Apple prepares to fight for the iPhone name in Brazil

Apple is set to challenge a Brazilian patent agency ruling that states that the iPhone trademark belongs to a Brazilian electronics company.

Robert Galbraith/Reuters
Apple CEO Tim Cook stands infront of images of the iPhone

Apple now faces a major obstacle in the emerging Brazilian smart-phone market. Brazilian patent regulators announced today that Apple does not have the rights to the iPhone trademark. This means that Apple will have to fight to keep the name, a battle that they’ve fought before.

The National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), Brazil’s patent agency, has denied Apple’s claims to the trademark because, it says, IGB Eletrônica SA already owns the rights. IGB is better known by its brand name, Gradiente.

Gradiente filed for a Brazilian trademark on the iPhone name back in 2000, six years before Apple filed its application. Since Brazil's trademark law states that registrations work on a first-come, first-serve basis, Gradiente was definitely in line before Apple. However, Apple is challenging the decision, according to the Wall Street Journal, on the basis that Gradiente has not sufficiently used its trademark.

Gradiente won the trademark in 2008, which according to Brazilian laws gives it rights to the name until 2018 as long as the company produces a device under that name within five years. Gradiente did not release such a device until December, only a few weeks before the deadline. Gradiente’s “IPHONE Neo One” runs on the Android OS, retailing for $304. That is a fraction of the price of Apple’s iPhone 5, which retails for $1,220 in Brazil. (In the US, the cheapest iPhone costs $199 with a two-year contract. That contract helps phone companies recoup the money lost on the initial sale of the device. Most countries do not have these subsidies, hence higher prices)

Apple has run into naming problems before. Last year, Proview Electronics sued Apple for fraud and unfair competition. Proview had sold the rights to the iPad name in Taiwan back in 2009. Apple thought that the deal included the naming rights in mainland China as well, but Proview's Chinese subsidiary disagreed. As a result, Proview attempted to stop the sale of iPads in China. If Proview had won the case, the iPad trademarks for the European Union, South Korea, Mexico, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam would have all been returned to them. Apple opted to settle the dispute, avoiding a trial.

Apple also faces a similar situation in Mexico. A telecommunications-equipment firm filed its name as “iFone.” The name was registered in 2003, well before Apple filed for the iPhone trademark there. Apple originally filed an injunction against iFone, claiming that the phonetically similar words would confuse customers. Mexican courts ruled against Apple, allowing iFone to continue its business. Apple is still allowed to use the iPhone name since the companies work in different businesses. 

The Brazilian fight for the iPhone trademark could turn out to be costly for Apple in more ways than one. Brazil is one of the biggest upcoming markets for smart phones. The WSJ reports that the country is expected to become the world’s fourth largest smart-phone market by 2016.

For more tech news, follow Aimee on Twitter@aimee_ortiz

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to