|
So Mac OS X Tiger's officially out the door and kicking heinie, but we admit that we're a little confused: just what is its connection with Apple, anyway? Because judging by the name, it's clearly a product of TigerDirect, that catalog reseller who, evidently, also creates Macintosh operating systems. So is Apple just cross-promoting it for TigerDirect, or did TigerDirect buy Apple recently during one of our voyages off-world and we just completely missed the news? We're sure there must be a simple explanation, but so far it eludes us.
Oh, wait-- here's a possibility: maybe only the thickest-skulled nimrods on the planet could ever possibly think that just because Mac OS X 10.4 is marketed as "Tiger" that it's somehow connected with those guys at TigerDirect-- and even then only if said nimrods had eaten lead paint chips for breakfast for thirty years and had recently been beaten savagely about the head with the Clueless Stick. Nevertheless, that hasn't stopped TigerDirect from-- ready for this?-- filing a lawsuit against Apple for using the "Tiger" name. Really, folks, does it get any better than this? If courtroom drama were Soylent Green, this Tiger suit would be the kind made from rich people who had a lot of class.
Here's the skinny on the sitch so far: according to a MacMinute article pointed out by faithful viewer Alan Graves, TigerDirect alleges that by naming Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," Apple infringed upon its trademark and has caused "perceived confusion between the products now being marketed by Apple under the 'Tiger' brand." Therefore, TigerDirect has actually asked a judge for a temporary injunction to prevent Apple from shipping copies of Tiger-- or at least to prevent it from marketing it in its allegedly "confusing" manner. You've really got to wonder about a company that waits until the day before a product comes out to file for a temporary injunction blocking its release. Mac OS X Tiger was first shown publicly, what, almost a whole year ago, right? So what's with the eleventh-hour injunction crap?
Now, this may seem like the grandpappy of all dumbass lawsuits, but believe it or not, TigerDirect actually has what may be a valid legal point: Apple has a "Tiger Center" at the Apple Store, which is more or less using the "Tiger" name in conjunction with an online store which sells the same sort of stuff that TigerDirect sells. (TigerDirect's parent company has "Tiger" registered as a trademark for "mail order catalog services featuring computers and computer related products.") Whether or not having a page on Apple's site referred to as the "Tiger Center" constitutes infringement or could actually lead to customer confusion among any sampling of consumers with sufficient cranial capacity to tell the difference between, say, a live echidna and a pound of ground beef with two dozen pencils stuck into it is a matter for a judge to decide. Somehow we don't see it amounting to much, though.
And apparently the judge agrees, since Tiger is now flowing freely in retail outlets everywhere and there's still a "Tiger Center" at the Apple Store, so evidently no injunction was granted-- which means that the judge doesn't think much of TigerDirect's chances of eventually emerging victorious. It ought to be fun to watch the fireworks until they fizzle, though.
Wait, who makes Mac OS X Tiger, again?
| |