Apple responded soon after the trademark registration with legal proceedings against the Barbato brothers, who recalled receiving “four large folders” of documents sent from Apple's Cupertino headquarters. Apple's central objection focused on the logo's similarity to the bitten apple and the risk that consumers might associate the Italian fashion label with Apple's established trademark universe. In August 2014, however, the European Union Intellectual Property Office—then operating under the name OHIM—rejected Apple's opposition in its entirety. The office's reasoning became the surreal centerpiece of the dispute: because the letter “J” is not edible, the missing section of the logo could not legally be interpreted as a bite and therefore did not establish the claimed trademark infringement. The brothers remained unable to discuss the litigation publicly until 2017, when their claim to the brand was definitively settled. The decision generated international media attention and turned an apparent Apple imitation into an eccentric European trademark victory; the Barbatos subsequently promoted ambitions to extend the label into consumer electronics, including reports of a possible Android smartphone bearing the “Steve Jobs” name.
Preparing the daily feature…
AI concept artworkArchive Record · 2010s
Apple's Four Folders of Legal Papers Lose to an Unbiteable J
Apple Inc. and Steve Jobs clothing company / 2010s
Apple responded soon after the trademark registration with legal proceedings against the Barbato brothers, who recalled receiving “four large folders” of documents sent from Apple's Cupertino headquarters. Apple's central objection focused on the logo's similarity to the bitten apple and the risk that consumers might associate the Italian fashion label with Apple's established trademark universe. In August 2014, however, the European Union Intellectual Property Office—then operating under the name OHIM—rejected Apple's opposition in its entirety. The office's reasoning became the surreal centerpiece of the dispute: because the letter “J” is not edible, the missing section of the logo could not legally be interpreted as a bite and therefore did not establish the claimed trademark infringement. The brothers remained unable to discuss the litigation publicly until 2017, when their claim to the brand was definitively settled. The decision generated international media attention and turned an apparent Apple imitation into an eccentric European trademark victory; the Barbatos subsequently promoted ambitions to extend the label into consumer electronics, including reports of a possible Android smartphone bearing the “Steve Jobs” name.
The daily editorial is currently unavailable. There’s still an entire archive to explore.