Questions over the Windows Trademark

TTop writes "As part of the Lindows lawsuit, the judge has preliminarily ruled that there are 'serious questions regarding whether "Windows" is a non-generic name and thus eligible for the protections of federal trademark law.'" I've always been bothered by Microsoft's habit of naming things using common words (Then again, my history of naming things includes confusing and bizarre names like 'Slashdot' and 'AnimeFu' so what do I know? :)

Comments

Ouch...

[weave]

The irony is quite rich. They try to smack down some small company naming a product called Lindows and end up losing the much bigger prize, the exclusive use of the word Windows.

Someone in Redmond is kicking themselves in the ass right now...

Re:Ouch...

[neuroticia]

Hm. Just playing devil's advocate here for a second.

1- "Windows", whether or not it's trademarkable is seldom called "Microsoft Windows" in the common household. It is "Windows" plain and simple. While this is MS's fault for choosing something that would *obviously* be shortened to "Windows" and thus be un-trademarkable, the public still associates "Windows" with MS.

2- Lindows is an operating system designed to take place of Windows by allowing you to run Windows apps without running Windows.

3- Lindows is an obvious play on the name "Windows", and it's unlikely that it was 'accidental' or based on something else such as "LinuxwINDOWSystem" or somesuch. Based on it's goal : Offer users the ability to run Windows apps in a Linux environment... Sorry, it's unlikely that they were NOT aware of it.

Normally I'd say that the whole idea of trademarking a common name was absurd, but seeing as Lindows' target is *The MS Windows User*, I have to admit that using "Lindows" was both asking for trouble and attempting to profit off of the established image of another company whether or not the word used was trademarked by said company or not.

-Sara

The issue of "secondary meaning"...

[SlashChick]

The article referenced at the top of the page doesn't go into much detail regarding the outcome of the suit (which will finally be decided in a year or so), but here is an article that might be a bit more informative.

The most interesting part of that article is the following quote:

"'There's no evidence Windows is generic and strong evidence it's not,' responded Karl Quackenbush, an attorney arguing for Microsoft. He said Microsoft has spent more than a billion dollars promoting and protecting the name Windows. That includes sending letters to hundreds of infringers warning them not to use the name, he said.

In any case, he said, names such as Amazon.com and Apple -- two other generic words -- have been adjudged valid trademarks because they've acquired a 'secondary meaning' through their strong association to products."

So, even though Microsoft might not win the preliminary injunction, it is likely to win the case. After all, if Apple and Amazon were both held up as trademarks in court, it's likely that the ubiquitous "Windows" will be as well.

I, for one, will be glad if "Lindows" loses in court simply because it is confusing to say out loud. Try saying this out loud: "I'd like some help with configuring Lindows, please." I fully support anyone's right to create a new OS, but I don't support naming a product in a confusing manner (and playing off the name of a more popular product), which is exactly what Lindows is doing. This sort of infringement is what trademark law was designed to protect, and I think Microsoft will win this one in the end.