Apple Loses Trademark Battle, Allowing Chinese Company to Use the 'IPHONE' Name The Beijing company Xintong Tiandi Technology can now sell IPHONE-branded purses, wallets and phones cases.

By Lydia Belanger

Opinions expressed by BIZ Experiences contributors are their own.

Xintong Tiandi Technology

Apple has long understood the importance of protecting its intellectual property, which is why the company registered the name "iPhone" in China in 2002, back before many of its engineers knew their employer was secretly developing the device. But even Apple's legal savvy could not outwit the country's notorious "trademark squatters."

The Chinese government has ruled that a company named Xintong Tiandi Technology is free to make purses, wallets and phone cases branded with the word "IPHONE" after rejecting Apple's appeal to the trademark dispute on March 31, according to Xintong Tiandi's website. Meanwhile, Apple's iPhone sales have declined for the first time ever.

Related: Apple Shows Us It's Hard to Be Innovative When You're on Top. But Does it Really Matter?

Xintong Tiandi registered for the trademark in September 2007, which is curious, given that 2007 was the same year Apple unveiled its mobile phone to the public. Apple had registered the same name in China in October 2002, but because Xintong Tiandi makes leather goods and Apple makes computers, the Chinese trademark authority granted the rights to both. Apple began pursuing legal action against Xintong Tiandi in 2012, according to Legal Daily.

Related: When It Comes to Knockoffs, Imitation Is the Costliest Form of Flattery

And in case you were wondering, no, a lowercase "i" does not differentiate the two, according to Quartz.

China doesn't think Xintong Tiandi will "harm [Apple's] interests," arguing that no one in China will actually think the handbags were designed by the Cupertino, Calif., company. Maybe Apple can interpret that as a compliment about its impeccable, distinctive design.

Related: A Chinese Sportswear Brand Called Uncle Martian Just Launched, and It Appears to Be Openly Ripping Off Under Armour

The website for the leather products includes a page discussing the dispute's resolution, on which the Xintong Tiandi suggests it hopes to work together with Apple to leverage their shared name to the benefit of both companies. Gee, thanks.

The Apple brand was worth $124.2 billion in 2014, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. But Xintong Tiandi's shenanigans show that even the most powerful brands cannot fend off corruption and blatant copycats.

Lydia Belanger is a former associate editor at BIZ Experiences. Follow her on Twitter: @LydiaBelanger.

Want to be an BIZ Experiences Leadership Network contributor? Apply now to join.

Starting a Business

These Brothers Started a Business to Improve an Everyday Task. They Made Their First Products in the Garage — Now They've Raised Over $100 Million.

Coulter and Trent Lewis had an early research breakthrough that helped them solve for the right problem.

Science & Technology

How to Future-Proof Your Career in Today's AI-Powered World

Think your job is AI-proof? Only if you've got skills a machine can't fake, like creativity, ethics and real human judgment.

Marketing

Why Your Travel Brand Needs a Smarter Domain This Summer

Peak travel season is upon us, and brands across the travel industry have a major opportunity to sharpen their digital presence and stand out in an increasingly crowded online marketplace.

Marketing

Why Some Legacy Brands Stay Relevant While Others Fade Into Obscurity

Here's how legacy brands can stay relevant by combining cultural capital with innovation and strategic infrastructure.

Business News

Starbucks Is Betting on Protein Cold Foam and a 'Sugar Reduction' to Turn Around Lagging Sales. Here's a Look at the Sweeping Changes.

Starbucks' CEO Brian Niccol plans to revive sales through a spate of company-wide changes.

Leadership

What Strong Business Partnerships Can Teach You (If You Let Them)

Borrowing brand equity is easy, but earning customer trust takes operational depth.