Case Overview at a Glance
- Federal judge reverses USPTO refusal, ordering registration of “Reality Composer” and “Reality Converter” marks.
- Court finds Apple’s marks aresuggestive and have acquired secondary meaning in the AR software industry.
- Ruling underscores Apple’s aggressive defense of branding in the competitive augmented reality space.
By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald
In a decisive victory for Apple Inc., a federal judge in Virginia has ordered the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to grant the company federal trademark registrations for “Reality Composer” and “Reality Converter,” overturning a prior ruling that found the marks too descriptive to qualify for protection. The ruling not only affirms Apple’s branding strategy in the rapidly evolving augmented reality (AR) sector, but also signals a clear judicial recognition of how distinctiveness and consumer association play critical roles in trademark law.
Origins of the Dispute
The trademarks at the heart of this case cover Apple’s developer tools for creating and editing 3D AR content, particularly for its Vision Pro mixed-reality headset and related products.
Apple unveiled Reality Composer during its 2019 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) keynote, a high-profile event streamed and covered globally. Later that year, it introduced Reality Converter as a companion tool. Both tools have been consistently marketed under their respective names, integrated into Apple’s developer ecosystem, and featured in media coverage by outlets such as CNN, Forbes, CNET, and TechCrunch.
However, Turkish visual effects company Zero Density opposed Apple’s trademark applications before the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). Zero Density claimed the terms were merely descriptive, arguing they referred directly to the software’s function, and that allowing Apple exclusive rights would create conflicts with its own “Reality”-branded products, including “Reality Engine” and “Reality Keyer.”
In December 2023, the TTAB sided with Zero Density, finding Apple’s marks descriptive and therefore ineligible for registration. Apple then filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia under 15 U.S.C. § 1071(b), seeking to reverse that decision.
