iPhone Battle: Apple, Cisco Extend Talks on "iPhone" Deal

Not open for further replies.


The Devil's Advocate
khin007 said:
i think apple i-phone is a big hit in the mobile phone market anyway
as of now i wud say it has shaken the market ... hit or miss will be decided by its sales figures .... the fan fare of launch and the media attention after launch sud not be confused with a product being successful .... not saying tht its not a good product .... but again giving it the crown now wud be wrong


Google Bot
i i captain..... :p
@khin let it come to the indian market first.... then ll c whether its a hit or no...


Hanging, since 2004..
mAV3 said:
imav3 .... ipathiks ... iarayaush ... imail2andy .... iraaabo .... ibill gates :mrgreen:

Everybody stand in line to take a poop ;) . Apple has reinvented the pot
presenting the ipot :


Similar innovations


This one is my favourite


This is what the giant Cisco says...

Cisco owns the iPhone trademark. We have since 2000, when we bought a company called Infogear Technology, which had developed a product that combined web access and telephone. Infogear’s registrations for the mark date to 1996, before iMacs and iPods were even glimmers in Apple’s eye. We shipped and/or supported that iPhone product for years. We have been shipping new, updated iPhone products since last spring, and had a formal launch late last year. Apple knows this; they approached us about the iPhone trademark as far back as 2001, and have approached us several times over the past year.

For the last few weeks, we have been in serious discussions with Apple over how the two companies could work together and share the iPhone trademark. We genuinely believed that we were going to be able to reach an agreement and Apple’s communications with us suggested they supported that goal. We negotiated in good faith with every intention to reach a reasonable agreement with Apple by which we would share the iPhone brand.

So, I was surprised and disappointed when Apple decided to go ahead and announce their new product with our trademarked name without reaching an agreement. It was essentially the equivalent of “we’re too busy.” Despite being very close to an agreement, we had no substantive communication from Apple after 8pm Monday, including after their launch, when we made clear we expected closure. What were the issues at the table that kept us from an agreement? Was it money? No. Was it a royalty on every Apple phone? No. Was it an exchange for Cisco products or services? No.

Fundamentally we wanted an open approach. We hoped our products could interoperate in the future. In our view, the network provides the basis to make this happen—it provides the foundation of innovation that allows converged devices to deliver the services that consumers want. Our goal was to take that to the next level by facilitating collaboration with Apple. And we wanted to make sure to differentiate the brands in a way that could work for both companies and not confuse people, since our products combine both web access and voice telephony. That’s it. Openness and clarity.

At MacWorld, Apple discussed the patents pending on their new phone technology. They clearly seem to value intellectual property. If the tables were turned, do you think Apple would allow someone to blatantly infringe on their rights? How would Apple react if someone launched a product called iPod but claimed it was ok to use the name because it used a different video format? Would that be ok? We know the answer – Apple is a very aggressive enforcer of their trademark rights. And that needs to be a two-way street.

This lawsuit is about Cisco's obligation to protect its trademark in the face of a willful violation. Our goal was collaboration. The action we have taken today is about not using people’s property without permission.

Cisco Blog

It's very clear that they wanna capitalize on the "i" tag everywhere, even if possible by stealing. iMac, iPod, iTunes, etc...and now iPhone. Can't they think of any other option? Certainly, it is "not-so-professional" act done by Apple.


Latest update of the deal........

Companies still trying to reach agreement!

Network equipment maker Cisco Systems Inc. said it agreed to give Apple Inc. more time to respond to the lawsuit it filed over the "iPhone" trademark, extending negotiations until February 21.

"Cisco has agreed to give Apple an extension until Wednesday, February 21," Cisco said in a statement. "Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution."

It was the second agreement to an extension after a similar move on January 31.

While Cisco has said it wants to keep Apple from "infringing upon and deliberately copying and using" the trademark, it has also called for "interoperability", suggesting it was seeking more than a one-off payment for use of the name.

Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris confirmed the extension, saying the discussions were aimed at reaching an agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.



Finally it's all over! The latest news of the lawsuit............

Cisco, Apple settle iPhone lawsuit

Cisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc. said Wednesday they have settled the trademark-infringement lawsuit that threatened to derail Apple's use of the "iPhone" name for its much-hyped new iPod-cellular phone gadget.

The companies said they reached an agreement that will allow Apple to use the name for its sleek new multimedia device in exchange for exploring wide-ranging "interoperability" between the companies' products in the areas of security, consumer and business communications.

The showdown between the Silicon Valley tech heavyweights erupted last month when Cisco sued Apple in San Francisco federal court claiming that Apple's use of the iPhone name constituted a "willful and malicious" violation of a trademark that Cisco has owned since 2000.

Cisco's Linksys division has been using the trademark since last spring on a line of phones that make free long-distance calls over the Internet using a technology called Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP.

SOURCE: BusinessWeek


Aspiring Novelist
Thank God! That is a win-win situation. I am curious to know what sort of interoperability will there be between the two devices. Cisco is trying to use Apple's product as a leverage. Let us see how beneficial it is for them.
Apple got all the hype and discussions pumped up by getting themselves sued and then settled on the exact same terms the deal has started with in the first place. I don't see Apple losing anything in this case. All they got is loads of free publicity. :)


The joy Of Wow
I have come to know that Apple has told that 3rd party s/w cant be installed on IPhone..Is it true??

But the phone luks gud & will be very heavy on pockets 2


Aspiring Novelist
Direct installation of third party applications won't be possible.

All third party applications will be approved by Apple before release. It will be "more of a controlled environment" according to Steven Paul Jobs, CEO of Apple, Inc.


With Google being one of Cisco’s biggest customers, and Google CEO Dr. Eric Schmidt on Apple’s Board of Directors, could a potential Google backlash been on John Chambers’ mind when agreeing to end the iPhone lawsuit?

Cisco iPhone outcome with Apple: was Google a factor

Cisco, Google and Apple are three of the world’s powerful IT players, and a perfect example of the ‘six degrees of separation’ that connects us all to virtually anyone else on the planet.

When Cisco took on Apple over the iPhone name, first by launching Linksys iPhone branded products towards the end of 2006 before the highest speculation of all time that Steve Jobs would launch an iPhone at Macworld 2007, and then by suing Apple the day after the iPhone announcement, Cisco knew that a fight with Apple could easily end up very messy and expensive, with Apple likely to come up smelling of roses anyway no matter what any legal outcome might have been.

That said, Cisco have managed to stake a relatively firm claim on the iPhone name, letting Cisco bask in some of Apple’s iPhone limelight, with the hope that there will be some kind of future interoperability with Apple products that could make Cisco and Linksys products more attractive to consumers and generate more sales than without any Apple or iPhone connection.

In this way, while this outcome was expected, both Apple and Cisco have been able to save face, with Apple able to claim the true victory yet giving Cisco access to what is one of the hottest brand names in the world today, even if Linksys iPhone sales are likely to be tiny in comparison with Apple iPhone sales.

Leaving Google out for a moment, the deal implies that Apple and Cisco will work together on something or in some way in the future, which in the rapidly changing digital media, computing and entertainment landscape could be a useful bit of insurance to have, although it does ultimately depend on Apple and Steve Jobs wanting to play ball.

So now we bring Google back in where we started. With Google and Apple very good friends, with Google CEO Dr. Eric Schmidt on Apple’s Board, how might Google have reacted to an intransigent Cisco willing to go to court with Apple over the iPhone name, no matter what?

From Cisco’s point of view, it’s all a bit too scary to think about. Cisco got to put out the ‘nobody messes with us or we sue’ message out there lest anyone else think they can similarly outsmart Cisco.

While Cisco have ‘lost’ to Apple, Cisco’s new ‘iPhone’ range has had the best free publicity in the global press ever, with the hope that anyone looking for a wireless VoIP phone that works with Skype and other VoIP providers – with that market growing quite nicely - might have had so much Cisco iPhone exposure that the Cisco/Linksys iPhone range proves to be a success all of their very own!

That, and keeping Google, one of your biggest customers on side, just may have made pressing the whole iPhone issue one of the smartest moves Cisco have made in a while.

Source: iTWire
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom