They might have to call it something else, though....

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...coapple11.html

Apple hit with iPhone suit; Cisco Systems says it owns name
By Michelle Quinn, Los Angeles Times

SAN FRANCISCO — Cisco to Apple: We need to talk.

A day after Apple baptized its eagerly anticipated cellphone with the marketing slogan "we need to talk," Cisco Systems filed a trademark lawsuit Wednesday, pointing out it has owned the iPhone name since 2000.

Up until Monday night, the two companies had been negotiating over the name. Cisco, which acquired the name when it bought a company, was willing to "share," spokeswoman Terry Anderson said.

Apple, apparently, was not.

Apple built a consumer-electronics empire on the lower-case "i" — iMac, iPod, iTunes — and has long coveted Silicon Valley neighbor Cisco's iPhone. Nevertheless, Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris called Cisco's lawsuit "silly."

Cisco came to own the name when it bought Infogear, which had owned the trademark since 1996. Linksys, a division of Cisco, began shipping iPhone products a year ago. It recently launched a phone that uses voice-over-Internet technology.

For several years, Apple has approached Cisco about the name iPhone, according to Cisco. Anderson said the networking company was not looking for money and that it credited the hard work of the Apple team.

Cisco, instead, is looking for "collaboration and joint development with Apple" to ensure Apple's phone will work with Cisco's networking gear, Anderson said.

After talks stalled, Cisco executives were surprised that Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs went ahead and christened his iPhone in a presentation Tuesday.

"Several other companies are using the name iPhone for voice-over-the-Internet products," Apple's Kerris said.

"We're the first to use iPhone for a cellphone. If Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we're confident we'll prevail."

Silicon Valley is not a hotbed of trademark-violation lawsuits, mostly because the products aren't around long enough to build brand recognition, lawyer Thomas Schneck said.

Apple might assert the iPhone is part of its family of marks, he said.

Cisco may worry that, with Apple entering the market, the name iPhone will become more generic.

Said Schneck: "I think it's a shot across the bow."