Brazil's Prosecutor General Sides With Apple in Long-Running 'iPhone' Trademark Dispute - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Brazil's Prosecutor General Sides With Apple in Long-Running 'iPhone' Trademark Dispute

The Brazilian Supreme Court has issued a favorable opinion to Apple in a long-running dispute over the exclusive use of the iPhone brand in the country, local media reports.

gradiente iphone white
For those unfamiliar with the case, Brazil's highest court accepted a constitutional appeal in 2020 by ISB Electronica, an electronics company that registered the ‌iPhone‌ trademark in Brazil in 2000.

Under the name Gradiente, IGB Electronica produced a line of IPHONE-branded Android smartphones in Brazil in 2012, and there was a period of time where the Brazilian company was given exclusive rights to the ‌iPhone‌ trademark.

The appeal resulted in a trademark battle that saw both Apple and IGB Electronica given the rights to use the name in the country, but that didn't prevent back and forth judicial fighting between the two, with each company attempting to gain exclusive rights to the trademark.

A 2018 decision upheld a 2013 ruling that gave both brands permission to use the trademark, but then IGB Electronica revived the dispute in an attempt to get the 2018 decision reversed by Brazil's Supreme Federal Court.

In the latest development in the case, Brazilian Prosecutor General Augusto Aras last Friday gave his assent to Apple's position. Aras said that even though IGB Electronica applied to register the iPhone trademark several years before Apple's smartphone was launched, the "iPhone" brand has since become a globally recognized name, and therefore plays an important role in the world electronics market.

For this reason, Aras said the use of the iPhone brand should not be subject to the traditional question of who registered the name first, but instead the "supervening context and relevant factual changes" should be considered before a decision is made.

According to Tilt (via MacMagazine), the Prosecutor General's opinion has now been delivered to the Brazilian Supreme Court, which will hear the case and come to a decision, although a date for the hearing has not been scheduled.

Popular Stories

iCloud iPhone 17 Pro

iPhone Users Who Pay for iCloud Storage Get Two New Perks on iOS 27

Thursday July 2, 2026 6:10 am PDT by
If you pay for certain iCloud+ storage plans beyond the 5GB that Apple offers for free, you will receive two more perks on iOS 27 at no additional cost. A summary of the two new iCloud+ perks on iOS 27:Increased daily usage limits for some new Apple Intelligence features, including image generation in the revamped Image Playground app. HomeKit Secure Video cameras receive generated video...
iPhone 4 on Black Feature

Apple Facing One of Its Worst Leaks Since the iPhone 4

Thursday July 2, 2026 9:53 am PDT by
Apple supplier Tata Electronics recently suffered a cyberattack that resulted in thousands of confidential files being published on the dark web, and this reportedly included some photos and documents related to the upcoming iPhone 18 Pro. We have elected not to share any of the leaked photos in this story due to the illegal nature in which they were obtained, but they can easily be found...
American Express Gold Apple Pay Feature

American Express Announces New Apple Pay Feature

Tuesday June 30, 2026 10:27 am PDT by
American Express today announced that you can now redeem Membership Rewards points when checking out with Apple Pay on the web and in apps on the iPhone and iPad. When checking out with Apple Pay on iOS 18 or iPadOS 18 or later, tap on your eligible American Express card (Platinum, Gold, Green, and others) and select the Membership Rewards points option. You can use points to cover all or...

Top Rated Comments

Robert.Walter Avatar
52 months ago
Although I would like to see apple have exclusive use of the iPhone name, this decision is quite bizarre.

I’m not a trademark attorney but I’ve never heard of somebody losing their intellectual property (here ™) because some other player became more successful using that name both later and elsewhere.

This decision doesn’t really uphold the point of registering a trademark if it can later can be reversed on such convenient and spongy grounds.
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ProfessionalFan Avatar
52 months ago

Although I would like to see apple have exclusive use of the iPhone name, this decision is quite bizarre.

I’m not a trademark attorney but I’ve never heard of somebody losing their intellectual property (here ™) because some other player became more successful using that name both later and elsewhere.

This decision doesn’t really uphold the point of registering a trademark if it can later can be reversed on such convenient and spongy grounds.
I agree that this seems unusual.

However, I think a big point here was that they didn't use the trademark until years after the iPhone was released. Which could make some see this as them trying to capitalize off the success of Apple's iPhone. Had they used it prior to the iPhone release, I wonder if this would've ended differently. Even though they registered it in 2000, they didn't actually have a product with the name until 2012.

I'm not a lawyer either though.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
52 months ago
Mother Nature is still awaiting a decision on "apple v. Apple, Inc"
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
52 months ago
Finally a logical decision by a court. It's amazing that it took 12 years and having to go to the Supreme Court in order to obtain this result.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
52 months ago
Had they been making and selling "Iphones" before Apple released its "iPhone" then the decision likely would have been different.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Kaikidan Avatar
52 months ago

I agree that this seems unusual.

However, I think a big point here was that they didn't use the trademark until years after the iPhone was released. Which could make some see this as them trying to capitalize off the success of Apple's iPhone. Had they used it prior to the iPhone release, I wonder if this would've ended differently. Even though they registered it in 2000, they didn't actually have a product with the name until 2012.

I'm not a lawyer either though.
Since the indrotuction of the iMac it become common practice for copyright trolls and other brands to patent i[Devicename] as it's a pretty low hanging fruit in name terms, just slaps i in front of every possible name before anyone else and sue apple if they use "your" trademark in a new product or try to sell the rights to the name, that's basically what gradient did, they are not even in the market anymore for ages (last time I remember purchasing something from them was the N64, they got the rights to import nintendo products here for a time after nintendo ended the deal with playtronic who sold the SNES here), probably become a mutilaser like company who buy cheap whitelabel crap from aliexpress and resell there with their brand for 8x the cost. that's why apple stoped using i on the name of newer products, it's way harder for someone to launch a product named apple watch or apple tv than iWatch or iTv.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)