Microsoft Starts Legal Fight Over Lindows Name

actappan writes: "Whether or not Lindows is real, this article on CNET News.com indicates that Microsoft intends to sue them into oblivion. Looks like supression remains the best way to promote innovation." cyberlawyer adds: "Some of you may remember that MS originally had great difficulty obtaining a trademark for the generic term 'Windows' but was eventually able to pay off those who had filed letters of protest to the granting of the mark including Sun, Oracle, and Borland. As a trademark lawyer I (unhappily) have to admit that Lindows probably has a weak case. Of course it's never too late to bring a cancellation action based on genericide ;-)" CodeWheeney contributes a link to coverage at Yahoo, too.

Comments

Re:M$ is wrong again, duh.

[dangermouse]

First of all, it's "copyright", not "copywrite". As in "right to copy", dig?

Second, this isn't about copyrights. It's about trademarks. And if someone pops up in your market with an extremely similar name and a product that aims to subsume the functionality of yours, it is not unreasonable to consider that an infringement of your trademark.

You're splitting some pretty fine hairs if you consider these products to be in different markets.. they're both operating systems for x86 computers, and the entire point of Lindows is to offer the same functionality (and then some) of Windows.

Sorry, but MS is in the right on this one.

Sue them into oblivion?

[aozilla]

this article on CNET News.com indicates that Microsoft intends to sue them into oblivion.

Umm, no...

"We're not asking the court to stop the company from making their products," said Microsoft spokesman Jon Murchinson. "What we're saying is they should not use a name that could confuse the public and infringe on our valuable trademark."

Fucking slashdot editors... I'm through. I contribute to slashdot no more. This is my last post.

Re:Idiot!

[dangermouse]

First of all, I never called anyone an idiot. So you can eat me.

Second, a trademark is a trademark. Whether it's a company name or a product name is irrelevant. Even if for some reason you think it should, in some alternate universe where logic is based primarily on coin flips, be relevant as a matter of degree, you might recognize that Windows is Microsoft's flagship product. Calling your OS "Lindows" is tantamount to naming your company Nicrosoft.

And incidentally, I don't think "Lindows.com" is going to stay in business for very long, and one could make a very sound argument that Microsoft has "earned its place".

See you in hell, dinner plate.

Re:Microsoft's Claim is Legit (IAAL)

[Rogerborg]

• I am actually a lawyer

Claims "Dave Brennins" aka "gayrod" aka dave@davebrennins.org

whois -h magic davebrenninslaw.org
Crsnic.net hasn't heard of davebrenninslaw.org

Whois Server Version 1.3
No match for "DAVEBRENNINSLAW.ORG".

traceroute davebrenninslaw.org
Error - davebrenninslaw.org doesn't exist

Sure, YAAL, whatever. Neat piece of whoring though.