Apple's decision to call their upcoming mobile device the "iPhone" has caused a whole case file's worth of trouble. Cisco has complained about Apple using the iPhone trademark, and already it has sparked debates far and wide, all speculating about Apple changing the name in time for its launch this June.

Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry says that this name change will be an eventual step for Apple to take. He bases this theory on conversations with "sources" that are "close" to the iPhone labs.

A lot of us could probably agree with this. As we've said, countless people have already expressed the same sentiments of Apple doing a name change for the iPhone. In fact, we've heard a couple of comments from our beloved QJ readers already, and all of them have valid points and are worth pointing out.

Bob: To be honest, the iPhone name will either be licensed from Cisco or Apple will change it to iMobile, iCell, AppleCell or something. Just look at iTV which is now Apple TV. They would not have got away with iTV in the UK as there is a company with the very same name.

xche78x: It's a mishap on Apple's side. Cisco really owns the iPhone name. So, the product should find a new name so it can be launched for the mass market.

neok182: Apple was very wrong for going ahead and calling it that before they finished negotiations with Cisco. And now they're paying for it. Cisco was nice enough to even talk about letting them use it... Now, they'll lose this case and have to rename the phone. After everyone now knows it as the iPhone. This is just the first thing to hurt it... As nice as the phone is and I'd love to have one myself, it has a very bumpy road ahead of it.

Fair exchange of ideas, guys. We all have our thoughts on the issue but the people have spoken. A name change would have to be inevitable.

So, after an entire year of waiting, speculating, theorizing, and guessing, Apple then unveils the much-awaited iPhone (though they might want to consider a name change soon, with Cisco breathing down their necks. iCell doesn't sound so bad...).

So with that entire year in mind, Gizmodo has compiled a gallery which showcases the number of iPhone renditions which were done by people who hoped that the then-mysterious product would look the way that they envisioned it. After all, sparks went flying when we first saw it on the back of a magazine in March 2006, and then the deluge started.

So how close was everyone's guess to the actual product? See for yourself.

View the rest of the non-iPhones after the Jump!

Uh-oh. Could it be that Apple is getting a taste of its own medicine? After its history of suing various individuals and companies left and right for various forms of copyright or trademark infringement, it looks like Apple is now being sued for the exact same thing.

Now, we've seen this looming over the horizon for quite some time now, and apparently, not even filing for rights to the "iPhone" trademark has saved Apple from the eyes of Cisco Systems. Tsk, tsk. And to think that everyone was so excited to just see Apple unveil its new toy.

On January 10, iPhone trademark">Cisco representatives announced that they have filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc. at the District Court of Northern California, "seeking to prevent Apple from infringing upon and deliberately copying and using Cisco's registered iPhone trademark".

As explained on the company website, here's what happened, and why they should be considered as the true owners of the trademark, "iPhone":

Cisco obtained the iPhone trademark in 2000 after completing the acquisition of Infogear, which previously owned the mark and sold iPhone products for several years. Infogear's original filing for the trademark dates to March 20, 1996. Linksys, a division of Cisco, has been shipping a new family of iPhone products since early last year. On Dec. 18, Linksys expanded the iPhone family with additional products.

Moreover, according to Cisco's senior VP Mark Chandler, they have "entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name", but that Apple "should not be using our trademark without our permission".

Thanks to zerox for the tip!

Perhaps when Apple gone and patented "-pod," they should have gone and patented the "i-" prefix once and for all. Because according to Gizmodo, there IS an iPhone out and announced. And it's not from Apple (Which means we just lost a bet. We were betting on "iPhone" in a previous article. Dang, there goes this writer's wages for the week).

It's the Linksys iPhone, with the "iPhone" trademark owned (or pwned) by Linksys parent company Cisco Systems. Looking at Linksys' press release, iPhone is their family of VoIP-enabled wireless phones. The Wireless-G IP Phone, in particular, also combines features normally found in cell phones including media streaming from the Internet.

Yeah, of course, if you're an Applephile who's been eagerly waiting for news on the iPhone, all of this Gadgets-related talk is blah-blah yada-yada without the trademark Apple logo somewhere in there. Well, whatever the Apple cellular phone will be, it won't be called the iPhone, that's for sure.

Which now launches the great debate/contest/discussion in Macworld today: what do YOU think Apple will call the iPhone? Because sure as heck, iPhone's been taken (The other alternative doesn't bear much thinking: what if there's no Apple phone at all? What would all the speculators think?).