An Apple a Day, Keeps the Startups Away

One of the most revolutionary people in the world, Steve Jobs, created the company we know today as Apple, back in 1976. Though the company has seen many ups and downs, in today’s world it is a global leader. The pace with which it is growing is unstoppable, because even amidst a pandemic, it hit its $2 trillion valuation in August, 2020. Though all is rosy on the financial front for the tech giant, there is a dark underbelly of Apple that a lot of us don't know of.

Apple has a notorious history in terms of the lengths it will go to in order to protect its trademark logo! In March, 2020, Apple filed a legal challenge against a meal planning app- Prepear, that has a logo in the shape of a pear and is considered to be a rip off of the original Apple logo. Prepear is an app aimed at kids and helps them have a healthy meal plan. To put it into perspective, a company that is approximately valued at $2.7 trillion and has over 80,000 employees, is suing a company that currently has 4 employees. It originally had 5 employees, but sadly had to let one go in order to be able to pay the thousands of dollars in legal fees to sustain this fight.

Amidst a pandemic, when governments and organisations are trying to help small startups, Apple has chosen to run one into the ground. Their problem arises from the fact that Apple believes that users are likely to associate the Prepear logo with theirs, owing to its minimalistic design and right angled leaf. This alleged ‘confusion, mistake or deception in the minds of consumers’ would damage Apple’s brand, the company said. However, the bright side to all of this is that Natalie Monson, founder of Prepear, has said they aren’t going to give in and change their logo. She believes in her business and wants to send a message to the rest of the community that small companies won't buckle to the bullies of their industries.

Prepear vs. Apple Logo [source- Hypebeast]

Funnily enough, this isn't the first time Apple is doing this! Taking a quick dive into the past, an independent Apple repair shop in Norway was sued by the tech giant for apparently violating its trademark by using aftermarket Apple products. Apple wanted to settle with the Norwegian business owner for an amount of $3566 and the written contract of him not being able to conduct his Apple side of the repair business. Henrik Huesby, the owner of the Norwegian company, refused to settle and took Apple to court and ended up winning. However, this real life David vs. Goliath moment was quite short-lived.

As Apple appealed to a higher court and finally ended up winning, with the Norwegian Supreme court passing a judgement in their favour. The reason that Apple may be this persistent in such cases is because they want to create a monopoly. With an aim to allow only Apple stores and authorised second party repair shops to officially repair Apple products. This can very easily be noticed with the extent Apple goes to hide diagnostic tools and software, unnecessary error codes, hiding data points and so on. The catch being that these shops don't do the different types of repairs that independent repair shops do, and even if they do offer any service, they charge an exorbitantly high amount. This is nothing but the desire to create a monopoly within their market and add to their ever growing revenue stream by shutting down small businesses. Even though eventually, the Supreme Court ruled against Huesby's favour, his choice to take on a massive corporation like Apple and fighting for what he believed in, provided the courage to other small businesses to stand up for what is right.

Apple also got itself into a scuffle back in 2009, with Woolworths, one of Australia's largest retail stores. Apple was worried that their logo looks very similar to that of Woolworths, and since the chain store sold electronics, this allowed them to retail items with this logo on the back. Apple was scared that this might lead to customers believing that Woolworths products are related to Apple’s. There is still no formal verdict on this matter, but it is said that Apple either dropped the case or reached a settlement with them, as till date Woolworths is still using the same logo.

Woolworths vs. Apple Logo

Another such incident was when Apple sent a legal notice to a small German cafe in the city of Bonn. The owner of Apfelkind wanted to open a space that allowed kids to play whilst the parents enjoyed a delicious coffee in peace. Apple claimed, yet again, that their logo was too similar to their own, but after innumerable meetings, Apple offered them a settlement. Throughout this entire process, Christin Römer, the owner of the cafe, garnered a lot of attention on social media and international news, quickly gaining quite the fan following. This increased footfall in her restaurant but more importantly, gave her the strength to decline the settlement and drag Apple to court. Soon after that the courts ended up siding against Apple’s favour. Apfelkind’s lawyer stated Apple has a history of initiating such litigations as a part of their agenda to scare off smaller companies from using anything that would even mildly represent their design style.

Apfelkind vs. Apple Logo [source: Gawker]

Personally speaking, I am not the biggest fan of this type of aggressive monopolistic behaviour where every single activity, no matter how simple, is designed to make large amounts of profit for the company. And it doesn’t just affect economies and revenue, but also the ever growing issue of climate change! Taking the above mentioned instance of Huesby, the independent repair shop owner from Norway, if Apple didn't go after small independent repair shops in the name of rigorously protecting its Trademark Laws and instead provided the tools and resources for independent phone repair to perform efficiently, it could have a major positive impact on the environment. According to an EBB survey, increasing the lifespan of european smartphones by just one year could reduce CO2 emissions to the extent of taking away 1 million cars off the road for that year.

Looking at the big picture, these small businesses don’t really affect Apple’s business model. It seems like it is high time that Apple indulges in initiatives that not only produces cutting edge technological products, but also supports smaller businesses by rethinking and redesigning the policies and mentality associated with the protection of its esteemed company name.