Cisco Extends Negotiations on iPhone

An anonymous reader writes "Apple and Cisco have just a short while longer to discuss the use of the iPhone name for Apple's new product. Cisco has extended the deadline for a resolution out to February 21st. The two companies are seeking a peaceful resolution to their problems, and the deadline was extended to 'reach an agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.' Early this month, Cisco put their lawsuit on hold to start these negotiations - it's easy to understand why they wouldn't want to scrap a whole month's worth of discussion over a few final details."

Re:Why can't Cisco just sell it?

[morcheeba]

You can't sell a trademark [wikipedia.org] in the US without the sale of some underlying asset. And, presumably, that asset must appear in the phone.

Trademark isn't an asset like copyrighted works or patents. It's a method for customers to identify the source of goods. Suppose a customer associates "iphone" with cisco -- if someone other that cisco sells an "iphone", then the trademark has failed and does not serve its purpose of manufacturer identification. .. now whether customers associate "iphone" more with Cisco or Apple is another question. And, if the courts assign it to the lesser-associated-with product, will it serve the public interest?

Read the product description.

[shmlco]

Read the product description. Note that while the name of the product is "Linksys WIP320 Linksys Wireless-G Skype iPhone", everywhere else it refers to the phone as, "the Linksys Wireless-G Phone for Skype", or simply, "the Wireless-G Phone".

Not the "the Wireless-G iPhone". Looks to me like they tacked an "i" onto the product name just in time for the lawsuit.

Be interesting to see if anyone has any physical brochures or product sheets on the "iPhone" that predate the lawsuit... and whether or not they had an "i" in them.

Re:I think Cicso knows they may lose the case

[Dan Ost]

Apple only loses time if Cisco gets an injunction against them using the name.

If Apple is confident that there will be no injunction, then they can continue to
market the iPhone without any lost time.