Apple has filed a lawsuit against Apple Cinemas, a cinema chain operating in the United States, for trademark infringement. The lawsuit, filed in Massachusetts federal court, alleges that Apple Cinemas has used the company’s registered trademark without permission, intentionally causing public confusion.

Will Apple Cinemas be closed?

The lawsuit was initiated after Apple Cinemas announced plans to expand nationwide by opening a new cinema in San Francisco. The chain had previously operated only in the northeastern United States. However, because the new San Francisco expansion includes areas close to Apple’s headquarters and retail stores, the technology company viewed this move as a legal threat.

Apple’s lawsuit states that the chain’s name creates a widespread perception among consumers that it has a direct connection to Apple. The company cited numerous examples of users confusing the two brands on social media and various digital platforms, emphasizing the negative impact this has on brand equity and customer trust.

Before resorting to legal action, Apple contacted Apple Cinemas management and made numerous attempts to resolve the matter amicably. However, the company stated that despite these negotiations, the other party insisted on changing the brand name and that its warnings were ignored.

In its lawsuit, Apple stated that it was seeking a court order to halt the use of the Apple Cinemas name and financial compensation for the damages it claimed to have suffered.

In its initial statement, Apple Cinemas stated that the brand name was not chosen in bad faith. The company’s founders maintained that the name originated from the company’s first cinema project, planned to open in Apple Valley, Rhode Island, in 2013. The statement stated that there was no intention to suggest any similarity with the Apple brand.

Apple Cinemas currently operates 14 cinemas across the US. The company’s goal is to reach 100 theaters nationwide. Apple, however, is requesting the court to ban the use of the trademark and compensate for the resulting damages, arguing that these expansion plans create the risk of further confusion with its own brand.