And You Thought Our Legal Issues with Apple were Out of Hand

**mikenificent** · 10-08-2008, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Eurisko

You'd never be hired as a copyright lawyer. Nuff said

When all else fails be childish. Not going to go back n forth. I will check for updates to see how this turns out though.

**Eurisko** · 10-08-2008, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by mikenificent

When all else fails be childish. Not going to go back n forth. I will check for updates to see how this turns out though.

It's not childish at all. It's a statement of fact. If you cannot see the similarities between these two logos, then you're either analytically impaired, or trying to make some moot point.

**mrtonyyx** · 10-08-2008, 03:10 PM

They are not similar. I think Apple should just go ****** die. The shape isn't the same and we all know it's obvious. They complain because they want to be unique and have nobody take their work/creations under their name or logo. This is rediculous. It's like a kid complaining that he can only have a blue ipod and nobody else in the world can have it besides him. Apple please go die.

**riku98523** · 10-08-2008, 03:45 PM

The VSBT one has a Trademark on it X-D

**ghandioncesaid** · 10-08-2008, 04:28 PM

I'm with Eurisko on this one...

As I said in my previous response there are many other ways to depict an apple than have a silver "apple" shape with some color and text on it. Apple is already doing the silver apple with no stem and right justification on the leaf. If they wented to use and apple because they're an innocent little school, they should have made it red, added a stem, pointed the leaf the the left. Just because the shape is a little bit different and there is no bite taken out of it look at the bigger picture. They're in the computer business and the BASE of their logo without the text is practically a direct copy of apple's logo. What would their logo look like without the apple? The mountain range with VSBT would still be a legitimate logo. I think they were TRYING to falsely associate themselves with apple as any copyright lawyer would agree. This will be settled outside of court because VSBT can't win.

Mods, don't less this thread become as bad as the Obama is a terrorist thread.

**Lute** · 10-08-2008, 06:22 PM

Becareful that your child don't draw an apple shape or it can get you in trouble!

**ronfin44** · 10-08-2008, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by mknapper1

Seriously look at the 2 logos and tell me you don't think they copied apple, or at least were influenced by the apple logo

Yeah, and? No bite, no matching contures, a leaf that goes the same way constitutes infringement? lol, k.

This is a clear example of arrogance on Apples part to think that anything with an apple is infringement. What's their next letter gonna be? "Dear descendant of Issac Newton. You are no longer to associate the discovery of Gravity with our logo." WTF? "Dear Matt Damon, please dub over your Good Will Hunting movie to say 'How bout them oranges'".

Originally Posted by Eurisko

It's not childish at all. It's a statement of fact. If you cannot see the similarities between these two logos, then you're either analytically impaired, or trying to make some moot point.

What?! A statement of "fact"? Really. So you know he would never EVER ever be hired as a copyright lawyer (for arguments sake) because he doesn't agree with YOUR OPINION of the apple resembling the Apple logo? So all of us that disagree with your OPINION are "either analytically impaired, or trying o make some moot point."? You're crazy. Just stating a fact, or is it opinion? Maybe popular opinion after reading through your posts regarding this Apple logo discussion and your arrogant attitude that you're right, and everyone else is wrong.

You're a moderator too? Wow.

**crewxp** · 10-09-2008, 02:30 AM

haha wow...

It's not childish at all. It's a statement of fact. If you cannot see the similarities between these two logos, then you're either analytically impaired, or trying to make some moot point.

ReALlY....?? REALLY!? Wow... uneducated people are very common these days. And to think he's a moderator.. wow.

**imode** · 10-09-2008, 04:28 AM

Originally Posted by crewxp

haha wow...

ReALlY....?? REALLY!? Wow... uneducated people are very common these days. And to think he's a moderator.. wow.

Come on guys... playtime is over so stop throwing toys around the room.

Being a moderator doesn't suddenly empower someone with superhuman abilities (i.e. we are not by definition infallible) Everyone is equally entitled to an opinion. Moderators are entitled (amongst other duties) to: delete SPAM, ban spammers, ban abuse, edit profanity, delete useless messages (like half the messages in this thread), keep things on track (not like this thread) and to be knowledgeable enough about things iPhone so that we don't look completely stupid

However... like other members of this forum our opinions are just that... opinions.

**Eurisko** · 10-09-2008, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by ronfin44

What?! A statement of "fact"? Really. So you know he would never EVER ever be hired as a copyright lawyer (for arguments sake) because he doesn't agree with YOUR OPINION of the apple resembling the Apple logo?

Thanks for all the attacks guys, but remember, its not "my" opinion, it's Apple's determination. I simply agree with them. As to my "statement of fact" comment, I'm trying to get across that if someone can't/won't see the differences and similarities between two objects, they would never be put in an authoritative position to do so. Being called childish for saying that, so be it.

Originally Posted by imode

like other members of this forum our opinions are just that... opinions.

Thanks for the reminder imode, I'm not sure why members think mods aren't regular people too. The reason we became mods is the contribution we've made to the site, but when we become mods, we're suppose to keeps our mouths shut and simply maintain the status quo. Sorta sounds like marriage.

**gafu** · 10-09-2008, 09:34 AM

I'll argue the marriage issue with you

**dale1v** · 10-09-2008, 02:54 PM

I've said it once, and I'll say it again- lol

**ronfin44** · 10-09-2008, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Eurisko

Thanks for all the attacks guys, but remember, its not "my" opinion, it's Apple's determination. I simply agree with them. As to my "statement of fact" comment, I'm trying to get across that if someone can't/won't see the differences and similarities between two objects, they would never be put in an authoritative position to do so. Being called childish for saying that, so be it.

What I was pointing out, is that it's only your opinion. So even if you agree with Apple, there are many people that don't, and guess what, that includes lawyers, judges, and people that are in other "authoritative positions". *sigh*

This is pointless to even argue about. Luckily we don't live in a Socialist state where we all have to think alike.

**imode** · 10-09-2008, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by ronfin44

What I was pointing out, is that it's only your opinion. So even if you agree with Apple, there are many people that don't, and guess what, that includes lawyers, judges, and people that are in other "authoritative positions". *sigh*

This is pointless to even argue about. Luckily we don't live in a Socialist state where we all have to think alike.

Precisely... it is pointless. Fortunately we don't live in a socialist forum but a Stalinist one. So unless the discussion gets back on track I guess I'll have to use my moderator (dictator) powers to close this thread

**Jordan.nave** · 10-11-2008, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by mknapper1

Seriously look at the 2 logos and tell me you don't think they copied apple, or at least were influenced by the apple logo

No, they don't look at all like each other. It is an Apple for crying out loud... I am going to have to side with VSBT on this one.

**khaoticsquirrel** · 10-11-2008, 10:42 AM

VSBT has the microsoft logo right on the front of their building! of course apple is going to go after them. tsk tsk..

And the greeNYC logo is a complete ripoff of apple. they have everything identical, just NYC colored their apple green and didn't think anyone would pick up on it, really?

**SleightOfHand** · 10-11-2008, 03:01 PM

As a graphic designer that works in branding, let me tell you that Apple totally has a case. One thing to remember is that it's not just the logo versions shown in the first post that are the issue, but every variation used in signage, advertising, etc. Take a look at the photo of the Victoria School of Business and Technology building. Notice the logo usage in their windows, no colors, but a white silhouette. That is very similar to Apple's usage in their stores and packaging. If I had designed Apple's logo, I would be doing the same thing they're doing.

**bklynjava** · 10-11-2008, 03:29 PM

Those that don't know Apple vs The Big Apple NYC "Apple tells The Big Apple to 'drop dead" lol Trademark Dispute Pits Apple vs. The Big Apple

I am amazed they would say anything, NYC has been known as the big apple long before Apple was around.

Maybe NY should sue apple or New Yorkers should file a Class action suit for using our Logo (ha!)

**one1** · 10-11-2008, 08:13 PM

I'm going to make my website logo an apple with a big set of hairy one's hanging from it and see if apple comes to get me.......

**f_itunes** · 10-12-2008, 09:16 PM

Apple's ripped off other peoples ideas for years, some school/record lable/tree in my back yard has similar things on it and apple fels the need to show it's mean side to them? Grow the **** up Jobs, you've established yourself and your logo plenty by this point, it would have helped not to change from the rainbow to the ugly shiny thing though.

Thread: And You Thought Our Legal Issues with Apple were Out of Hand

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

The Following User Says Thank You to imode For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Eurisko For This Useful Post:

Posting Permissions