Listen: Apple loses another legal battle with Swatch
"Swat has accidentally stumbled into another apple and tangle meant and once again come out smelling like a rose earlier this month. Macrumors ran the piece saying Swiss court had sided with the Swiss watchmaker and its bite with apple over the tagline tick different apple argued that that trademark unfairly referenced it's nineteen nineties think different ad campaign. The Swiss court disagreed saying that appeals think different campaign wasn't famous enough and Switzerland to warrant protection. Occasionally stuff happens. But when those occasions are close together it starts to look weird. The Sydney Morning Herald says apple has lost a case in Australia to keep swans from using the phrase one more thing down under. Of course, you know, the phrase is one apple co-founder Steve Jobs used to use at media events before. Introducing something that would change the world. Tim cokes even used the phrase, most notably. When he introduced apple watch back in twenty fourteen now swatch is using it to sell watches, which it's always a prising the here, they still do quoting the report swatch argued it used the phrase to market a film, the wa inspired set of watches and claimed that us was influenced by television detective Columbo who would often say just one more thing. I don't think I'd call Colombo film, Noah, also, I sort of wonder whether they got NBC's permission to use the phrase of that's really where it came from. Actually, it doesn't sound like that would matter to the court and his ruling against apple the peace had hearing officer Adrian, Richard saying patchy and temporary used does not have the character of indication of a trade source also weighing heavily against the opponent on this issue this ordinary meaning that the phrase carries simply that the speaker is about to say something else."