Is the image of an apple common property or can it be protected as a figurative mark for different product areas? This is the question at the Swiss Federal Administrative Court in St. Gallen on Thursday. Apple appears as a complainant: The group wants to expand its figurative mark, which shows a generic Granny Smith in black and white, to other areas. However, the Swiss Federal Institute for Intellectual Property partially rejected the application last fall.
Granny Smith originally a trademark of the Beatles label
Trademark advocates noted that the mark is “a faithful representation of an apple” and is “in the public domain,” according to court documents. As a result, the figurative mark lacks the necessary distinctiveness. Apple then filed a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court, saying there was no “sufficiently specific relationship between the sign and the goods” in this case, as the court noted.
The figurative mark is not the well-known Apple logo of a stylized, bitten apple, but a completely normal apple – with an eventful brand history: The Granny Smith originally adorned records of the Beatles’ “Apple Corps” label. At the end of the 1970s, the label took the then still young computer company Apple to court because they saw their trademark rights being violated.
The apple logo that is disputed in Switzerland here in the listing at the German Trademark Office – obviously directly from the record.
(Picture: screenshot trademark entry)
The trademark disputes between the companies dragged on for decades, an agreement was only reached in 2007, since then the Apple brand has belonged entirely to Apple – including the Granny Smith from Apple Corps, both as a whole apple and in a sliced form. In other countries, Apple has apparently already been able to successfully extend protection for the apple logo to other categories than just protection class 9, which covers sound carriers, for example.
Apple’s apple logos are a thorn in its side
According to local media reports, farmers’ associations in Switzerland in particular are concerned, after all, the image of an apple is often used there too. Apple is considered an aggressive defender of its trademark rights, even apple logos on small bike paths can offend – as can films about an “Apple Man”.
(lbe)
