So it seems Cisco did not keep the trademark for the iPhone name. Why? No use. If you don’t produce a product with the named trademark you lose it. Makes sense right? Anyway it seems that Cisco may have tried to dupe or at least be extremely aggressive with the USPTO or US Patent and Trademark Office by renewing the iPhone trademark with a product that wasn’t yet called iPhone but rather the Linksys CIT200 and the Linksys CIT310.
Tom Keating was the first to have realized this as he has actually reviewed the products Cisco claims were called iPhone. Tom mentions in his blog there is no reference to the term iPhone on the boxes or manuals. If this is true and we aren’t all missing something obvious, Cisco may have lost the trademark on iPhone.
Does this mean Apple who has the name iPhone registered through a shell company could try to stop Cisco from using the name both domestically and internationally? This story is getting more and more interesting by the minute.
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
twitter
![blackberry-watch-real-2[1].jpg](http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/rich-tehrani/assets_c/2009/10/blackberry-watch-real-2[1]-thumb-autox70-6851.jpg)
Actually Vocaltec was the first to use the iphone name! http://flatplanetphone.com/wordpress/?p=30