Since the internet boom, we have seen numerous multinational tech corporations resorting to lawsuits and litigations to protect their trademarks and logos from smaller businesses. In many cases, these logos and trademarks were originally owned by someone else, not the tech company. However, due to legal technicalities, the MNCs often prevail in these lawsuits.
In a recent development, it has been reported that Apple is seeking intellectual property rights for images of apples in Switzerland. If successful, this could potentially force a fruit company that has been in existence for 111 years to alter its logo.
Apple has officially lodged an application with the Swiss Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) to acquire intellectual property rights for a realistic depiction of the Granny Smith apple variety, specifically in a black-and-white representation. The intention behind this move is to restrict other companies from utilizing an apple in their logos.
According to reports, the Swiss authorities have granted a partial approval to Apple’s trademark request, acknowledging that the company could obtain rights for only a portion of the goods it sought. This decision is based on a legal principle that recognizes generic images of commonly available goods, such as apples, as part of the public domain. However, it should be noted that Apple has already initiated an appeal in response to this ruling.
Apple has been involved in fruit-based litigation before, but the most recent case is gaining significant attention and recognition.
As a result of Apple’s recent legal manoeuvre, a 111-year-old fruit farmers’ organization in Switzerland called Fruit Union Suisse will be compelled to modify its logo. The organization’s logo, which has long featured a red apple with a white cross—the Swiss national flag—imposed on one of their most commonly grown fruits, will need to be changed.
Fruit Union Suisse director Jimmy Mariéthoz expressed his difficulty in understanding the company’s motive, which he said was not like protecting their bitten Apple logo, but rather owning the rights to an actual apple. He added that this was something that was almost universal and should be free for everyone to use.
As of now, Apple has not made any official statements or comments regarding the recent developments in IP litigation.
Mariethoz further highlights that Apple has displayed a “very aggressive” approach when it comes to addressing potential trademark infringements. He emphasizes that the organization does not wish to engage in competition with the tech giant.
Nonetheless, the Fruit Union Suisse maintains a hopeful outlook due to its longstanding existence of over 100 years. Considering the legal process, a verdict from the Swiss court could potentially take several months, or even years, to be reached.
Other Legal Disputes Involving Apple’s Logo
Apple has been embroiled in numerous legal disputes pertaining to its logo, serving both as a plaintiff and a defendant. One notable case is Apple Corps v. Apple Computer, which involved a series of lawsuits and settlements between Apple Inc and Apple Corps, the company established by the Beatles.
The dispute centred around the use of the name and logo “Apple.” The initial legal action was brought by Apple Corps in 1978, alleging trademark infringement and breach of contract. In 1981, a settlement was reached, with Apple Inc agreeing to refrain from entering the music industry.
However, conflicts resurfaced in 1986 and 2003 as Apple Inc introduced music-related products and services such as the Macintosh computer, iTunes, and iPod. The final resolution was reached in 2007, granting Apple Inc full rights to the “Apple” name and logo while licensing certain rights back to Apple Corps.
Another notable case, Apple v. Woolworths, emerged in 2009 when Apple Inc filed a lawsuit against Woolworths, an Australian supermarket chain, over its new logo, which featured a stylized “W” within an apple-like shape.
Apple argued that the logo bore too much resemblance to its own and could lead to consumer confusion. In response, Woolworths contended that its logo was not an apple but rather an abstract representation symbolizing freshness and quality. The parties reached an out-of-court settlement in 2012, with Woolworths agreeing to modify its logo.
