Apple has filed a lawsuit against the US Patent and Trademark Office for refusing to grant trademarks for its augmented reality software development tools, Reality Composer and Reality Converter. Reuters reports: Apple, whose augmented reality technology is the centerpiece of its newly released Vision Pro headset, asked a court on Friday to reverse the USPTO's decision that the phrase was not distinctive enough to warrant federal trademark protection. (PDF) “Consumers need to use their imaginations to understand how meaningless phrases like 'Reality Composer' and 'Reality Converter,' which sound like sci-fi impossibilities, have anything to do with Apple products. “There is,” the complaint states. “They are suggestive, just like Burger King is a fast food chain and not an actual monarch.”
Apple's Reality Composer and Reality Converter allow developers to create and modify 3D augmented reality content for Apple apps. This content is compatible with Apple devices, including the Vision Pro mixed reality headset, which the tech giant started selling earlier this month. Turkish visual effects company ZeroDensity has opposed Apple's trademark application at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, arguing that the phrase cannot receive a federal trademark because it only describes the functionality of the software. ZeroDensity also said Apple's trademarks could be confused with its own “Reality”-related trademarks.
ZeroDensity, which is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, said in a statement Monday that it is “surprised and concerned.” [Apple’s] The USPTO court agreed with ZeroDensity that Apple's marks were descriptive without addressing whether they would confuse consumers. Apple said in Friday's complaint that the language was “manufactured.” The terms coined by Apple do not describe the underlying software development tools. “In contrast, descriptive terms like raisin bran or American Airlines succinctly describe the products and services offered under the brand name,'' Apple said. Apple insisted its marks were not intended to cause consumer confusion and accused ZeroDensity of trying to “assert broad rights in the term 'reality' that no entity can monopolize.”