Steve Jobs brought a sleepy yet ramping up Internet phone from Irvine-based Linksys to national attention.
Three weeks before Jobs unveiled Apple Inc.’s iPhone,a flashy wireless phone, iPod and Web browser,Linksys took the wraps off the latest version of its own iPhone.
Before Jobs introduced the world to his iPhone, few had heard of Linksys’ phone.
Then Linksys parent Cisco Systems Inc. sued Apple over the name, getting Linksys’ iPhone just about as much attention as Apple’s.
Linksys came out with its latest iPhones in December. They look like typical wireless phones but tap the Internet to place calls, which can be cheaper than using a wireless network or traditional phone lines.
The phones sell for $80 to $370.
“The goal of iPhone products at Linksys is to take the advantages of the Internet and integrate those in a wireless device,” said Dennis Vogel, senior manager of product marketing for Linksys. “The convenience of voice-over-Internet and low-cost calling is still an appeal. But we want to go beyond that and add other functionality that lets you see if someone is online, do a weather forecast or a local search.”
The Linksys phones use the Skype Internet telephone service, part of eBay Inc. since 2005, for online calls. The phones also work with traditional phone lines.
The devices have a contact feature that borrows a page from instant messaging and allows callers to see if someone else is available before placing a call, Vogel said.
“It is inarguably confusing” with Apple’s iPhone, said Kim Nobles, a lawyer specializing in trademark law for Irvine-based Crowell & Moring LLP. “In this case, it’s pretty close. Both are hardware, both are high-tech phones.”
There are differences.
Apple’s iPhone, due by early summer at about $500, is set to use the wireless network of Cingular Wireless LLC, which recently adopted parent company AT & T; Inc.’s brand name. The phone’s Internet access is set to be through AT & T;’s wireless network.
Then there’s Apple’s touch screen and other custom iPhone software.
But those distinctions could be lost on the less tech savvy. Both devices are next-generation wireless phones that play music and video and access the Internet.
Cisco has owned the trademark for iPhone since 2000, when it paid $300 million for Redwood City’s InfoGear Technology Corp., a maker of a phone with a screen and keyboard for Web browsing and e-mail.
The company first invested in InfoGear in 1999.
Cisco primarily was interested in InfoGear’s software, which it wanted to offer to telecommunications companies and businesses as a way to distribute and manage information for handheld organizers and other de-vices.
The company’s big push into consumer products came in 2003, when Cisco paid $500 million to buy Linksys, a maker of routers and other devices sold through stores.
Apple, which wouldn’t comment for this story, has said in published reports that Cisco sat on the iPhone name for most of the time the company has owned the name, and it should be considered generic. Beyond that, Apple’s is the first iPhone cell phone, they argue.
(Neither company owns iphone.com. That belongs to Overland Park, Kan.-based Nuvio Corp., a provider of Internet calling plans.)
Linksys first started shipping iPhones in 2005, according to the company.
An early “cordless Internet telephone kit for Skype” version is available online and at stores.
The big push for Linksys came last month with a new line of iPhones, currently only available online. Company spokeswoman Karen Sohl said negotiations continue with stores.
Cisco and Apple had met over the name since 2001, Cisco spokesman John Noh said.
Cisco thought it had a deal with Apple over the name on Jan. 8, he said, a pact that would have allowed both companies to use iPhone.
A day later, Jobs made his announcement before a deal was signed, Noh said. “We haven’t heard from them since.”
The trademark infringement suit was filed two days later in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco.
“The reason this is so important is because we’re not looking at the opportunities we have today, but three to five years from now,” Noh said. “Devices of today are not going to be the devices of tomorrow.”
