This will most likely not end up in a .... long legal battle...... as the company that owns the "Apple Cinemas" theater chain do not own a legal trademark to their "Apple Cinemas" name. They never got one (and maybe never even applied for one) in the over 10 years before 2024, that they've been using "Apple Cinemas" as the name for their theaters. But in 2024, the USPTO rejected their trademark application for "Apple Cinemas", citing confusion with Apple Inc. If both companies had legal trademarks, then it's either up to the USPTO to make a ruling as to whether one trademark is infringing upon the other or the two companies will negotiate an agreement to the use of their respective trademarks or it might end up being a long legal battle.
Witness how easy it was for Apple to acquire the "iPhone" trademark form Cisco when Cisco allowed their "iPhone" trademark to expire and thus had no legal trademark claim to it.
https://newsroom.cisco.com/c/r/newsroom/en/us/a/y2007/m01/cisco-sues-apple-for-trademark-infringement.html
less that 2 months later
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2007/02/21Cisco-and-Apple-Reach-Agreement-on-iPhone-Trademark/
We later find out that Apple didn't have to even offer Cisco a dime, for the "iPhone" trademark.
https://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/01/27/apple-cisco-iphone-trademark/
Where as it eventually cost Apple Inc. $500M to end their battle with Apple Corp.
Most of Apple long legal trademark battles are with other entities that own legal trademarks and are fought in front of the USPTO. Here the USPTO already made their ruling that the name "Apple Cinemas" can be confused with Apple Inc trademark. It is no longer just a "claim" by Apple Inc.. So now, Apple is forced to defend their trademark, as not doing so will surely weaken their case against other entities that they feel might infringe on their trademarks. How can Apple go after others that they think might be infringing on their trademarks, if they don't go after the ones that the USPTO already ruled as are infringing on their trademarks? Apple now has no excuse to not go after the company that runs "Apple Cinemas" and force them to stop using a name that infringes on Apple Inc. trademark. (Not a name that they only think might be infringing on their trademark).
Before the company running the "Apple Cinemas" theater chain can win against Apple Inc, they need to plead their case in front of the USPTO to reverse their ruling, by convincing them (the USPTO) that the name "Apple Cinemas" do not confuse consumers with Apple Inc. And not just geographically. As improbable as that might be but not impossible, if they can win there, then Apple might have a long legal battle in preventing the company that owns the "Apple Cinemas" theater chain from using the name "Apple Cinemas". Otherwise, how can the company that own "Apple Cinemas" convince Apple Inc. that their "Apple Cinemas" name do no confuse consumers with Apple Inc., when the USPTO already cited that it does.
