Would you like HP to be able to call it the App Store instead of the App Catalog? | webOS Nation
 
 

Would you like HP to be able to call it the App Store instead of the App Catalog? 111

by Dieter Bohn Thu, 13 Jan 2011 2:27 pm EST

If you haven't heard, Microsoft has filed a complaint against Apple's trademark on the term "App Store," The argument is that the term is too generic to be trademarked. Presumably, that trademark has led other smartphone makers to jump through some interesting hoops in naming their app stores: Palm's "App Catalog," Android's "App Market," Windows Phone's "App Marketplace," and BlackBerry's (oof) "App World."

Any secondary meaning or fame Apple has in ‘App Store’ is de facto secondary meaning that cannot convert the generic term ‘app store’ into a protectable trademark. Apple cannot block competitors from using a generic name. ‘App store’ is generic and therefore in the public domain and free for all competitors to use.

Now, we supposed we're in agreement with Microsoft here if only to free up other companies to use the more natural name for their respective app stores. However with webOS we kind of like "App Catalog" as it sort of implies the more open structure that Palm has taken with regard to app approval. In addition to the "Official App Catalog," we also have the Beta and Web feeds that don't require pre-approval from Palm in order to get published.

Big deal? No, but if Microsoft gets its way perhaps HP and Palm will rebrand the App Catalog some day.

Sources: TiPb and WPCentral

111 Comments

I'm with microsoft but I like what we have on webos don't change it

"App store" is definitely too generic to have a patent on it. Apple's patents are so ridiculus. They try to patents things like pinch to zoom and slide to unlock a touch screen device. That's one of the reasons I hate Apple. I like the App Catalog name. It goes with what I know about webOS. The Market on Android is a good name too. App world goes with BB. So its really not that big of a deal but I know why Microsoft is complaining. App store is too generic.

Considering scale, and App Kiosk or App Boutique might be more in line with identity.

But considering what apps were before the apple-ization moved them from productivity items to fluff, they should all be forced to call them App Flea Markets.

Not a huge deal but you seem to be confusing patents and trademarks. You can not patent a name but you can trademark it. Microsoft is objecting to Apple's trademark and rightly so, I applaud them for this. The multitouch thing however is a patent, although I think it should be invalidated.

App Store is tied in too much with Apple. I rather like each cell maker having a different name for their stores, and App Catalog has a much warmer sound to me than App Store.

I don't really care what it is called as long as it get more Apps in the catalog. Specially (logmein and Teamviewer)I do agree with Microsoft that App Store can not be trademarked

I agree. I don't care about the name, just get more developers on board for more apps!!!

++++

AMEN! Especially about the park that we need Logmein or Teamviewer. I just can't believe it, a year and a half in and webos still doesn't have a decent remote access client. This app alone is what makes me consider android. Sad but true.

I'm agreeing with you on this it's the only program that is making me look at other clients.

I dont think "App Store" should be able to be trademarked. "Apple app store" yes. Plain old "app store" no. Does Best Buy trademark the term "electronic store"? Toys R' Us "Toy Store"? Sees candies "Candy Store"? You get my point.

Good point. Very good examples.

Not really. Trademark is all about prior, established use.

"Electronic Store" "Candy Store" et all were all in the vernacular, and untapped, long before BestBuy or Sees were around.

If BestBuy started proceedings to trademark Electronic Store, they would have missed the boat by about 15 years.

Sort of why you can't TM "auto" or "grocery store"

But no one really used the phrase "App Store" until Apple coined it. Doesn't mean the function didn't exist - just that no one ever called it that.

But personally I don't care. I think it would be monumentally stupid for MS to push this, as it just draws out in the media how dominant the App Store is (for Apple).

you may want to read up a little more before posting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

Genericized trademarks can NOT be had..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalator#Loss_of_trademark_rights

Well if Wikipedia says so, it HAS to be true. But, I agree with you, taken from the United States Patent and Trademark Office website. (I'm bored at work and have a degree in research, sorry):

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/ttab/other/2004/76236221.pdf
In considering whether applicant’s mark is generic it is beyond dispute that “the burden of showing that a proposed trademark [or service mark] is generic remains with the Patent and Trademark Office.” In re Merrill Lynch, 828 F.2d 1567, 4 USPQ2d 1141, 1143 (Fed. Cir. 1987). Moreover, it is incumbent upon the Examining Attorney to make a “substantial showing … that the matter is in fact generic.” Merrill Lynch, 4 USPQ2d at 1143. Indeed, this substantial showing “must be based on clear evidence of generic use.” Merrill Lynch, 4 USPQ2d at 1143. Thus, “a strong showing is required when the Office seeks to establish that a [mark] is generic.”

hey at least i started to look :p

Its generic when its generic.

You can't argue that it's generic, AFTER its used enough in trade to become generic sounding.

The word "app" (vs. application, or program) wasn't even in the lexicon.

Can the Office refuse to register a mark?

Yes. The Office will refuse to register matter if it does not function as a trademark. Not all words, names, symbols or devices function as trademarks. For example, matter which is merely the generic name of the goods on which it is used cannot be registered.

Additionally, Section 2 of the Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. §1052) contains several of the most common (though not the only) grounds for refusing registration. The grounds for refusal under Section 2 may be summarized as:

1. the proposed mark consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter;
2. the proposed mark may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons (living or dead), institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute;
3. the proposed mark consists of or comprises the flag or coat of arms, or other insignia of the United States, or of any State or municipality, or of any foreign nation;
4. the proposed mark consists of or comprises a name, portrait or signature identifying a particular living individual, except by that individual's written consent; or the name, signature, or portrait of a deceased President of the United States during the life of his widow, if any, except by the written consent of the widow;
5. the proposed mark so resembles a mark already registered in the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that use of the mark on applicant's goods or services are likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception;
6. the proposed mark is merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of applicant's goods or services;
7. the proposed mark is primarily geographically descriptive or deceptively geographically misdescriptive of applicant's goods or services;
8. the proposed mark is primarily merely a surname; and
9. matter that, as a whole, is functional.

"The word "app" (vs. application, or program) wasn't even in the lexicon."

First of all, yes it was.

Second, even if it wasn't, it doesn't matter. The term "app" is not in contention, as all the competitors use it. The question is whether a trademark of "app store" for a store that sells apps is too generic.

RoomStore

The abbeviation of "Application" down to "App" may be material for establishment of a trademark.

While Application Store should be sufficiently generic to exist without protection.

No but "Best Buy" and "Toys R' Us" are just as plain so then they should be forced to change their names.

The general public will confuse Palm's "App Store" with Apple's App Store and believe that what ever is in one App Store should be in all the other App Stores. Please keep the differentiation between the names.

I don't want Palm to change the name, but I want them to be able to change the name. I want it clear that the App Catalog is an app store.

I think generic is generic. It should be available. I do like Palm's App Catalog though. I just wish it was more of an App Catalog instead of an App Pamphlet.

+1

Pointless. Can i call my insurance company StateFarm since those are both common words too? Im pretty sure no.

Besides, if Microsoft wins this, id just think Microsoft is a whiny baby with an inferior app store since they obviously didnt think they could be successful on their own without taking Apple's name.

I think MS' point is that App Store is a generic descriptive term of what it is, though. See examples above from jsgraphicart. It would be like calling your Insurance Company "Insurance Company." Good luck with getting that trademark approved.

Or, calling your Word Processor "Word" and trademarking the name, then complaining people can't use that term for their own word processors. That would be equally ridiculous, and...

Oh.

Wait.

Nevermind, scratch that. ;)

More seriously, I never heard the term 'App Store' used for anything prior to the iPhone. Apple was the first to explicitly use the term 'App Store' that I can think of. Whether it's reasonable is another matter, but Apple was following well-established precedent in trademarking it, and this is something lord knows plenty of others have done.

HP has been known to get pretty snarly towards anyone using 'jet' in a printer name, for instance, despite the fact that inkjet printers are known collectively as, well, 'inkjets.' They used to guard the 'jet' portion of their LaserJet/DeskJet/ScanJet line as rabidly as anyone else (though I don't know if they still do).

Unsuccessfully, apparently, since Canon had the "BubbleJet" (worst printer name ever).

No, because the words "state farm" do not inherently describe an insurance company. Trademark laws state that a trademarked name cannot be simply descriptive. So, for example, I could not trademark "Hamburger Stand" for a chain of street stands that sell hamburgers, but I probably could trademark it for a bookstore. However, trademarks only apply within a market, so I couldn't go suing hamburger vendors for using the name of my bookstore.

I agree with Microsoft, but we should keep the 'App Catalog' name. 'App Store' makes me feel like I have to spend money there, whereas the 'Catalog' description feels like we have more of a choice.

i could go either way.

wait, this is coming from the company that trademarked the word "window" even though they were the 3rd company to use that term for parts of their GUI??

Yes, Microsoft has ridiculous trademarks. It would be nice if someone would go after them, too, but it does not invalidate the point that Apple's trademark is generic and descriptive, and should thus be invalidated.

I prefer App Catalog. It sounds much better. App Store is very much associated with Apple.

But it ultimately comes down to what Palm wants.

So... I gonna create my Trademark: "App"!

Now, I'm rich!! :-))

"Apple App Store" - Okay

"App Store" - Foolish

Best Regards... B)

I do and have always agreed with MS's point on this (and in fact, when the competing stores came out, I was like, "why don't they all just call them the same thing? There's no way the term App Store is trademark-able..."). Not sure if it's worth their time to argue it, but the basic reasoning is sound to me.

However I've gotten used to App Catalog for the Pre and like the sound of it (and typing 'cata' to search for it is muscle memory for me now). I would have to relearn that if HP changed it. In the end, meh.

What is funny is that if any part of "app store" is deserving of trademark, it is the "app" part, which is clever because it simultaneously refers to apple and applications, plus they were the ones to go big on "there's an app for that."
It is silly that they decided that the store catalog etc was what needed changing/protecting.

I'm surprised that Apple hasn't tried to bar everybody from using "App" since it is the first 3 letters of Apple. ;)

As long as we're abreviating,, How about App Cat. And have an icon like a tiger or something.

keep it as is

Most people I've come across use the term "app store" in regards to any mobile app store, not just Apple's. But even if Palm can change the name, I'd just stick with "app catalog".

Apple should call their apps "applecations."

Apple has an App Store for the Mac also now, which I'm sure worries MS because they no doubt plan to copy that idea too. For it's part Apple claims that App is not just short for Application, but also for Apple. Seems like a stretch to me. MS's best argument I think is that Steve Jobs himself used the term generically when he referred to "Android app stores."

Regardless of what the court decides, consumers will call them whatever they want. When people talk about Kleenex and Q-Tips they don't necessarily mean that brand, even though those are protected trademarks.

The Linux distribution I use at home uses software repositories, which is basically an app store, except everything is free. Heck, Ubuntu has been using repositories since before the iPhone. So, as long as you're throwing out accusations of "copying," you'd better include Apple in the mix.

I always think MS is foolish, and really don't care what HP calls their place to get software applications, just as long as we get more apps and more WebOS devices!!

Overall, Apple needs to get over itself. But I like App Catalog!

Get over themselves? Were you complaining when Apple first applied for patent? Did it bother you?

Or are you just jumping on now that MS has an issue with it.

Because I think if you really cared, over and above fan-issues, you'd been incensed a few years ago when they first registered the mark (which was not a secret).

In reality it's "application store", that is the generic term.

since it is a store that sells applications.

I do believe Apple does have some merit here because, they used their own abbreviated version of "application" by using "app", and then phrasing it in with "store"; creatng "app store" as a unique phrase that is deeply associated with apple.

However if apple is granted this trademark, it would probably send a precedent, to trade mark the word "app" or "apps" when referring mobile device applications.

I agree.

The other thing, as I saw on perhaps TiPb, is that Apple has called their applications (on the Mac) Appliacions with the extention of .app since 2000 with the introduction of Mac OS X.

From fileinfo.com

"Application program (or executable file) that runs under Mac OS X; runs when double-clicked; similar to a .EXE file in Windows."

Notice, it even mentions "similar to a .EXE file in Windows" and when you click Start in Windows, you can go to your "Programs"

Coke owns the trademark to Coke, even though coke often refers to a brown carbonated cola.

Actually, it goes even further back than that! The .app extension for program bundles actually dates back to NeXT, the company that Jobs founded after he was ousted from Apple. NeXT released the first version of their 'NeXTSTEP' operating system in 1989. When Apple was dying, years later, they bought NeXT to use NeXTSTEP as the new Apple operating system. Mac OS X was initially just NeXTSTEP with a facelift and a new nametag, so the .app extension continued on unchanged. :)

(This is why all of the core classes in OS X's Cocoa programming library, like strings and so on, are still called 'NSString' and 'NSImage' and suchnot; the 'NS' prefix stands for Next Step.)

dont care what they call it. just fill it up

I frankly think the term "App" is already too closely tied to Apple. I always figured they called their Programs "App" so that people would connect "App"le and think of them.

Before this, these little things we put on our phones were Programs. And they still are.

Calling it "App" anything make the majority of the public think of Apple anyway. Great branding on their part.

sorry, I'm going to have to strongly disagree with you there. "app" has never and will never be associated with apple. I've been calling "programs" applications (or apps for short) for as long as I can remember. It's not short for apple or anything related to apple. To this day when I download a freeware application on my windows box I download it to the "app" folder. Technically any program that was not a game was placed in the application category though I guess games could be considered apps in a way. If it were me I'd still keep applications and games separate, but that would probably confuse most apple users.

Hi schnoid,

Disagreement noted, and I won't argue that there are plenty of folk who connect "app" to application in general, but I still think that the majority of consumers don't. And that they now look at "App" as with connection to "Apple". I'm not talking about the computer savvy or those who would think of having an app folder. I am talking about the people to whom Apple markets. Even if the association wasn't originally there, I think that it is now. And has been ever since Apple's App store really took off.

I think of it similar to Verizon's "Droid" marketing of the Android operating system. People hear "Droid" and think it means Android, but if they walk into a Best Buy and say they want a "Droid" then the salesperson will lead them to Verizon...not Android in general.

nnb

"Killer App" has been a popular term since the mid 90's, almost a decade before Apple created their app store.

Also, Google got in trouble with Lucas Arts over Droid, I think. The term "droid" wasn't associated with robots until Star Wars, and Lucas got the trademark, I'm pretty sure.

So when Google (and I think Droid belongs to them, not Verizon, but could be wrong) did their big launch with Android, they ran into some potential legal trouble, and ended up settling.

Droid is a trademark of Lucasfilm and is used under license by Verizon for its "Droid Does" marketing blitz. (See the small text on the bottom of http://www.droiddoes.com/). Droid is used with special permission from LucasFilm. I don't know what (if any) monies changed hands to make that permission possible.

Regarding your post above: I agree that "app" has been used for decades, but think that the connotation has changed from general computing to mobile computing specifically relative to a single brand. I remember regaling the "Killer apps" on my first smartphone years ago only to be met with blank stares as to what I was talking about.

When I shifted the same discussion to the computer lab, everyone knew what I was talking about.

I am not trying to say that the term App is an Apple invention, just that the meaning is construed to mean Apple in the eyes of the general consumer.

Did you ever call Black and White copies Xeroxes when you were younger?

Droid is a Trademark of LucasFilms

your argument is SERIOUSLY FLAWED

Don't care

This is a waste of time and money. That phrase is synonymous with Apple whether Microsoft likes it or not. Suing isn't going to change consumers perception. Just like BlackBerry has their App World, Palm has App Catalog and Android has their Market.

Say what you will, but nobody called anything the 'Application Store' or 'App Store before apple launched it. They promoted the term and now Microsoft can't think of a good way to promote their own Store and illustrate why it's better. They just want to be able to say in a commercial, "..or browse the App Store" so uninformed consumers thing they're somehow the same thing. It mentally eliminates the rather large difference between the two stores. I think Microsoft has a larger stake in this though, since they also want to compete with Apple's newly launched App Store for the mac.

Nobody called anything 'App Store' because there was not a store to buy apps. Because Apple was first to create one does not mean that the name they gave it was not generic. Take Kleenex for example. Nobody called anything Kleenex before they started manufacturing their tissue paper, but now most everybody calls tissue paper kleenex, even if they use Puffs.

The best point MS makes is their argument that even Steve Jobs called the Android Market an app store.

I think HP should stick with App Catalog. I think Apple should stick with App Store, but I don't think they should be able to have a trademark on the title.

LOL, really? Several YEARS before the Apple App store, there were 25,000 Palm OS applications available, on several stores, including Palm Gear. Apple was hardly the first.

Handmark, Palmgear, Pocketgear, etc.

All this stores existed before Apple's, but eKalb has his point: everybody thinks they were the first, the same thing that happens with Facetime... 3g video call is old as the 3g network!!... That's the Reality Distorsion Field's effect, guys

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field

Wait, there's a webOS app catalog? For what?

Public domain books, soundboards, and fart machines.

App Catalog is more sound than App Store. You don't go to stores to get free products but there are bunch of free Apps available to download.

App Store fits Apple since they are after people's money for every little thing. Palm gets its support from Linux community which is more open and freeware/shareware friendly.

App Cat is fine, who cares?

Id like HP to release WebOS 2.0 already!

I love the name, App Catalog.
If this were a survey, "App Catalog" would be the winner hands down. Besides, the number of apps will increase rapidly in the coming months once the new HP WebOS devices are released.

"It's okay, we're a technology company, using the name 'Apple' doesn't infringe at all on 'Apple Music', don't worry, we're not in the business of selling music."

*cue iTunes store*

Apple's entire name is stolen from Apple Music, hence why The Beatles refused to be in the iTunes store for so long.

Apple's entire existence is one giant case of the pot calling the kettle black.

A rose by any other name...

Geez, people shouldn't we be more concerned about what's actually in the catalog then what it's called? I know we live in shallow marketing oriented brand based culture, but a little substance please?

After all, we all went to WebOS because it's a higher quality mobile OS and not necessarily what the marketing brains told us to do? Right?

"App Cart" like an Apple Cart. haha F*ck Apple!

Ok, I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding of trademarks is you just need to convince them that when most people hear the term, they think of you. You don't need to be first, or the only one. You just need mindshare in the present.

Microsoft was able to trademark "Windows." Were they the first? No. Did they use the term first? No. I have manuals from competing systems and technologies, and even API's that allow a user to open a "Window." But Microsoft was successful in convincing the court that when a person thinks of Windows, they think of Microsoft.

To invalidate the Apple claim, if I understand it correctly, Microsoft needs to show that enough people think of app store outside of Apple (in other words, people consider it generic, or there are alternative app stores).

Someone should look at Palmgear and whomever bought them to see if the term was/is still used outside Apple.

For example, here is a reference that I think predates Apples app store:

http://www.davidco.com/forum/showthread.php?2231-Better-version-of-Palm-...

But unless folks "think" outside Apple, Apple may be able to get the trademark.

Yes, unify it. They all sell the same thing, why refer to them by different names? Yes, that's a flawed argument but I'm sticking to it :-p

You know, this seems like the perfect post to have a poll in it, yet no poll.

I don't care what it's called. But app store is like car lot or grocery store. Shouldn't e exclusive.

How about "The WebOS Store"?

It shouldn't be limited to apps. We can shop there and get upcoming devices, apps, accessories and apparel. This can be a hit since it has not been done yet by anyone in the mobile OS space.

More importantly, business or any sites can have links to the store via feeds and will get a % when people buy something. It's a great way for webOS to flourish and will cost almost nothing.

I couldn't care less what HP calls it.

personally, I don't really care. But since we are looking for potential names. How bouts the
"HP App tree"

if someone else has already said it. I apologize! Way too many comments to read.

apple...bite that! Sorry patent that

Before to think to change the name of catalog is better to think to open the catalog to all country...like Apple and Android....

Hear! Hear!

Pls remove the country-lock nonsense, and/or start accepting PayPal or something!!

I'm all for getting away from the term catalog, and Microsoft is correct in their assertion.

But since they did the same thing with the word "windows" I think they should be disqualified from making the case. They can't have it both ways.

No news week. See you on the 9th.

I don't really care. Seems like a frivolous waste of time...

The thing is, Apple can point to "App" as being something they started or being short for Apple.... But they're not defending the term App. App is used in the App Catalog, the App World, etc. They're defending App Store, with Store being the critical term of differentiation. They've already surrendered the term App to general parlance.

Any defense of App Store is doomed to lose.

being in marketing, I always get pretty worked up about this sort of thing.

I think if Apple wanted to brand their "app store" with their little logo mark next to the word 'store', it would be trademarkable. (for the record, if I ever in the future see such a logo from Apple, preCentral will be subpoena'd in my lawsuit. Apple may own the apple logo image, but that concept is now and hereafter mine.)

but this debate always makes me think of the list of trademarks that the NCAA holds for their "3rd Month of the Gregorian Calendar Basketball Competition". The fact is, someone on their broadcast partner CBS in the 80's coined the phrase, but the NCAA now bars anyone from using it without official license.

personally, I like "catalog", but am happy to see someone try to dent the armor of Steve Jobs' "machine"

For me App Store is too generic, but also App Catalog. I don't know why they just don't name them iOS Store and WebOS Store (...or Catalog). Google was the only one that did this right

Why is no one is using 'App Shop' yet? That would be just as natural IMO and no need to trademark it either.

Now, we supposed we're in agreement with Microsoft here if only to free up other companies to use the more natural name for their respective app stores.

"supposed" should probably be suppose unless you no longer suppose to be in agreement.

Yeah, I know it doesn't matter but at times I enjoy being a smartass.

Lets Call It The "App Bodega"

Someone beat you to that, actually, by a good couple of years:

http://appbodega.com/

HaHa, Check That Out!

while Microsoft is right in changing the insanity that is apple, HPalm should keep the current name. the term "app store" sounds bland, generic, and says "hey i want your money." as a Linux based OS, webOS is about freedom, not business. we all know apple is in it for the money more so(it seems) the an most other companies. so should the term be available for others? YES. but for webOS? no thanks. catalog is a far more friendly term.

Couple of notes:

Coke, Windows and Xerox are the names of either companies or products which is why they can be trademarked. The word "Apple" is the very common name of a fruit but was trademarkable only because a company was named after it. "App store" is neither the name of a product nor a company which is why it cannot be trademarked or even compared to those examples.

Steve Jobs has been quoted referring to, "Android app stores". If Apple truly thought it was their trademark, it would be equivalent of using their other trademarks to describe PC competition such as, "Dell's iMacs" and competing MP3 players such as "Microsoft and Sony's iPods".

Let's call it.
Place Where You Go To Obtain Software To Run On Your Webos Device By HP/Palm.

Therefore taking a step against the dumbing down of America

I like App Trough. I've only had my Pre for a couple of months but I feel like a gen-u-wine pig routin' round tryin to idify me inner "App-atite"

While I commend Microsoft and their battle against the fruit, I feel App Store is the least appealing title of them all.

microsoft is right, but as a not native-speaker of english, i like the term app catalog way more

HP Palm please DO NOT change the name.

There are several reasons:

A) Be an original, not a copy
-----------------------------
Stand up, be yourself, keep your self-esteem, walk your own way and STOP trying to copy others.
There are enough copies around. We need more originals!

B) Better represents, what it is
--------------------------------
To me, it better represents
- the nature of what it is
(a catalog with paid AND free apps) and
- the philosophy of the webOS community
(nice working togehter partnership,
where the fruit company and others
are far away from)

I like it, it's better,...

...keep it the App Catalog!

Greetings from Switzerland,
Rolf

Yes, Microsoft. "App Store" should not be trademarked, as it is such a common term. Unlike "Windows", "Office", "Word", etc.

The use of catalog is appropriate for Palm. Each Market has its own name. App Market is a generic name, I do not believe Microsoft will need any trademark on or against.

How about a more interesting article title; will developers ever produce real UI's for their applications and use oracle software as application information, appropriately? Read on...

I really don't care about the name that much. Just give me some bad-ass applications to use on my next webos devices. However, I rather it remained the way it is. That way when you say App catalog, I know u are talking about hp/palm webos; when u say App store, I know you are talking about apple/ios; when you say App world, I know you are talking about blackberry/rim ; and when you say App market, i know u are talking about google/android. So just leave the name as it is and give us some 'SUPPER BAD' apps in the App catalog to use with our "coming soon" 'SUPPER BAD' devices.

I don't care what you call it, just let me download an app and give me 24 hours to try it before I am charged.

Android market is the model.

I've never liked or used the term "app." So how about we call it the software shop. To me app means apparatus i.e. snorkel, turntable ladder, tiller ladder, heavy rescue, hazmat truck, command vehicle etc. Or appendix in a book.

I think the trademark of App Store for Apple has a limited life ahead. That said, we'll see Blackberry's App Store or Windows Phone App store, anyway just for differentiation.

Marketing people will still be saying "Visit our Windows Phone App Store." Really it would be easier if they had their own name since then they just say "Grab it at the App Catalog" and you know they are talking about HP/Palm.

But, in any case, I'm happy with App Catalog..

Typical MS, Windows 7 phone fail, apps for the Windows 7 store fail. So, in typical MS style, lets pick on Apple when they do something better (which Apple usually does).

Besides it is going on 3 years and MicroSoft just realized that Apple patented "App Store"? Typical MS speedy awareness of doing things.

Apple traded marked App Store first, it has been around for a couple years, leave it be.