One of These Woolworths Looks Too Much Like an Apple?
The Woolworths department store chain in Australia is being taken to court by Apple due to their new logo… looking too much like Apple’s. Apple is required by law to defend their trademarks, lest they lose them, and they’re concerned Woolworth may sell computers (or smartphones?) under the new, Apple-esque logo.
If the stylized W in Woolworths’ logo didn’t have that little leaf on top, we’d think Apple was a little over-litigious. As it is, we’re not sure why the W needs a leaf, or if it looks more like an Apple than the “Great Pumpkin” from Charlie Brown (maybe Peanuts can sue as well?)
Take a look at the comparisons above and let us know how close you think the logos are.
[via AppleInsider]
October 5th, 2009 at 7:14 am
I don’t think they are that close. The merged image on the right looks slightly modified so that the bottom of the apple fits with the original Woolworths logo.
It’s not a great logo for Woolworths, but I really don’t see there being Trademark infringement.
October 5th, 2009 at 7:21 am
It’s definitely an Apple. Which is fine, because they are a grocery store who market fairly heavily on fresh produce.
However, there one of Australia’s largest companies – and do compete in the consumer electronics area. They recently launched a mobile phone network too!
That said, there consumer electronics business doesn’t brand things “Woolworths”, and are one of the bigger Apple re-sellers in the country ; I’d say they’ll happily drop the trademark claim in consumer electronics (surely Apple don’t have an issue with the grocery side of the business!)
October 5th, 2009 at 7:30 am
October 5th, 2009 at 7:44 am
everyone is always trying to copy apple…
October 5th, 2009 at 7:53 am
And, this has what to do with the iPhone exactly? What’s next, is TiPB going to report on the Virgin Mary appearing in grilled cheese?
October 5th, 2009 at 8:16 am
Gee… How far will they go?? Ridiculous!
Besides, I see a man stretching his arms. Not an apple.. There’s probably a gym somewhere that can sue them too..
Maybe if they don’t spend so much on lawyers for these things we could get better phones for lesser price..
October 5th, 2009 at 8:18 am
if I were the judge in this case, I would kick Apple out of the courtroom for wasting my time.
October 5th, 2009 at 8:42 am
@frog I agree with both of your points.
They are, after-all, “The Fresh Food People.”
October 5th, 2009 at 10:14 am
@Chris Nixon: Yes they did. People seem to forget that Apple ripped off a lot of stuff.
October 5th, 2009 at 10:38 am
It’s like comparing apples and oranges…
October 5th, 2009 at 11:23 am
As the article says, if they took the unneeded leaf from the top, everyone would be happy…does seem like they are trying to copy Apple, just from looking at the images. In the end, it’s a silly thing, but I guess their legal department does need a reason to exist
October 5th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
It’s obviously a peach, not an apple.
October 5th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
@Steve:
Oh come on. Anything with a stem on top, Apple owns? Is that your theory?
Jeeze, I hope New York City isn’t next on Apple’s Hit list.
http://glosslip.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/apple.jpg
October 5th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Check out this discussion on the Woolworth’s logo from late 2008 when this first came out.
http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/personorapple_discuss.php
October 5th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
@Grant:
Link broken by blog software:
You have to use TinyUrl like this: http://tinyurl.com/6g4owc
October 6th, 2009 at 1:14 am
I look at that and see the “W” from walgreens (the drugstore or whatever you wanna call it) I believe apple is way out on a reach with this here and the judge should kick the legal dep of apple and ask them what they were thinking. But I guess that’s how America has become. Yes I am American and yes I do love my country
October 21st, 2009 at 7:40 am
Surely Apple “ripped off” their name from the FRUIT. Have they tried to sue Gwyneth Paltrow’s daughter, also?