Vivo has been granted the great honor of the "iPOO" trademark in China. Something is probably lost (and gained) in the translation, and we aren't exactly sure what it will be used for, but it's Vivo's now — within trademark class limitations. Read More
The Android tablet market is something of a wasteland. Samsung puts a lot of effort into making really good tablets, Amazon puts a lot of money into making, um, a lot of tablets, and everyone else is an also-ran. Can OnePlus shake up the market for tablets the way it has for Android flagship phones? It might just take a stab at it soon. Read More
If you've placed bets on when HTC will release its last smartphone (at least under its own name) and have marked that date prior to June of this year, you've lost your money. The financially-languishing Taiwanese phone maker still has some gusto left and it may look to continue getting its name out there one way or another. The latest news in its attempts to do so comes from Russia, where regulatory documents have indicated that the company will promote several new smartphones in the near future using a familiar name for longtime HTC fans. Read More
Samsung has several lines of earphones, but that number might be about to increase by one soon. The company filed a trademark application for the name 'Samsung Buds' at the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) last week, hinting at a new line of earbuds coming along in the near future. Read More
One staple of OnePlus phones over the years has been 'Dash Charge,' the company's proprietary fast charging technology. The OnePlus 3 was first to include it, allowing the phone to charge two-thirds of the battery in roughly 30 minutes. If you watched the OnePlus 6 announcement live stream, you may have noticed that Dash Charge wasn't mentioned once - and there's a reason for that. Read More
The dream of the phone-as-desktop will never die...not if Samsung has anything to say about it. According to Galaxy Club in the Netherlands, Samsung is taking another shot at the dream with a new version of its DeX platform, and possibly abandoning the traditional dock form factor. Read More
Andy Rubin has only just announced his much-anticipated new smartphone, but his company may already be in legal hot water over the infringement of intellectual property. It's been brought to our attention that Spigen, the US case and accessory maker, already has a trademark for the term "Essential" and has written to Rubin's organization to contest its use. The letter firmly compels Rubin's fledgling company to "cease and desist from any and all uses of marks including the term "Essential"." Read More
Google might have joined the common vernacular — it was entered into the venerable Oxford English Dictionary back in 2006, after all — but it has staunchly resisted attempts to render the actual trademark "Google" invalid. A recent suit to invalidate the term has been decided in Google's favor, so that's one more attempt thwarted. Instead of joining the vaulted halls of cellophane, linoleum, and thermos, Google will remain a trademark.
Genericization is a big problem for big businesses. Companies like Xerox and Zamboni have had to launch ad campaigns in the past to keep their terms out of common use. Read More
Last night, we received a tip that the Play Store listing for AirDroid, a popular app that allows users to see notifications, respond to messages, and manage content from their Android devices on a desktop, had been removed from the Play Store. The listing was directing to Google's infamous "Not Found" page.
We reached out to the AirDroid team who, at the time, were still trying to figure out what had happened. As it turns out, Google had removed the listing after a mass-complaint from Facebook. The sweeping set of complaints picked up tons of apps with "WhatsApp" in their names, but also apps - like AirDroid - that simply mentioned WhatsApp in the description. Read More
It seems like ages ago that Apple and Samsung finished duking it out in court over Samsung's "borrowing" from Apple's early iPhone designs. However, the $930 million judgement against Samsung was just the beginning of the legal tussle. This whole time the lawyers have still been racking up billable hours, and now a US appeals court has reversed a big chunk of the damages saying Apple's trademarks on the look of the original iPhone aren't valid.