X-Box Name Dispute In The Works

Machina writes: "Seems Microsoft was a little late in claiming their X-Box Trademark . "Microsoft (MSFT) could face a legal challenge to its use of the Xbox name for its forthcoming videogame console. Microsoft filed its claim to the name with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Oct. 18, 1999, but a Florida company registered its use of the Xbox mark with the USPTO on March 10, 1999. "

Comments

That's not Microsoft's game

[Paul Crowley]

Microsoft do lots of evil things, but when was the last time you heard of them threatening to sue competitors over a patent or trademark? That's not really the way they operate. You're thinking of Apple, or IBM, or another such litigous nasty.

And it sounds like, in this instance, they're in the right. Much as I loathe them, this isn't the way I'd like to see them lose.
--

Sounds like a scam

[Zico]

This tech company was so concerned with the value of the name "Xbox", yet they never tried to get the xbox.com domain, which Microsoft owns? They changed their name from Nicollet Process Enginerring to XBOX Technologies two months before Microsoft filed for the "Xbox" trademark. I'm pretty sure that rumors were floating around about the Xbox name before Microsoft filed for the trademark, which was why everyone was speculating about the name.

So...anyone know when leaks first started appearing that Microsoft would name the system "Xbox?" Or if XBOX/NPE company is a "trademark squatter" and have filed for trademarks with a lot of other names that they don't use? If their ownership is a joke, they don't have much of a chance here.

Cheers,

Re:the dates seem awefully close

[AtrN]

Please, it's not a patent

Time and time again on /. various IP topics come up and there are hundreds of incorrect statements about IP law. Patents are confused with copyrights, copyrights confused with trademarks, and patents confused with trademarks. They are very different things (and much is written about them and available on the WWW, try the Patent and Trademarks Office for starters).

As for a leak. Doubtful. Maybe they just didn't do a proper search (MS registered their mark all over the place, basketballs is one of the product areas in trademark #78026626). Maybe someone blabbed an in-house development name in public and then, with the blabber having lots of clout, they have to stick with it all the way to making it the logo on top of the box. Or maybe they've got a lot of money in the bank and can dangle some really big carrots in front of the little folks who might get in their way. Or some combination thereof. Pure speculation of course.

However this looks like an co-exisiting trademark owner (marks can co-exist in different markets) attempting to extend their mark from one area to another. MS with their new product are trying to grab the name everywhere (as is their habitual behaviour, grab everything). They collide. Time to get the lawyers out again for rolodexes and bad hair at ten paces on the courthouse steps.

no problem for microsoft

[gumis]

they will just switch to $-box name..

It's the same as with NT

[Otis_INF]

NT as a name was already trademarked. So MS trademarked 'Windows NT'. I wouldn't be suprised that MS will now trademark 'Microsoft X-Box' instead of just 'X-Box'. Besides that, if the products of the same name are totally not related it's not uncommon 2 companies can register the same name:

Here in the netherlands we have Dove chocolate (from Mars Inc.) and Dove soap. Thankfully they don't use the same packaging, but both marks are trademarks. Also we have Sun dishwasher stuff and Sun computers, Linux cleaning services (yeah really! in The Hague, it's a house cleaning agency) and Linux the OS... :)
--

Profiteering/squatting

[CarrotLord]

sure, this other company may have got in before MS, but check this quote:

"Microsoft is spending a lot of money promoting it and I think [the Xbox name] is as valuable to them as it is to us. If they want us to part with it, it's up to them to determine how much they think it's worth," Van Leeuwen said.

Seems to me as if what they are really wanting here is to profit by letting MS invest a lot in their trademark, and then hitting them with a conflict to get money out of them. Surely they would have heard of XBox long ago -- surely they would have been able to contact MS and say "er, no, we have that name" much earlier, so MS would be able to get a new name form the start... but no, it appears that they hvae let it go long enough for it to be worth MS's while to pay them out rather than find a new name...

rr

Wow, I wonder...

[MWoody]

Whoah, I'm so confused! Do I side on the point of pointless, belligerent legislation, or on the side of the Satan-spawned megacorp Microsoft? Is there some legal way they can _both_ lose?

Hear that sound? That's the heads of thousands of Slashdot regulars exploding.

;-)
---