wish to give you the iPad trademark. We do not require any payment

[Gas Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:27PM]

@reader1
Perfect...ly lame, and unimaginative, yes. Much like the iPad.

[tmarks11 Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:32PM]

And Fujitsu laughs all the way to the bank.

Pausing along the way to trademark the unlikely name of iMaxi.

So when does Apple come out with the 14" version of the Ipad?

[ThomasK Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:34PM]

why do you think that Apple has not this solved before announcing the iPad name? They could have signed agreement and just not proceed the final step (for many reasons, e.g. because in that case a lot of people outside of Apple will know it)

[bullshitexpresscom Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:39PM]

@mellerad Probably your moms bulbous ass.

[tvopdx Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:46PM]

'cause they need to have a product in the market to claim copyright. and having a product trumps having a name - making settlement fairly straightforward - would you like some cash? or would you like to spend a lot of money on lawyers.

[bbeelzebub Posted Mar 26th 2010 5:55PM]

Apple does something legit. Wonder that?

[Trey21 Posted Mar 26th 2010 6:19PM]

Nuskin had an 'iphone' long before Apple did and they made quite a nice chunk of money from that name exchange.

[Macc55 Posted Mar 26th 2010 6:30PM]

I call it Apple Tablet. What makes the name ipad so official? Because it's printed? Who cares. Screw it. Why name it, it's freakin sweet. Do you like the itouch? Would you like a huge one in your face in 3D. (that's what I told her) bottom line what ever it's called it's gonna sell and change the way we see tablets. I myself personally think the iPhone software A4 is better and faster. I don't want crappy fans that they have in laptops and all that other stuff. I truly think people shouldn't say shit until the ipad has cleary been out for a few months.

[Riffmaker Posted Mar 26th 2010 6:40PM]

Things like this and how they treat their employees(Apple Police Nazi's force their employees to hand over their phones so they can read every text message and picture ever sent or they're fired if they don't) is why I'll likely never buy anything from Apple.

The "Ask forgiveness rather than permission" philosophy that Apple has done with many trademarked names is just scummy behavior. Any company that uses high priced lawyers to get whatever they want merely because they want it is a company not worth a shit.

Any startup company of Earth wouldnt have been allowed to hit the market using an already trademarked name, but appearantly Mr. Steve Job's doesn't feel he needs to play by the same rules as everyone else. /saracasm on/ He's such a wonderful visionary /sarcasm off

[icstars989 Posted Mar 26th 2010 6:51PM]

So can Apple sue Fujitsu now for using it's property to make their money back?

[krosref Posted Mar 26th 2010 7:10PM]

still a stupid name.

[Wesscoast Posted Mar 26th 2010 8:53PM]

@krosref

So's iPod. You're point?

[Lord Vader Posted Mar 26th 2010 7:29PM]

How did you?... I mean, you are completely wrong. Leave before I force choke you.

[The Madman Posted Mar 26th 2010 7:39PM]

@Gas I thought that was what he was getting at: a lame name to reflect a lame device. Perfect, no?

[lv2bll54 Posted Mar 26th 2010 7:45PM]

The last thing Apple wanted was to be was sued as they're dishin' out pain to HTC

[Okjeff171 Posted Mar 26th 2010 8:24PM]

@reader1 Its a logical choice for the company that made the I whatever famous... Maybe they shouldve called it the Ipod touch HUGE edition

[Wesscoast Posted Mar 26th 2010 8:52PM]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's the next thing that's gonna take down the iPad, haters?

Flash wasn't it. The pathetic trademark wasn't it. Multitasking won't be it.

Now about that friggin' virtual keyboard............

[BuzzMega Posted Mar 26th 2010 8:54PM]

Just got this note about my Fujitsu stock:

Dear Stockholder,

Woo HOOOO!

[KenEsq Posted Mar 26th 2010 8:59PM]

This is unusual for Apple...they've got a pretty long history of just trying to steal other's trademarks.

[KenEsq Posted Mar 27th 2010 7:44AM]

@Atkins

No, I can tell you after 20 years of working in the field and having to bring a suit to protect and win back my own trademarks that Apple has a well-deserved reputation for not respecting the intellectual property rights of others and a large helping of arrogance and contempt coupled with sloppiness in their legal department.

[anonemouse Posted Mar 26th 2010 9:48PM]

so much for squatting on the MAXiPad name... now how am I going to get steve to email me?

[Atkins Posted Mar 27th 2010 1:08AM]

@KenEsq Like every other major company out there (which surprisingly don't get the coverage)

[RawheaD Posted Mar 27th 2010 2:27AM]

”why can't Apple ever learn to have these conversations ahead of time?”

Because when they do, some dumbass executive of the other party will, more likely than not, leak/spill the name to the press at some point (before the crucial keynote). We've seen similar things happen many times in the past.

I'm not defending Apple's secretive ways, btw. I'm just explaining the rationale behind their (in)actions.

[Middleman Posted Mar 29th 2010 12:23AM]

A truly magical name bought for a truly magical price! I gather Moses would approve....