Tomorrow’s iPad 3 Event Might Be Crashed By iTV (But Not The One You Think)



Although bloggers and analysts refer to Apple’s rumored upcoming HDTV as the iTV just out of simplicity, there’s no actual indication that Apple would call it that. None. No one knows for sure if Apple’s even working on an HDTV, let alone what they’re going to call it.

The only evidence that Apple might call an HDTV the iTV is US Patent Patent No. 2011/0154394 A1, which has a solitary image indicating that Apple might, at least, be using the name iTV internally. But that’s not stopping the usual cadre of doofuses from trying to eke some payouts (or, at least, some free publicity) out of the whole thing. In this case, it’s American-based iTV Entertainment, who are threatening to crash tomorrow’s iPad 3 event to prevent Apple from releasing an HDTV with the same name.

US-based iTV entertainment has just sent out a press release, threatening Apple with lawsuits up the wazoo and planning to crash the iPad 3 launch event tomorrow, all to stop Apple from using the iTV name. They even want to meet with Apple board member Al Gore to work out a deal with Apple.

Sound familiar? The UK’s iTV has similarly blustered.

With so many companies claiming to own the iTV name, it seems unlikely Apple would release a product without working out licensing deals with them first. Sounds like these bozos are starting to get impatient for their cash pay-outs, though. I wonder what Apple’s backup name is, though. Siri TV, anyone?

Press Release:


San Francisco, CA March 7, 2012 – iTV Entertainment, LLC announced today that its counsel, Bart S. Fisher, had sent a letter to Apple, Inc. board director, Al Gore, suggesting that a meeting be held “to see if an amicable and fair transaction arrangement” could be made between the parties with regard to Apple’s use of the “iTV” mark displayed throughout their U.S. Patent No. 2011/0154394 A1 for a product that is rumored to be in development by and being planned for a possible launch in 2012. Apple describes its device as being “an audio and video entertainment center”.

“The Apple iTV entertainment center device would cause a great amount of confusion with iTV Entertainment customers”, according to iTV Entertainment LLC Chief Executive, Patrick Hughes. Hughes also said that Apple CEO Tim Cook and general counsel Bruce Sewell have been notified in addition to board member, Andrea Jung, and Apple’s head of patents, Ed Scott, that should “the iTV rights issue” not be resolved, then we would have no other choice but to “bring to the International Trade Commission (ITC) [our trademark infringement complaint] that could result in an exclusion order being issued against Apple under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930.” Similar to Apple’s alleged infringement of the Proview Technology trademark in China, this potentially new infringement case could possibly put Apple into another trademark battle where certain Apple products could be barred from importation or sale within a major market, where in this case, it would be the United States. Apple is no stranger to Section 337, as they currently are using it in a patent case against Motorola Mobility in an attempt to block the importation of Android phones.

Hughes contends that Apple was fully apprised in August of 2010 that iTV Entertainment has been using its mark in commerce since 2001, but perhaps Apple has been more concerned about Great Britain’s second largest broadcaster, ITV Network LTD, which has had rights in Great Britain to its ITV name since its formation in 1955. As recently as 2010, ITV’s group director Mike Large said ITV would ‘vigorously defend’ its brand and reputation and said it could take legal action against Apple if it goes ahead with plans to use the iTV mark. However, ITV seemingly and conspicuously reversed its position in January 2012, and now deny that they would take any such action against Apple or that such dialogue had even taken place. This appears to be evident from the fact that ITV Network’s U.S. application for the ITV trademark went abandoned on January 13, 2012 – even though it had a filing date of May 5, 2006; and just week or so ago, Paul Dale (CTO, CIO, COO) of ITV Plc tweeted “I’m at Apple Europe! CIO Briefing, by invitation only ”.

Hughes and Fisher contend it is inconceivable that Apple, with their $100B cash stockpile, would simply ignore perhaps the last impediment in their quest to secure the coveted ‘iTV’ name which ardent Apple followers see as filling out their universal ‘i’ family line ofrevolutionary iPod, iPad, iPhone, iOS, iCloud, and iTunes products and services.

Widely quoted Apple analyst Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray recently said to Bloomberg Radio about the impending Apple iTV and how it could affect the market, “It will be the biggest thing in consumer electronics since the smartphone.” He has also been quoted as stating, “Apple could sell 1.4 million units, and it could add $2.5 billion to 2012 revenue, or roughly 2% of the company’s total.” In addition, Barclays Capital has already forecast sales of $19 billion for the product in 2013

With several top analysts predicting the iTV as potentially driving Apple’s market capitalization to over $1 trillion, it doesn’t make much sense for Apple to risk having their iTV products denied entry into the United States while a trademark case works its way through the ITC process – especially considering Apple’s recent track record at the ITC. Apple, just late last year, lost a case in a case they took to the ITC against Motorola Mobility. Apple clearly cannot afford to continue ignoring these important trademark issues and deal with them at a later time, which has been the tactic they have mostly used in the past.

As a consequence of Apple’s inaction, Hughes and Fisher have also been exploring teaming relationships with potential Chinese electronics manufacturers for their own iTV Entertainment system which could be sold exclusively in the United States and note that Chinese manufacturer Hisense Electronics is already marketing an I’TV tablet device in China. Doing the right thing by seizing the opportunity to negotiate a fair exclusive license for the use of the iTV mark would greatly enhance Apple’s reputation and improve their image – not to mention going a long way towards fulfilling Steve Jobs’ legacy. Hughes and Fisher (who has an extensive background in representing Chinese enterprise) believe however, that time is running short for Apple.

For more information, please contact:

Patrick Hughes
President & CEO

[via 9to5Mac]

  • paul eric lagace

    Actually I thought Apple TV. pretty much the one i though. never heard of iTV. Must be cause I’m Canadian, hey!

  • Roontoon

    A village is missing it’s idiot.

  • Barrett Jasper

    So they are basically blackmailing Apple that unless they reach a settlement they’ll crash the event? Isn’t that illegal to blackmail?

  • Barrett Jasper

    in other news…iTV App Store App is a great little app.

  • joewaylo

    They should have submitted their patent as Apple TV Rev. 3. Then secretly call it iTV at the end when it becomes public usage.

  • Honey Badger

    Attention whores. Most people haven’t even heard of them. They just want to get noticed. There are no indications that Apple plans to market anything under the iTV name. (unless he knows something we don’t.

    My bet is he’s HOPING that Apple wants to, so he can demand a massive payout.

  • FriarNurgle

    Still find it silly for Apple to make it’s own HDTV. The little hockey puck is at a great price point. Add on a facetime cam (peripheral) and expand the current functionality with more mirroring/airplay/gaming features and throw in 1080p and you have a winner. Siri seems silly considering it doesn’t work well with background noises… you know like a TV playing. Maybe I’m just cynical because I most likely won’t be able to afford it, but an actual HDTV from Apple doesn’t make sense. 

  • tv_gadget

    isnt there a british channel named iTV?

  • MacGoo

    Apple TV. And they’ll rebrand the existing box as some sub-type (Apple TV Express or something like that).

  • Connor Mulcahey

    You make some good points but apple love simplicity and the last thing they would do is sell a peripheral camera to stick on top of your TV. That’s why they invented the iSight camera.

  • MacHead84

    Uh no, thats called serving someone with papers. Because of, ya know, that little thing called registered trademarks. Those aren’t just for fun. Yeah, kind of along the lines of how Apple sues any company that uses an apple (or even a round object) in its logo.

  • firesign

    iPad 3 and a preview of iOS 6. Maybe a new Apple TV with 1080p output. There will be no Apple television at this event.

  • ??nD ??os??A

    Apple TV actually sounds better than iTV.  And I question the whole word “television”. A word that has been around since the 1920s. If apple does produce a “TV”-like device, won’t it be a transformational product?  Why would they want to tie it to the old school TV, when it could be the paradigm shift we have all been wanting for so long?
    The existing AppleTV name seems fine, iTV seems to abbreviated anyway. 

  • Gregintosh

    They have no business getting in the way of anything given the fact that they have no clue if a TV is even part of the announcement.

  • Gregintosh

    Apple is going to call their new TV the “ATV FHD R11080S” (Apple TV, Full HD, Revision 1, 1080p, Siri). Duh. :-)

    Oh wait, they’re not every other electronics manufacturing company.

  • MacHead84

    Are you in JR High School? This is called a preemptive proactive approach. If Apple does not infringe on patents, then the company does not disrupt. if Apple DOES infringe, the company is there to issue necessary papers. In grown up world you dont wait til months after the fact, you handle what effects your business promptly. 

  • Jordan Clay

    wanna know something kinda funny.  Search “itv” on Amazon and look at what the first thing that pops up is.

    Yes, that’s right, an Apple TV.

  • Antonino Governali

    i’d bet on AppTV.  appLE and APPlication based television.

  • CharliK

    Or if Apple will call it iTV

  • baby_Twitty

    Ignorance is a bliss. but in your case, … f a i l

  • baby_Twitty

    The world isn’t made up of 1 country (USA) only, mate.

    iTV is a well known network in Europe and Asia.

  • Honey Badger

    I’m full aware of iTV in the UK, friend. It’s a well established brand. I was referring  to iTV Entertainment which is the US company. I’m Canadian not American and I know more about iTV in the UK than I do about iTV Entertainment, south of the border. (I realize I wasn’t clear – my bad)

    In either case, if the iTV name is taken, then it’s taken. If Apple wants to use it, it’ll cost them. I don’t see Apple using iTV because iTV in the UK is already so well established. I certainly doubt they’ll try to hijack it. They may try to acquire it if they just have to have it, but I don’t see that happening.

    I got the sense that iTV Entertainment (the US company) is just looking for attention and hoping for a payday. I might be wrong, but that’s just the way it seems.

  • tv_gadget

     @baby_Twitty:disqus… there is a british tv channel named itv started in 1955..

  • Barrett Jasper

    “(or even a round object)”  +1 I lol’d they are sue-happy lil bastards! Yikes.