Apple and the Podcasting Trademark

I posted a comment on the Apple/Podcasting trademark controversy earlier today on Mark's blog. While I was going to write something more extensive here, I don't have time, so I'll just repost the text of my comment here:

Changing the name would make a lot of sense. Not to sound like the Apple apologist I am, but I expected this to happen for legal reasons. I don't think anyone can deny that the Pod in Podcasting comes from iPod. No one referred to MP3 players as *pod until Apple came around with the iPod. Like any sensible trademark holder, Apple has looked down on derivative trademarks, because those weaken the trademark holder's claim to their own name (failure to defend a trademark will destroy the trademark holder's claim to the name per U.S. law –– this isn't Apple's peculiarity, it is our government's).

Note that with Linux, for a company to use Linux in their product name (e.g. Red Hat Linux), one must obtain a derivative trademark agreement from, IIRC, Linux International, Linus Torvalds's designated authority for the matter.

In the end, they did help to create it [Mark suggests they are freeloading on the podcast phenomenon], because 1/2 of the name is from their product. It would be like calling a subscription to a non–Kleenex brand “tissue of the month club” 'Leenexcasting. I'd bet a lawsuit would transpire in no time. :–)

The big point, I'd say is this: anyone who didn't see this coming was far too naive. I thought it was kind of a stupid thing to name it to begin with for this very reason. Something that played off the name blog would have made a lot more sense than Podcast, and not only from a legal perspective but descriptive one too. Moreover, Apple doesn't want the “iPod halo effect” to go over other devices like the Zune, and since a lot of podcasters are outside of the whole iPod ecosystem, I can see why they would be concerned that very thing is happening.