“iDon’t have a real keyboard
iDon’t run simultaneous apps
iDon’t take night shots
iDon’t allow open development
iDon’t customize
iDon’t run widgets
iDon’t have interchangeable batteries
Everything iDon’t
DROID DOES”

Shown on Fox and CBS (CBS) during a pair of NFL football games Sunday afternoon, the ad clearly positions Droid as the mythical iPhone killer. And while that might seem foolhardy, perhaps even hubristic, those who’ve seen the Motorola (MOT)-designed device say it’s at the very least a worthy iPhone rival.

Says Boy Genius: “[This is] the Android device to beat, and easily the most impressive. From what we’ve been told, Google had a direct hand in the Motorola Droid. Something to the point of almost dictating every move Motorola made when designing and making the phone….the Droid, even in its non-final form, is the most impressive phone we’ve used since the iPhone. It’s positively amazing.”

A gushing endorsement of an unreleased device and as such, to be taken with a grain of salt. That said, it’s hard to believe Verizon (VZ) would go all out here without good reason. And make no mistake, the company is going all out, even to the point of licensing the “Droid” trademark from Lucasfilm.

This past weekend’s TV commercial and a Droid teaser site are clearly the beginning of a major marketing push intended to position Droid as the Apple (AAPL) iPhone’s better, or at least its equal. Little wonder then that Google (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt was so upbeat about Android’s future during the search engine company’s earnings call last week.

“Android adoption is literally about to explode,” Schmidt said. “You have all the necessary conditions, you have the vendors, you have the distribution and so forth. This is a very critical period with all of everything being delivered.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Verizon to iPhone Users: “Want Five Times More 3G Coverage? There’s a Map for That.”
• Perhaps by “Devices Like the Pre,” Verizon CEO Meant the iPhone?
• Analyst: AT&T Screwed Without iPhone Exclusivity
• Q: Should Apple Bring the iPhone to Verizon? A: Yes.
• Apple, Verizon and the iPhone LiTE

“• It is a stylised ‘W’ for Woolworths with the addition of an abstract leaf symbol representing fresh food;
• It is reminiscent of one of the most famous Woolworths logos of the 1970s;
• It represents a person–as in ‘The Fresh Food People’ and the Woolworths focus on its customers.”

– Woolworths announces its new logo.

Woolworths Supermarkets describes its new logo as “an abstract leaf symbol” intended to represent fresh food. But to Apple, the stylized “W” looks far too much like its own namesake fruit, which could be problematic should the supermarket chain someday decide to peddle its own brand of consumer electronics. And so Apple is petitioning IP Australia, the local agency that governs trademarks, to reject the Woolworths application for the mark.

It seems an overly litigious move, even for Apple (AAPL). As Hans Hulsbosch, the Woolworths logo designer dryly notes, “Based on this logic, they would have to take action against every fruitseller.”

That said, the Woolworths application is for a blanket trademark on a broad range of goods, including electronics, specifically “apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images…calculating machines, data processing equipment and computers…computer devices and computer peripheral devices…[and] computer hardware and software.”

While it might seem unlikely that the supermarket chain would ever manufacture devices, it did recently begin dabbling in cellphones, so it’s not entirely out of the question. Said a Woolworths spokesman: “While we can’t rule [computers, musical players, or other devices] out, we haven’t got any plans at the moment.”

This isn’t the first time Apple has challenged a trademark. Last year the company went after New York City’s GreeNYC campaign claiming its logo would create confusion in the marketplace. And in 2007, Apple settled a long-running trademark dispute with The Beatles’ parent company, Apple Corps.

“There is nothing in eBay’s systems and policies which favours or encourages the listing or sale of counterfeit goods,” the Court wrote. “On the contrary, eBay Europe take active steps to prevent or at least minimise such activities. The fact that eBay could take further steps does not affect this….The fact that it would be possible for eBay Europe to do more does not necessarily mean that it is legally obliged to do more, however.”

Another disappointment for L’Oréal, whose legal campaign against eBay (EBAY) has met with similar defeats in France and Belgium (cases in Germany and Spain are still pending). Though the cosmetics giant was able to take solace in the court’s suggestion that eBay could be a bit more proactive in its efforts to prevent the sale of counterfeit goods on its site.

In 2007, Google (GOOG) applied for its own mark on Android, the name for its open-source mobile phone operating system, and was rejected on the grounds that it was too similar to Specht’s. Google went ahead and debuted the OS with the Android name anyway, and now Specht is suing the company. In a complaint filed in a Chicago federal court, Specht claims that Google’s use of the term will deceive and confuse customers. He asks the court to bar Google from using the name and demands $2 million in damages for its misstep. Google, says Specht, “stole first and asked questions later.”

Google, for its part, disagrees. The company clearly views the suit as opportunistic and says it has no intention of paying that $2 million penalty. It says the trademark, Android Data, hasn’t been used in at least three years and that Android Data Corporation has been dissolved. It argues there can be no confusion between the two names. “We believe the claims are without merit and we plan on defending them vigorously,” a spokesperson said. “We have no interest in settling this case.”

Handy tools for when you’re researching a medical condition at work, shopping online for family Christmas presents, or you know, SURFING PORN, which is, after all, what the Internet was designed for. …