|
Thursday February 1, 2007
|
 I noticed this ad published in the New York Times business section today (page C9). These ads don't come cheap, several tens of thousands of dollars I should think. The timing of it all really leaves me wondering: Is this ad meant to bolster Cisco's trademark ownership claim of the term iPhone? I counted no fewer than nine iPhone references on the page. Makes you wonder who will win this trademarking war.
Post by Davis Janowski
Posted By:
Gearlog
|
|
|
Stumble
Digg
del.icio.us
Slashdot
February 1, 2007 6:05 PM
Well, considering that Apple and Cisco just agreed to extend talks over the trademark dispute:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128721-c,companynews/article.html
I don't think it's meant to bolster the value of Cisco's trademark, rather just to raise awareness of Cisco's iPhone. I mean honestly, everyone can conjure up an image of Apple's iPhone, but if you ask someone what Cisco's version looks like, good luck. They probably want to make sure people know what their product is actually about, before their trademark is essentially worthless by proxy.
February 1, 2007 10:57 PM
From what I can tell, I can almost guarantee this is an attempt to get tremendous publicity for a cheap price. I think cisco and apple planned this out to reduce marketing expense.
I am not sure how much the Ad in the Time magazine costs, but I would assume it would cost much more than ten of thousands and I believe it depends on the length of the contract too.
February 2, 2007 7:56 AM
Well, Apple didn't announce the iPhone "months ago," but last month. I would definitely agree, however, that Cisco is doing this to gain either mindshare or some sort of legal foothold in its battle with Apple. Remember, Cisco said that they had owned (and sold) iPhones for several years, but nobody's really ever proved that, including Cisco.