Apple Wants to Own "Podcast" Trademark
Apple has issued a cease and desist to Podcast Ready, claiming that the terms "Podcast Ready" and "myPodder" infringe on Apple's trademarks, and that they cause confusion among consumers. Wired notes that Apple has been cracking down on use of the word "pod" by lots of different people.
Clearly this means that Apple is trying very hard to own the podcast trademark and I would not be surprised to see a lot of different products and sites change their names. However, like with Google, the genie is out of the bottle here. Podcast is in the dictionary and part of the vernacular. Still, I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV so it's hard to say what's right here by law. From the naked eye it seems very aggressive to me.






The term "podcast" was born out of the Apple iPod womb. Now the Apple-mother is chasing down those who utilize the "podcast" term. Podcast is inherently Apple, therefore, the term "vidcast" will boom in popularity.
Furthermore, the Microsoft Zune and Samsung K5 will launch their unique mobile video devices. I've read and been an ear-witness to the fact that neither said firms will adopt the "podcast" or "video podcast" Apple jargon to associate with their devices. Both of their marketing teams assert that "podcast" is everything Apple. I know one of the marketing executives at Microsoft and she says the Zune will play "Vidcasts." They(Microsoft) will stay far far away from Apple-speak and now everyone can get sued for using the term "podcast." As Professor Rubel rightly stated back in 2005, "2006 will be the Year of Vidcasting and Advercasting"
Posted by: MICHAEL | Friday, September 22, 2006 at 06:02 PM
Personally (and I'm not an expert) it seems to me that Apple should love the fact that their terms are in the vernacular. Just like Band-aids and Kleenex before them it's a free imprint. What's more, fighting the use of those terms leaves a bad taste in many consumer's mouths. It just doesn't seem like this is the right battle to fight.
Does common use dilute their brand or does it strengthen it?
Posted by: ann michael | Friday, September 22, 2006 at 07:54 PM
Like you all, I'm not a professional. I am a consumer and a passionate user of the web.
Podcast is a word that is part of the whole web 2.0 era. this whole new way of ideas should be seen as what it stands for: sharing our knowledge and ideals.
We are worrying here because we lack an owner for such a popular word, and now, a channel. 'Podcast' these days it is like saying 'radio' some time back.
I guess it's just better to be greedy than proud.
Posted by: FStraat | Friday, September 22, 2006 at 08:34 PM
What people don't realise is that if you don't enforce your ownership of a trademark that's yours, you will lose that trademark.
Then the term "Podcast" would be open to abuse.
Posted by: Richard Henry | Friday, September 22, 2006 at 08:54 PM
The ramifications of this are significant and Apple better realize it is about to piss of the majority of podcasters worldwide and this will turn into their worst ever PR nightmare.
Posted by: Todd Cochrane | Saturday, September 23, 2006 at 01:52 AM
Many times we assume that companies behave like humans, while they are only ruled by money. And this rule says that you can make more money from trademarks. Most of us, on the opposite, would be happy to know that sometingh that we have invented has become so popular that is now in a dictionary. Without carimg to much about money.
I don't want to say that companies should be philantropic organizations, but that it not necessary to extend the business anywhere. Praise people who have embraced your products, instead of sueing them... Partner with people doing business thanks to your products instead of blaming them... Or you will remain alone: there are so many alternatives...
Posted by: Nicola Mattina | Saturday, September 23, 2006 at 06:36 AM
Being more or less in the writing/ publishing biz, there's another use of the "pod" word that's in common currency on the web. Nothing to do with Apple. Another type of "broadcasting." Print On Demand. P.O.D. Think Apple can pounce on that use, too?
Posted by: Julie | Saturday, September 23, 2006 at 06:42 PM
I agree with Michael & Todd.
Todd, it will be a PR nightmare for Apple. Podcast is part of our daily lexicon. Todd's point leads into Michael's articulation. Another term like "Vidcast" will emerge and replace "podcast." Everyone except Apple will embrace the term and thus not be afraid of Apple's legal sharks!! (BTW - I really like the term "Vidcasting," I was unaware of the term until today - it makes linguistic sense)
Posted by: Kathy | Saturday, September 23, 2006 at 07:37 PM
i think it's silly... plain silly... and i hope apple waste alot of money and lose whatever legal action they take...
if anyone owns pod.. it's startrek or starwars...
or the pea..
Posted by: ming2.0 | Sunday, September 24, 2006 at 09:18 AM
No one here has yet mentioned that Apple did not invent the term "podcast". They have a trademark on 'iPod', but there have been 'pod's before. Besides the English word for various types of containers (including pea pods), there have been various uses of those three letters, including Print On Demand, PODS (Portable On Demand Storage, a trademarked name!), Pod People, and so forth. Granted, the term "audioblog" is not as cute as "podcast" but we could go back to that if Apple presses the issue.
Sure, "podcast" was derived from contracting "iPod" with "broadcast", but the term is not "iPodCast", is it? The key in my mind is that Apple did not create the term, did not buy it from those who did, and have let the term be popular for two years before trying to sue over it.
Apple should step back and just deal with those who abuse their actual product names (they did force the "iPodder" software to be renamed). A "pod" is a storage container. An 'iPod' is Apple's storage container for media data. General use of the term "podcast" for the generic distribution of media content via RSS is an indirect advertisement for the fact that there is an iPod at the user end of most of those feeds. It is not a distraction from Apple's product but a tribute to its popularity.
Posted by: solak | Monday, September 25, 2006 at 01:08 AM
Now that the actual letter has come out, and the Wired story's premature conclusion about Apple's supposed plans to take over the word 'podcast' has been disproved, can we all get back to bashing Apple for the dumb things it's actually doing? My thoughts on the whole flap are here.
Posted by: Ryan | Monday, September 25, 2006 at 10:11 PM
Since I believe in sharing is caring so I would like to tell you people about some fresh content written by a professional content writer about trademarks and its importance and other stuff, check out here http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/tm.html
Hope this helps!
Posted by: Addies | Wednesday, October 11, 2006 at 11:51 PM
Great Content.
I have read these articles.
Basis of Your Small Businesses
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-bsb.html
Administring Your Small Business
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-asb.html
Financing Your Small Business
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-fsb.html
Sales Management and Marketing Your Small Business
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-smmsb.html
Running a Successful Small Business
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-rssb.html
Small Business E-Commerce
http://www.smallbusinessbible.org/navigation/ssb-sbec.html
Posted by: John | Wednesday, November 08, 2006 at 06:38 AM