Apple Sues Woolworths Over 'Apple-y' Logo (PHOTOS)

*See pictures below*

Apple is taking Woolworths to court over the retailer's latest logo: a green, stylized "W" Apple claims bears too much resemblance to its trademarked Apple.

The Woolworths logo (see below) does bear some resemblance to the Apple symbol in color and shape. However, according to Mashable,

The Australian-based Woolworths claims that their logo is simply a stylized "W" paired with an "abstract leaf symbol". One could, however, also say that it's a stylized person with outstretched arms, or an "apple being peeled".

This isn't the first time Apple's gotten protective of its look. Last year, Apple sued the Victoria School of Business and Technology for what Apple claimed was a design just a bit too close for comfort (see below):

Can Apple really claim any Apple? Hans Hulsbosch, who designed Woolworth's new logo, quips that the company is going too far. "Based on this logic, they would have to take action against every fruit-seller," he said.

According to an entry on Wikipedia, the criteria for trademark infringement is as follows:

• Strength of the mark


• Proximity of the goods


• Similarity of the marks


• Evidence of actual confusion


• Marketing channels used


• Type of goods and the degree of care likely to be exercised by the purchaser


• Defendant's intent in selecting the mark


• Likelihood of expansion of the product lines

What do you think? Too close for comfort or should Apple just chill?

Quick Poll

Is Woolworth's logo too similar or is Apple being crazy?

Too similar

Crazy

Share your vote on Facebook so your friends can take this poll

Comments

[MIKEinNYC]

05:34 PM on 10/08/2009

Apple is a bunch of predators.

There's still a Woolworths?

[igorz]

04:19 PM on 10/08/2009

Liver failure has been known to cause odd behavior...I'm thinking all is not well with Little Stevie Wonder's new one.

The only REMOTELY similar attribute of the 2 logos is the doohickey at the top and, most likely, anyone with a sound liver would've recognized that.

Personally, I'm dumping all my AAPL while the gettin' is good.

[jsgaetano]

02:11 PM on 10/08/2009

Just because they named their company Apple doesn't mean the image of the apple becomes their sole and exclusive property.

[AgnesBankhead]

07:25 AM on 10/08/2009

all mr hulsbosch and woolies need to do is reverse the image so that the "leaf" points to the left and the visual association to apple's logo will disappear .........

[NoSillyName]

02:40 AM on 10/08/2009

Australia still has Woolworth's? The same Woolworth's that folded in the U.S. back in the 80s or early 90s?

[juanbobo]

12:44 PM on 10/07/2009

How many brands can you name that have a stand alone, recognizable logo requiring no type?
1. Apple
2. Nike
3. fill in the blanks

The fact is that there are very very few. That's why typography is so important to graphic design. if you've got logo requiring no type, you protect it with all you've got

[RustyPatina]

08:15 AM on 10/07/2009

Battling corporate giants. ZZZZZZZZZZ

[chedet]

05:16 AM on 10/07/2009

Maybe then the fruit apple can sue the company apple for taking its name...

[MikeHermit]

04:58 AM on 10/07/2009

I have always had problems with copyright laws. How can you own a word? How can you own any logi that has an apple in it? A school? The apple is a tradional symbol of schools. A leaf or stem at the top? It has 3 directions it could go, right, left, and up. Even a bite out of an apple. I could imagine a dentist office using that as its logo.

There are those who would use the actual Apple logo. But those would be counterfiet computer sellers. The real risk. A school, Woolworths, a dentist office are threats? That is just pathetic and petty.

[MagicalPossibilities]

12:05 AM on 10/07/2009

That's pretty ridiculous. I think Apple may have had a case with the technology school, but the Woolworth's logo looks nothing like it and besides, how would they be remotely threatening them? If it's the same Woolworth's of the "five and dime" stores I remember as a kid, it's a totally different line of business.

[TheWoolseyMammoth]

05:46 AM on 10/07/2009

The Woolworth's that used to be in the US is NOT the same company as the Woolworth's in Australia. I personally don't know what the Australian Woolworth's is like, but I can add that the African/Middle Eastern Woolworth's (which is related to neither the American Woolworth's nor the Australian Woolworth's) is actually quite an upscale store, with gourmet groceries, fine clothing and wares. I lived in southern Africa for a bit and to be honest, I miss the African Woolworth's now living back here in the US.

On the logo, Apple's gone way too far here. Are they next going to start suing Vermont apple growers for calling their macintosh's macs? They took the name and logo from the public consciousness and call it their own? Please. I'd give it to them if they were trying to defend the old style rainbow colored Apple logo, but anything vaguely resembling the shape? The Apple kool-aid must be pretty mind-numbing in Cupertino.

[bongstradamus]

12:02 AM on 10/07/2009

If woolworths dropped the stem looking thingy from the top, apple would probably back off.

[DevonTexas]

03:09 PM on 10/06/2009

What about Apple Records logo?!

[ForObamaInDallas]

08:56 PM on 10/06/2009

That issue has been addressed within the next couple of pages on responses. ;)

[dmsdzinr]

10:38 AM on 10/06/2009

As a Graphic Designer of over 30 years, let this one GO, Steve. It isn't even close to the Apple logo.
Just because the Woolworth logo is an apple too is NO basis for a lawsuit.

[bongstradamus]

12:15 AM on 10/07/2009

If I was Steve I'd say "take out the leaf and we're cool." Its a small change and doesnt take away from the woolworths logo. in fact it focuses attention on the fact that its a W where the leaf distracts you from that. If woolworths specializes in clothing, footwear and beauty products, why are they even alluding to fruit in the first place? The logo is already green, is this a fight worth fighting to appear eco-friendly?

[lewi0168]

03:25 AM on 10/11/2009

If you want to know what Woolworths specializes in go to the ASX site: http://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/companyInfo.do?by=asxCode&allinfo=&asxCode=WOW.

[Feanor]

10:22 AM on 10/06/2009

Didn't they rip off the name and logo from the Beatles in the first place?

[justins79]

02:12 PM on 10/06/2009

No, they didn't. Apple Computer was sued by Apple Records (the Beatles' record label) when Apple chose to include microphones with their computers. Apple Records at the time argued that anyone owning an Apple Computer was getting into the recording business because of the microphone. This event was the inspiration behind the long-time Apple sound file called "Sosumi" (say it out with emphasis on the phonetics).

[Feanor]

04:39 PM on 10/06/2009

That is the Apple Computers version of the story, anyway.

[publanski]

01:03 AM on 10/07/2009

Yes, they did rip off the name. And Apple record's symbol was a green apple. And they lost a lawsuit based on this: In 1978, Apple Corps, the Beatles-founded holding company and owner of their record label, Apple Records, filed a lawsuit against Apple Computer for trademark infringement. The suit was settled in 1981 with an undisclosed amount being paid to Apple Corps.

[studmoose]

08:22 AM on 10/06/2009

This sounds just like Branston who appears to sue every business that uses the word 'Virgin" in it.

He seems to try and force them to surrender 'Virgin' or force them out of business with excessive legal fees.