If you look really closely, the white space goes "up" farther.... but probably not enough

the colors are inverted...and a different shade of blue. Probably enough to get them a legal reprieve.

I just really want a job in "branding"...I've never been paid to masturbate before...

You just know those guys laugh all the way to the bank...and the ski slopes...and their yachts...etc.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC_logos#_note-1

Kinda "ooops", we forgot to do our research. I guess it happens all the time. With worldwide companies these days, there is bound to be a conflict. Oh well.

Novatio's logo is blue on white and square, with the central bar having 30% of the width and 65% of the height of the overall image.

Netapp's logo is white on blue and about 25% wider than tall, with the central bar having 22% of the width and 60% of the height of the overall image.

.. at least that's what the lawyers will say.

But surely your just compare apples with apples?

El Reg decided to show an Intel ad for me on this comment page...

It is a blue background with a maze under it. Anyone else seeing it?

Well, right there in the middle, this big "N" logo is sitting there, hidden by all the other maze lines running off... Is this a problem for either company?

...putting on my old marketing hat, the copyright will apply to the /logotype/ i.e. the logo + the associated text, and from a branding PoV, the two company's logotypes are fairly distinct. And don't shoot me, I've been back in IT for the last 8 years - the 2 years in marketing was a temporary aberration.

NAS box turned my data to greasy sludge.

Doesn't NetApp seem to be flipping the birdie through this logo ?

Don't believe me ? Stare at the logo for a few seconds and tell me. It looks like erect middle finger.

I wonder which marketing dude is losing his/her Job.

a restaurant fast food chain took on all others who had not copyrighted their birth names and more .. logo's and liked name's

the cost of this corporate ego massage is money that would have been better spent:

[1] debugging a "Big Science" storage product that occasionally exhibits very odd behavior.

[2] padding the top line so that prices for NetApp gear can be made less insane.

this idea, that marketing can gloss over a multitude of operational issues, is not a long-term solution (the saying has "deck chairs" and "Titanic" in it). the storage sector is beginning to exhibit classic signs of low-end disruption. premium vendors usually do badly in this process, if they survive at all. branding exercises do not help this.

odds are, barring a major revision of the business model, in 5 to 8 years, NetApp will be another Unisys (a footnote in IT history), or out of business. and no one will care about their snappy logo.

it is difficult find a unic logo but.... how many billions to copy an other existing ??

its not the same business branch.

everybody chill.

church back to village center, and you bored readers out there

back to your servers. try to keep them up this time, netapp

can help you there.

I don't think that the difference in market is relevant for a trademark here. You can use the same *name* as another company if you're in a different market, but a logo is a separate issue. Try using those golden arches for anything and see what happens.

For another example, try using the olympic rings for a laugh, especially in 2012 in the UK.

I like the fact that NetApp's slogan, "Go further, faster" actually works better for an automotive lubricant, as well. You wonder if the same PR firm just recycled some of its old work :-)

Alan - there has always been an exception for famous names and logos. I'm sure NetApp wouldn't try and use Nike's swoosh and claim non-infringement on the grounds they are operating in a different market. With the exception of well known/famous brands; logos and brands can exist in harmony in different markets/classes of goods. It's actually not uncommon