Apple takes aim at copycat fake retail stores with new lawsuit
Apple has gone on the offensive against a number of defendants, including 50 John Does and unnamed businesses, in a new trademark infringement suit. The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of New York remains under a court seal, so the specifics of the complaint are not known.
However, one of the defendants in the case is "Apple Story Inc.," matching the name of a retail outlet that mimics Apple's own highly successful retail operation. "Apple Story" is located in the neighborhood of Flushing in Queens, New York; Apple's lawsuit was filed in Brooklyn.
A photo of the "Apple Story" store, submitted to BirdAbroad, shows accessories for Apple products held in displays designed to look like Apple's iPhone and iPad.
Based on the photo, the New York store does not appear to go to the same great lengths taken by some highly elaborate fake stores in China. A handful of locations in the city of Kunming look nearly identical to Apple's legitimate stores, and employees at the fake locations even wear signature blue t-shirts.
AppleInsider attempted Thursday afternoon to contact Samuel Joseph Chuang, the attorney representing defendants Apple Story Inc., Fun Zone Inc., and Janic Po Chiang, to confirm the exact nature of Apple's lawsuit. A request for comment was not returned as of the time of publication.
Because the lawsuit is sealed, it is unknown whether this particular complaint, filed on July 25, also targets the elaborate overseas operations. It's possible that Apple does not yet know who runs those stores, and could be included in the 50 anonymous John Does that are named as defendants with no attorney listed.
"Apple Story" store in Flushing, New York. Credit Greg Autry via BirdAbroad.
Also named as a defendant in the case are generic "XYZ Businesses," with no total number given. Finally, a person named Jimmy Kwok is also listed as a defendant with no attorney.
Apple is represented by New York-based attorneys Mark N. Mutterperl and Todd Ryan Hambridge of the firm Fulbright & Jawardi LLP.
The case's docket report reveals that Apple's legal team spoke with defense attorney Chuang on Tuesday of this week, and both gave the court consent that the case be unsealed, which is how its existence was discovered by AppleInsider. However, the documents will remain sealed with access only to counsel and the court, leaving the exact details unknown.
After the fake Apple Stores in China garnered attention around the world, city officials in Kunming began investigating the retail locations. Outraged customers duped by the operations also reportedly returned, demanding proof that their purchases were genuine Apple products and not cheap knock-offs.
Two of the fake retail locations were ordered to close by the government because they did not have official businesses permits. But those stores were allegedly not found guilty of any copyright infringement in China.
37 Comments
It makes me laugh that every time AI bring up the story of the fake Apple shops they can't help but mention the blue shirts.
"even wear signature blue t-shirts."
I doubt even Apple can stop retailers wearing blue shirts. I can just imagine the scenario...
"Hey Steve, we've just found a fake Apple shop, take a look at these pictures"
"OH MY GOD! They have even managed to get hold of our blue shirt technology"
Jeez, even I can fake a blue shirt, the Chinese copycats are way ahead of copying clothing.
I have used Apple computers since 1985 and I have about had it with their strong-arm tactics the last few years. I am seriously considering giving up on Apple products entirely. That Apple Story store looks NOTHING like an Apple Store. Where do they get off on suing these guys. So no we need to add the word Apple (Not Apple Computers, not Apple, Inc.), just Apple...to the "hands-off" list. Disgusting. No, Apple is not loosing money, nor are the customers "confused" as to whether this is an official Apple Store or not. Nonetheless, I am sure that will be part of Apple's complaint.
I have used Apple computers since 1985 and I have about had it with their strong-arm tactics the last few years. I am seriously considering giving up on Apple products entirely. That Apple Story store looks NOTHING like an Apple Store. Where do they get off on suing these guys. So no we need to add the word Apple (Not Apple Computers, not Apple, Inc.), just Apple...to the "hands-off" list. Disgusting. No, Apple is not loosing money, nor are the customers "confused" as to whether this is an official Apple Store or not. Nonetheless, I am sure that will be part of Apple's complaint.
Should probably wait for full details of the lawsuit to come out before you get too worked up. Apple may be happy if 'Apple Story' simply changes the store name, but who knows?we'll see when we actually have some decent information to discuss.
I have used Apple computers since 1985 and I have about had it with their strong-arm tactics the last few years.
It's my understanding that if you hold a trademark on a given term, you must make some effort to defend the mark or you will risk losing the trademark protection, even if you "don't really care" that someone is using a similar name to your trademark. That may be why Apple is doing as they are in the case of the "Apple Story" business.
It should be interesting to see how the whole "fake store" thing plays out.
I have used Apple computers since 1985 and I have about had it with their strong-arm tactics the last few years. I am seriously considering giving up on Apple products entirely. That Apple Story store looks NOTHING like an Apple Store. Where do they get off on suing these guys. So no we need to add the word Apple (Not Apple Computers, not Apple, Inc.), just Apple...to the "hands-off" list. Disgusting. No, Apple is not loosing money, nor are the customers "confused" as to whether this is an official Apple Store or not. Nonetheless, I am sure that will be part of Apple's complaint.
To you it looks completely different to an Apple store, to the hapless customers who hadn't been in a real store though it would look entirely convincing. The fact that customers freaked out when they found out it was a fake indicates at least some of them were misled.