Apple - Cisco: whose 'iPhone' is it?

Even if Cisco wins the lawsuit against Apple for infringing iPhone trademark, it has already lost. In the minds of the dear consumer, iPhone was, is, and will continue to be perceieved as Apple's brand and not of Cisco. Technically, if Cisco wins this lawsuit, it will own the trademark on paper, but thats about it.



Test for consumer perception: Which of the above phone is iPhone? Obviously, the one on the left. But in reality the one on the right is Cisco's iPhone, whereas the one on the left, per Cisco, shouldn't even be called iPhone.

On part of Apple, I think it was a bold and smart move, to consciously go ahead with iPhone announcement during MacWorld Expo, knowing very well that they are violating trademark ownership. On technical grounds, they may lose the lawsuit against Cisco, but they got what they wanted and that is people connecting to the cell phone from Apple with the name iPhone. Now, even if Apple loses this battle and has to call its iPhone some xyzPhone, consumers are still going to refer it as iPhone. In fact, I am sure there are lots of people out there who probably didn't even knew that there is a product from Cisco named iPhone until the big noise of this lawsuit.

A better move from Cisco would have been to give away (or share or form some kind of partnership) iPhone trademark to Apple, get good publicity out of it, and use that publicity to bring a wider exposure to their own iPhone. Consumers would have called Cisco a sport which would have helped them build a soft corner in consumers mind.

Good music has no language barriers

Even though I don't understand a word of this song, the music and even the sound of the lyrics is still pleasant to the ears. For those of you who like mixed paced music, wait until 55 seconds into the song where it picks up the pace. I am sure you'll end up listening the whole song after that.

Un-anonymous Online Communities

Today, online communities have members whose identity cannot be tied to physical person. Online communities either have anonymous members or members who are using 'handles' to voice their opinions, recommendations, criticism, etc. Everyone is hiding behind 'handles' in order to safeguard their online identity. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this as one has to safeguard their personal identity to prevent identity theft or any other kind of trouble. However, this does not work well for things such as community members recommending vendors of services (eg: plumbers, electricians, real estate agents, tree trimming services, etc) in the real world.

For example, if you are looking for a plumber in your city, you can surely look it up in yellow pages. But, since there are hundreds of plumbers listed there, how do you know which one is trusted and most recommended one. If you take the online resort to find a reliable plumber, you cannot trust the recommendations because the recommendations are coming from 'handles' which you cannot trust and have to take it with a pinch of salt. In such scenarios, it is necessary that trusted identity of the recommendee come into picture.

The old school way of doing this would be to get a reference of a vendor by asking your colleague or friends or neighbors. Since the recommendation is coming from a trusted contact, you can safely consider the recommendation and act on it. It is necessary that today's online communities, at least those that are revolving around product or service vendor recommendations bring in the angle of trust into picture to make the community worthwhile.

After all, all you want when choosing a vendor of commodity services is a touch of trust to zero-in on that one vendor out of hundreds available.