Weird decision, if so I wonder what would they say about other trademarks like Apple..

Apple is a valid trademark in the "computers" category, but would not be accepted in the "food" category.

Here are the 13 valid trademarks in France containing the word "apple" in the same category as fruit: https://data.inpi.fr/search?advancedSearch=%257B%2522checkbo...

None of them are descriptive of the actual fruit.

"Apples in the Sky" is a valid trademark only because apples in the sky do not exist. If there was a strange meteorobiological event where such fruit started to grow in the clouds, this would no longer be a valid trademark for someone to create, because it would be descriptive of a category of things in the real world.

What about "Savoury apple" ?

Is that a category of things that exist?

“Free Apples”

Waiting for Apple to enter the food industry, with a highly specific McIntosh-based genetic lineage that they dub the "iApple".

I don't like the idea of trademarks that are so well-known that they apply in all fields. That doesn't serve the public. Companies that well-known can easily apply for a trademark across multiple fields. The trademark owners that would really need that kind of help are the smaller ones that aren't eligible for that, and must specifically register in various fields of industry.

IP law needs severe reform no matter which jurisdiction you're in (since the majority of the world signed the Berne Convention, the same reforms are needed everywhere)

But what's the alternative for the trademarks that are truly universally known? Does it serve the public for me to be able to sell unauthorized Coca-Cola brand products, or more likely, the trademark owner selling a token item in each category to maintain the right to prevent others from using it?

Hard to make it clearer that you didn't read/understand the decision than a post like this