As a life long resident of the Big Apple, I always wondered why we permitted this little, spunky computer maker, Apple Computer, to borrow our brand and benefit from the decades of folk lore and tradition associated with the Big Apple's history. Maybe it was New York's natural affinity with the underdog, I thought.
After all, here was a tiny David of a company, created by two computer geeks who actually thought that product design might enhance our experience with computers. Possessed with odd ideas that computers might make people's lives easier, more fun, more creative, they actually wanted to make these machines more intuitive to use, more "user friendly" in the industry jargon. They were contrarians from the inside out.
What the heck, I thought, these guys could use any help we, New Yorkers, could provide and letting them trade off our scruffy, anything-is-possible history is easy! It doesn't cost us and helps them. So no New Yorker objected when they showed a momentary lapse of creativity and adapted our logo, the Big Apple, as their logo. We even calmed down our friends at the Big Apple Circus and intervened with representatives of hundreds of Big Apple businesses, asking them to chill out, to give these west coast nerds a break and let them benefit from our luster.
But as my Mom used to say no good deed goes unpunished. On April 5th, Apple Inc. apparently renewed its objection to a proposed NYC logo for our Green campaign because it too closely resembled the logo they had appropriated from us. Go figure. I'm sure Jobs will dismiss the gaff, blame it on "the lawyers" as he continues to showcase his flagship Fifth Avenue store, using images backdropped by New York's iconic General Motors building, a view of the Plaza Hotel, Central Park, or shot from an angle showcasing the Fifth Avenue, Tiffany's intersection.
A bigger question is "why does Apple care?" The company claims that having its logo share the market place with the New York City Green logo would dilute Apple's mark. Apple thinks that having the two marks co-exist would confuse the public. People would no longer know that Apple products come from Apple and that ads and related products bearing the Green NYC logo are promoting a NYC environmental "green" public policy. The legal experts refer to this as a "confusion as to source". Doesn't seem logical to me!
And what if the public is confused as to the source of these products and services? Is that bad for Apple. As a maker of computers, ipods and monitors and as a reseller of vast arrays of computer and entertainment related products, Apple surely doesn't have a very respectable environmental footprint. Would it harm them if a few New Yorkers actually thought they were good environmental citizens?
