MAM
The forbidden fruits and singing bananas
A very serious fight between Apple Computers and Apple Records of The Beatles is now headed for the ninth round.
On this side of the ring is Sir Paul McCartney, with the title of a legendary musical artist and boyish looks with a cute smile. On the other side, yet another youthful boy wonder, Steve Job with his intellect and a legendary title for being the first to lead the start of the personal computer revolution.
The fight is all about the name and use of the word “Apple”, and its right owners.
The Beatles have already, successfully defeated Apple Computers in the earlier rounds, as The Beatles formed Apple Records in 1958, when Steve was just toying with the wires in his garage. Apple Computers was formed much later, so they had to pay Apple Records some $25 million very quietly in a settlement after a long and very bitter and expensive battle. These fights are quite common, as long as picking names for corporate branding is considered a simple task.
Now, suddenly, right in the middle, the saga opens again. This time, the trouble was echoed, just by hitting similar musical notes on the innovation scale. It started with the creation of iTune. Simply put, both of the forbidden fruits deemed going into the same business of music. Now the battalions of American attorneys with high price blue suits and howdy-doody firm handshakes are engaged in pillow fights with the tight-lip, upper-crusted British solicitors of the Empire, suited in grey flannel, costumed wigs and all. The sun already set on this empire a long time ago but the zesty spirit is still there. Right on.
“Order! Order! Order!”
The story is so simple and the lesson ever so very clear. Never name a company after a fruit. Now for all those corporations whose corporate branding originated out of a botanical or a zoological expedition, this should be a big lesson and a serious warning. Look out, the serpent cometh your way. Sooner or later, the fruit basket will be kicked and legal fights will start. Watch out for the tumbling of corporate brand identities the likes of Oranges, Pineapples, Apricots, Cherries and Peaches, as periodically, they all have their days in court and most fade away in the long haul. Apple Records and Apple Computers are now two rare examples of such survivals in the modern times.
It is suggested that the fight is so intense that keeping aside the famous large class-action suits; this settlement would be the largest amount in legal history. It has been reported that when this mind-boggling amount is introduced, there will be a possibility that Apple Records could get a chunk of equity from Apple Computers plus a board membership. Talk about a bite.
Mr.Banana
It is also said that The Beatles have suggested that Apple Computers should call itself a “Banana” or anything other than apple. Now, now where are their British manners? Are consumers really ready to carry “Mr. iBanana”?
The story gets bigger. The debate is on two fronts “name confusion” and “wares”. Wares are things for which a name is registered under and used and confusion comes when customers can’t identify the correct company. On ground on confusion, The Beatles were too picky to pick the first round as no one confused Apple Computers with Apple Records. Now the issue is “wares” and increasingly under the trademark laws “wares” are becoming problematic. Example, how do you differentiate easily between Media, Music, News, or Web, Internet, Computers, with Cable, Voice, or Technology? They all seem to be just one bundle of services.
iPod, iTune and related items are now in direct clash with vinyl records and music sheets. True, they are closely related this time. Who knew then, when Beatles in 1958 picked up the name “Apple” quiet innocently and so did Steve Job. That was then, this is now. The entire globe and entire markets shrank and it seems that everyone is now on top of each other. Corporate branding is no longer a game of picking names out of a hat.
It is very hard for trademark practitioners to look out for these merging technologies and changing perceptions. But then, most CEOs and corporate executives would not take a pre-warning from a trademark attorney seriously and rather proceed with a gung-ho launch of the name so that later Messer’s Howdy-Doody Attorneys can pay millions in damages, while corporation dodges from embarrassing court cases.
When will your corporation be in court to defend your corporate branding and your name identity? This can be established very easily. Enter your name in “quotes” in Google and if there are dozens of identical business names and they are also in your related business then it’s time you quickly start a legal-fund as the serpent cometh your way too.
Brands
Pre-seed funding fuels nailinit, India’s new-age nail care brand
Gruhas Collective Consumer Fund backs Gen Z-focused beauty startup
MUMBAI: nailinit, a community-first nail care startup targeting Gen Z and millennials, has raised Rs 2.5 to Rs 3 crore in a pre-seed round led by Gruhas Collective Consumer Fund and Marsshot VC, alongside a clutch of consumer, technology and operator angels.
Backed by entrepreneur and investor Nikhil Kamath, Gruhas Collective Consumer Fund is betting on nailinit’s attempt to give India’s nail care aisle a long overdue makeover. The fresh capital will be used to deepen distribution across quick commerce and D2C channels, build its community engine, and accelerate product innovation in a category that is high frequency but still light on strong brands.
Founded by Tanishq Ambegaokar and Shubham Singhal, nailinit is positioning itself at the crossroads of beauty, self-expression and culture. The brand wants nails to be more than a finishing touch. It sees them as a canvas for identity, content and commerce.
“At nailinit, we are building for a generation that sees beauty as self-expression, not just routine,” said Ambegaokar. “The nail category in India has largely been underserved by strong brands. This capital allows us to invest in product depth, community and distribution in a thoughtful and long-term way.”
Singhal added that while the brand’s tone may be playful, its operating focus is sharp. “This round strengthens our supply chain, expands our digital footprint and enables disciplined execution as we scale.”
The funding round drew notable angels including Shashank Kumar of Razorpay, Arjit Johri of Marsshot VC, Yash Jain, formerly of NimbusPost, Karan Jindal of Meta, Jivraj Singh Sachar of ISV Capital, Nishank Jain of Accel, Yashvardhan Kanoi, Ashwarya Garg of HYPD, Venus Dhuria of Phot.AI and Amishi Parasrampuria of The Whole Truth.
Gruhas Collective Consumer Fund fund manager Gauri Kuchhal, believes the opportunity lies in shifting habits. “Nail care remains underpenetrated in India, with consumers relying on time-intensive salon visits. As convenience and self-expression gain ground, press-on nails can unlock more frequent and experimental usage. Nailinit is well-placed to expand beyond press-ons into adjacent categories.”
The brand is currently the only nail care player in India blending product-led retail with a dedicated kiosk at Jio World Drive in Bandra, where customers can walk in for services while discovering the range. It has also built early traction across quick commerce platforms such as Zepto and Blinkit, with a launch on Instamart in the pipeline, and is available on Amazon, strengthening its omnichannel presence.
In a space long dominated by salon chairs and scattered labels, nailinit is attempting to file, shape and polish the category into something sharper. With fresh funding in hand, the startup is setting out to prove that in beauty, small details can make a bold statement.
