Hacker News Reader

Comment by grey_earthling | Hacker News Reader

If Apple want to argue that the logos are confusingly similar, well OK then: the newer company should be obliged to change their logo.

View on HN

You mean the newer logo should be changed - I don't think the fruit company has had the same logo for 111 years.

Neither did Apple Inc.; the current flat one is from 2017.

This is incorrect. Old company logos don't lose their trademark. This logos shape dates back to 1977.

It is correct; you are moving the goalpost.

If they were using the 1977 logo, including the color scheme, it would be impossible to argue, that the similarity can lead to confusion of them and the point of the article would be moot.

Yes, I do! Good point!

> newer

I think you misspelled "with a bigger legal budget".

Although your method works out fine in this case, IMO the fact that one company literally sells apples should give them extra claim the using an apple as a logo.

So technically Apple should change their logo?

Yes.

Well one is a fruit company and apples are fruits and it did it first, and the other is a tech company that came after it and is saying the logos are similar, in an ideal world a judge would say ok I believe you now you change it.

But hey, Apple is a 2 trillion dollar company, wars have been started for a lot less, so the discussion isn't even worth having unless you also believe in Santa.

> in an ideal world a judge would say ok I believe you now you change it.

first they have to pay compensation for all theyears of misleading customers

Well a Swiss judge can only tell Apple to use a different brand in Switzerland. I doubt the Apple Switzerland business is worth 2 Trillion.

Well they can endup agreeing Apple Switzerland will never use the brand for the same areas that Apple US does.

So if Microsoft were to change their logo to look like Google’s, Google would have to find a new logo?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com