[bkor]

Trademarks are per industry/category. So going after companies where the similarly is already questionable and further, the industry isn't the same is not needed. The second link is about some coffee shop and the case was lost. Meaning, good example where Apple shouldn't have started the case.

There's also a difference between defending your trademark and going after things were the overlap is vague at best (e.g. the pear thing).

[numlock86]

> Trademarks are per industry/category. So going after companies where the similarly is already questionable and further, the industry isn't the same is not needed.

Most of that is a myth, because people keep mixing it up with protected designs, names and the like. Trademarks are another league, though. Otherwise we'd have plenty of real estate businesses called Coca Cola and Apple with equally designed logos for example, and cases like Apple vs some Café would just disappear or not happen at all. Again, they don't do this for fun and giggles. It costs money and is necessary.