Everyone knew it was bound to happen. Rumors and gossip have swirled for nearly a year over Apple's new 'iPhone' device (phone to the far right). Only problem... um, yeah, iPhone already exists. Cisco Systems (phone to the left) owns the name in a trademark dating back to 2000, when the company acquired Infogear Technology and its iPhone product.

Now you'd think logic would have provided one of two GOOD solutions for Apple.
1.) Negations to use the iPhone name along with Cisco.
2.) Find a different name for your device.

And of course there is the BAD solution:
1.) Screw the trademark owner and call your device iPhone anyway.

Apple ironically chose both the first good and bad way of handling this situation. First they started to negotiate, and then they decide to use the name anyway. Talk about adding insult to injury. The result of them choosing to proverbially screw Cisco, while pretending to play nice, has now landed them in the middle of a lawsuit over the trademark.

Cisco has had the following to say about the lawsuit, "This lawsuit is about Cisco's obligation to protect its trademark in the face of a willful violation. Our goal was collaboration. The action we have taken today is about not using people's property without permission."

Apple's response was as follows, "We think Cisco's trademark lawsuit is silly. There are already several companies using the name iPhone for Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP) products. We are the first company to ever use the iPhone name for a cell phone, and if Cisco wants to challenge us on it we are very confident we will prevail."

Side with who you will.

What burns my bread on the situation was the fact that both companies had been in serious discussion over the last few weeks, and reportedly even years, about how to 'share' the trademark name. What would compel Apple to just go ahead with the name and not finish the negotiations? Hrm, lack of patience maybe?

Cisco was quoted as saying, "We genuinely believed that we were going to be able to reach an agreement and Apple's communications with us suggested they supported that goal. We negotiated in good faith with every intention to reach a reasonable agreement with Apple by which we would share the iPhone brand. … Before iMacs and iPods were even glimmers in Apple's eye, we shipped and/or supported that iPhone product for years."

Now on the flip side of this equation I will say the device looks really nice. The features and new technology in the *cough* iPhone are incredible. Some are unhappy about their ties to Cingular, but lets leave network debate to the Blogosphere.

In the meantime it'll be interesting to see how this legal fight pans out. I can't help but side with Cisco, primarily because of how Apple went about handling the situation. You don't act like you're friendly on negotiations and then deliver the 1-2 punch when you're still at the negotiation table. That's just bad form in my opinion.

May the company with the most money and best lawyers win.

That's my 2 iCents.

John C. Derrick
Founder