[ghevshoo]

> "This is not just Apple's lawyers being lawyers, it appears that the organization at Apple stands behind its lawyers,"

I wonder how much truth there is to this conjecture. It’s seems to me that Apple stand to lose much more than they have to gain by pursuing Prepare like this.

The Apple logo is one of the most iconic in the world. It’s hard to confused it with another piece of fruit. If Prepear was a computer company then it would be easier to see and to sympathize with Apple’s objection, but every way you look at it this seems a PR disaster of Apple’s own creation.

[DaiPlusPlus]

And there's plenty of examples of computer-related companies and organizations with Pear and fruit-related names, what about [PearPC](http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/)? Their SourceForge website and GitHub page are up.

And this company is selling Apple logo parody MacBook stickers on Amazon - how is this also not infringing on their trademarks if we use the same standard? https://www.amazon.com/Sockeroos-Sticker-Partial-Macbook-Uni... -

Colour Banana too (Banans are fruit!): https://colourbanana.com/

It's too easy to find these just by googling right now - I want to know what Prepear did that attracted Apple's lawyer's attention...

[Apocryphon]

Parody is protected under fair use. Though those stickers don't seem very parodic.

[DaiPlusPlus]

Nitpick: Fair-use is a defense for claims of copyright infringement, not trademark use violations; but trademark law does have built-in exemptions for parody though ( https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2019/10/08/parody-unde... ) so your point still stands.

However I would argue those stickers were parody.