sagittariusgallery

I'd rule in favor of GreenNYC. Apple owns that single distinction of the apple, the way it is represented. But the one GreenNYC has is completely different in form. I personally would not confuse the two. Furthermore, I don't believe the two are close enough for this case to rule in favor of Apple.

So sick of the sue happy. Just because the Apple company is represented by that apple doesn't mean they own *all* apples. If Apple were to win this one where would they go next? Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

redflannelelephant

I don't think Apple have a valid case - their logo is reminiscent of the Beatles Apple logo anyway. They shouldn't be able to copyright the whole spectrum of apple logos/images - and New York was known as the Big Apple years before Macs were invented - what's to be confused about? The NY logo is a swirling decorative apple. The Mac logo is a graphic apple with a bite taken out. (BTW, will Apple start suing anyone painting biblical scenes from the Garden of Eden, I believe there was a pretty major apple biting thing going on there too).

sixhours

They're both apples, sure, but they don't look at all alike to me. I'd rule in favor of GreenNYC.

*waits for the obligatory "how do you like dem apples!" joke*

TrackandFieldDesigns

They are similar - I guess - being as they are both APPLES!!!

SteppingStones

ASIDE from being apples, I see no similarities! Apple needs to learn to share! Someone once tried to stop me from using the term GENUINE with my seaglass! What am I supposed to call it FAKE?

NYC wins with me, great article Sarah!

dorkdesigns

NYC would win if I were the judge. They don't look anything alike.

dougsolomon

Like most folks, I'm very familar with Apple's logo. I didn't even think of Apple until I scrolled down the page. Case dismissed!

NormalIsBoring

Apple doesn't even use green as their main color for the logo! What do they have to be worried about anyways?

People thinking that they got a computer from Apple when really it runs on vegtable oil and come from Green NYC??

I rule in favor of Green NYC.

ClaudiaLord

I don't think its that similar except for maybe the leaf. But GreenNYC's has a stem which Apple's doesn't. Plus I agree that NYC has used an apple in their logos and slogans for a long time. I would side with GreenNYC.

Onanoa

I agree... it's an apple.
You can't copyright nature, only a graphic interpretation of it and these are two different interpretations.

If you asked a few artists to draw apples, they'd probably end-up with similar shapes...duh.

Besides I believe there are enough degrees of separation for GreenNYC to win.

monkeypowered

Nope. Not similar. GreenNYC all the way!
C'mon Apple,play nice. You're not even using the green and it's not like GreenNYC is another computer co.

skrhoadesdesign

I don't think there is any merit to this. You can't copy an apple, or a tree, or any item that is standard. You also can't copyright a color. Beyond the color and the apple shape, the two images are completely different, with different meanings, and different textures. Apple just wants the monopoly on everything (not that they aren't wonderful.)

Ninnerfish

Are you kidding?! Those look IDENTICAL! Who does GreenNYC think they are?

Just kidding.

I almost did it with a straight face.

JewelsofLuxury

I can definitely see a distinction between the two. Plus apple uses every color known to man for their logo, so how do you create a logo to look like an apple without infringing on theirs? Do they just own every apple design then??

cozycottagecreations

Hmmm....I hope no one ever comes to my shop looking to buy a computer.

Seriously - I took a look at GreenNYC's apple and didn't even think of Apple Computer until I scrolled down a bit further. Obviously, there's more than one take on how to create an apple.

MissKnits

they are not similar at all! if they think the general public as a whole would truly be confused by this, then they really do think we are just a bunch of idiots! lol yes they are green apples, but very very different and distinct in style. i saw APPLE has no true grounds for this.

eclipse

This seems groundless to me because of two main points:
1. the logos are not that similar, other than they are both apples. Apples were not invented by Apple corporation, they grow on trees. There was Apple records in the 60's, this was their logo
http://www.zibs.com/blog/archives/App...
So therefore, no one has exclusive rights to use a naturally occurring fruit in their logo.

2. I can't imagine what products these 2 companies would have that are even similar. greenyc doesn't make computers or small electronics. If they made computers or mp3 players or phones, then I might see *some* confusion by consumers but right now I don't see how anyone would be confused.

BlackStarBeads

I did NOT think of Apple Inc when I looked at the GreenNYC Apple. I love the GreenNYC logo and hope they get to keep it.

thegardenofbeadin

I dont think they are similar at all. There is no consumer confusion here. GREEN NYC you have my support

stonesoupsupplies

Interesting issue. I would imagine that Anda's point is one of Apple's primary arguments, but I don't really see this campaign diluting the existing Apple logo. Apple's got a pretty strong brand ID going.

Plus, I think the other one looks more like a peach than an apple. :)

MagpieCollections

At this rate, will Apple come and say dont sell "Apples", it'll confuse the consumers into thinking, local markets sell computers..lol..!!
Pardon me,I couldnt help myself from posting that stupid joke of mine..!!

eggmanstudios

This reeks of the whole Apple Corps (Apple Records) vs. Apple Computer (Apple Inc) debacle.

Sigh.

Apple, I love you, but dang. Grow up a little.

DaisyChains

Not the same, totally different.

puffluna

I agree with the majority. GreenNYC's logo looks different enough... but, that being said... we know how important "branding" is so I can sort of see Apple's perspective. I can't see them winning though. Like other's have said, the apple has been used before. In fact... it kind of represents the original sin, doesn't it?

excely

I don't see where they are competing or there is overlap that could cause consumer confusion?

(Not that I think there would really be consumer confusion anyway)

AliciaWalsh

OK. Both are apples. Both are green.
Both have a leaf. How would you advertise a granny smith apple that you wanted to sell in your organic farm stand with out consumers being "confused" that they were buying an organic computer? I love the GreenNYC logo. I vote in favor of The GreenNYC BIG Apple!

terrain

I think Apple's suit has no merit. You can easily list the distinct differences between the two logos. GreenNYC's is different because:

a) it is not a solid colour, it is linework
b) it is shaped differently
c) it has a stem
d) it is a different shade of green
e) it does not have a bite out of it

If the courts rule in Apple's favour it could set a dangerous precedent. There are many companies that have been using apples in their logos for many years. Would Apple then own the rights to *any* graphic image of an apple? It's a slippery slope and I hope the courts recognize that.

shandke

They are completely different, and the Big Apple was in existence long before Apple, Inc was ever a valid company.

OrigamiCentral

The logos are totally different. I would never confuse them for each other.

ArtistryInFocus

How ridiculous. Apple is evil. Green New York is a great idea and should be able to keep this unique logo. I completely agree with Terrain and so many others above.

utterlypersonal

Uh.......yah those are not the same. Any idiot knows the apple computer logo by now. No confusion there!

Myracuulous

I’d really have to have more information to judge a case like this. It’s true that Apple can’t lay claim to all apple designs, but if someone were to try and make, say, an MP3 player brand with a stylized apple design as its logo, even if it looked quite different from the Apple logo, it would be easy for customers to get confused.

GreenNYC isn’t making MP3 players, but I would want to see exactly which “certain GreenNYC goods are identical, or highly related to goods and services Apple has offered” before condemning this as Apple being litigious. Maybe, for example, people are honestly thinking that the reusable green grocery bags that GreenNYC is producing have something to do with Apple, since the GreenNYC is also seen in association with technology items like hybrid cars. The Wired.com article says that they are going to do consumer studies to see if people are actually getting confused, I think the results of those should be the deciding factor.

esdesigns

looks different enough to me.

teaforbini

In the spirit of playing Devil's advocate, I'd like to say that Apple does have *some* merit to their claim.

I'm a law student studying Intellectual Property law (including copyright, patents etc). I am in Australia and I acknowledge the laws between our countries are fairly different and also I don't get to study trademarks until next semester, but I'll chime in with my 2 cents.

A mark in Australia needs to be substantially identical or deceptively similar to a mark that has acquired a reputation. I think we all agree GreenNYC's logo isn't "substantially identical" but I'd say that Apple could well establish it is at least "deceptively similar".

It is sufficient if using the mark results in a number of persons having cause to wonder whether the two products may have come from the same source (now, I have no idea what type of company GreenNYC is, but still, I think there's scope for argument here). I myself could envisage consumers assuming the GreenNYC logo is some new direction Apple is taking to keep up with trends.

curlyfrysc

I use a Mac but Apple needs to go bite themselves! No one will be confused over something that looks nothing like the other.

dragonhouseofyuen

In favour of Green NYC.
As an artist it is clearly visible that the hollow apple with the curvy lines and NO missing section is not from Apple.
I would not be confused, however I would be consulting with the design team for producing a green nectarine! instead of an apple for NYC.

dragonhouseofyuen

(I love nectarines!)

berrybluecreations

I'm also in support of Green NYC, they are the same fruit, but the graphics aren't even close to being similar except for that.

vozclothingandart

Oh no, I'm confused- they look the same. Just playing, they are obviously different so I support Green NYC.

offthehookstudios

Even if I were 3 years old and playing the Sesame Street game- "One of these things is not like the other…" I would STILL not think they were the same logo, I would STILL not get confused.
I love Apple, I'm using a Mac right now but come ON!!! let's get real shall we?

FireHazardBeads

and the next step would be to forbit all green apples in fruit stores and supermarkets why people could think that the company apple lost them all over the tables?

do they realy think that people are all so stupid that we would see all apples like being company apple?

company apple would lose if i where the judge

SomsStudio

I don't see how GreeNYC company profile of environmental/ green initiatives has anything to do with Apple's computers. So "Certain GreenNYC goods are identical, or highly related to goods and services Apple has offered" argument is pointless.
As far as the actual logos go, they are different enough for the general public not to be confused.

I have seen plenty of actual copy cats....I remember "Quality" ice creams - a popular Indian brand, being copied as "Kwality" or "Quawlity" Ice creams. Or the "Cosmopolitan" magazine vs "Complete Woman"....Now these I can understand!

Apple fighting with GreeNYC does not make sense.

GreeNYC: you have my vote!

BabyBellatrix

I thought the GreenNYC logo was nice, felt crisp, clean, and simple, I didn't get *apple* from it at all since to me *apple* was never crisp, clean, and simple, lol, but of course I'm someone who's first experience with a computer involved starting and booting it (literally) from a cassette tape in the 5th grade, rofl.

So what if the Green NYC is a green apple and they sell some similar products :::shrug::: what's *apple* going to do next start asking for money from every single person that draws, paints, or takes a picture of an apple? This is about as ridiculous as that tidbit I heard a few years ago about O.J. Simpson wanting to own O.J. :::snort:::

brianslittlegirl

uuuuuuuuum... lol, yeah, I don't really see a case their. People are just suit-crazy. They are apples... they are green... but they are very dissimilar. Maybe if their products actually are similar I could see it, but if not, then what on earth is the issue? Sounds like apple needs to get a life.

seb8351

I have a feeling that NYC was "the big apple" before Apple, inc. existed. Maybe NY has a case against Apple?

SudsMuffin

Wow I was rooting for Green NYC until I saw this image:
http://www.omni-advertising.com/art/d...
Granted the Green NY logo is flipped on it but it certainly appears to have a very similar silhouette, like it had been traced and then redesigned from the original shape. Very interesting.