Microsoft Loses Appeal To Shut Down LindowsOS

alphabet26 writes "LindowsOS announced yesterday that a Seattle Judge has denied Microsoft's appeal to shut them down, citing that Microsoft's own use of evidence helped determined "Windows" is a generic word. Lindows.com has posted the judge's seven page ruling on their website." Microsoft is trying get an injunction to prevent Lindows from using the name while the trial proceeds, and the judge has denied them, twice. Lindows could still lose the case in the end, though.

Comments

Maybe M$ should just retaliate. . .

[Limburgher]

And name an OS Winux. . .

"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[Erasmus Darwin]

Microsoft isn't trying to shutdown the LindowsOS, as the article headline erroneously states. They're merely trying to stop them from using the Lindows name. The error seems to be a mistranscription of the Lindows press release, which refers to Microsoft attempting to "shut down Lindows.com" (presumably due to the name rather than the content). Even if Microsoft were to have won, there'd be nothing preventing the Lindows people from changing the name to JdsfhkjashdfkjOS.

Re:"Shut Down LindowsOS"

[killmenow]

I think Microsoft IS trying to shut down the Lindows OS (or perhaps I should say they are trying to KEEP it vaporware).

Jobs mimicked Xerox. Gates mimicked Jobs. Robertson mimicked Gates. Only Gates knows how well mimicking works as a business model.

I think Microsoft wants Lindows to never be done...or at least they never want Windows to be done until Lindows won't run(tm).

The silly trademark thing was the only thing they could attack until there's an actual product.

You can bet [if|once] a final, shipping product comes out of lindows.com Microsoft will sue for reasons other than just the Windows trademark.

I Never liked "Lindows" as a name

[FearUncertaintyDoubt]

It always sounded like some cheap Chinese knock-off to me. I think you want to sound like your quality is better than Windows...

Homer:[gasps] Look at these low, low prices on famous brand-name electronics!
Bart: Don't be a sap, Dad. These are just crappy knock-offs.
Homer: Pfft. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox and Sorny.

What beautiful music....

[rhadamanthus]

I think the truly important part of this article has nothing to do with M$ (readies flame-retardant suit...).

The truly important bit is regarding "trademarking of common phrases". I think it absolutely ridiculous that companies can trademark any common word or phrase. Reference a similar suit to this one, Mastercard suing Nader over "priceless" to see this kind of silliness in action. (feel free to find a better article, I just pulled the first item off google)

Basically, I do not condone the use of language "exclusivism". Language, as a whole, does not lend itself well to patentability. Satire, documentaries etc. are protected speech regardless of trademark, although occasionally (as usual) the courts can get confused. In this case it is even more bizarre. Suing over a name sounding the same? Poets beware!

-------------rhad

Re:Its time for Redhat Windows, Mandrake Windows e

[Erasmus Darwin]

"if Windows is deemed a generic word its ALL OVER for the microsoft monopoly."

No, it isn't. Microsoft has the benefit of having strong public recognition of both their product name and their company name. Furthermore, it wouldn't kill their trademark on the distinctive Windows flag logo that many people have seen at boot-up for the past 7 years.

I also think that retail stores would be less likely to carry a Linux-based operating system labelled "RedHat Windows". Why? Because anyone confused enough to buy "RedHat Windows" only because of the "Windows" in the name is going to return it the very next day when it fails to "work" (where "work" equates to running all his/her existing MS Windows-based programs; wine or other emulation packages aren't going to be enough to appease a novice end-user who was expecting actual MS Windows).

Finally, I think breaking up a monopoly via trademark is inherently lame. The whole point of trademarks are to allow consumers to be able to differentiate the different products in a given market. I know I'd feel dirty if Linux had to start tricking people into using it.

Why?

[night_flyer]

The whole "Windows", "Word", "Office" thing has always pissed me off.

http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm

TRADEMARKS. Active Channel, Active Desktop, Active Directory, ActiveStore, ActiveSync, ActiveX, Advisor FYI, Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Allegiance, Amped, Asheron's Call, Ask Maxwell, Authenticode, Azurik, BackOffice, BackOffice logo, bCentral, BizTalk, Bookshelf, CarPoint, ClearLead, Computing Central, Crimson Skies, Developer Studio, DirectDraw, DirectMusic, DirectPlay, DirectSound, DirectX, Encarta, Entourage, Fighter Ace, FrontPage, HomeAdvisor, Home Essentials, Hotmail, Links, Links Extreme, MapPoint, MechCommander, MechWarrior, Microsoft, Microsoft Agent logo, Microsoft Internet Explorer logo, Microsoft Office Compatible logo, Microsoft Press, Microsoft TV logo, Midtown Madness, Mobile Explorer, MoneyCentral, Monster Truck Madness, Motocross Madness, MSDN, MSN, MSN logo (butterfly), .Net logo, NetMeeting, Nightcaster, Outlook, Outsmart, Passport logo, Picture It!, PowerPoint, Precision Racing, Project Gotham Racing, Revenge of Arcade, Rise of Perathia, SharePoint, Slate, Tex Murphy, The Age of Kings, The Everyday Web, Trekker, UltimateTV, UltimateTV logo, UltraCorps, UnderWire, Urban Assault, VGA, Virtual Golf Association, Visio, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual C#, Visual InterDev, Visual J++, Visual Studio, WebTV, Where do you want to go today?, Windows, Windows logo, Windows Media, Windows Media logo, Windows NT, Xbox, XBOX logo, Xbox "X" logo, ZoneFriends, ZoneLAN, ZoneMatch, ZoneMessage, Zoo Tycoon, and/or other Microsoft products referenced herein are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners. The example companies, organizations, products, domain names, email addresses, logos, people and events depicted herein are fictitious. No association with any real company, organization, product, domain name, e-mail address, logo, person, or event is intended or should be inferred.

Re:Lindows is bad

[lkaos]

From their own site:

Lindows.com is a consumer company that brings choice to computer users. Lindows.com, Inc. uses the latest technology to create affordable, intuitive, user-friendly products. Lindows.com, Inc. was started by Michael Robertson, founder and former CEO of MP3.com. At the core of Lindows.com is a new operating system called LindowsOS(TM), a modern, affordable, easy-to-use operating system with the ability to run both Windows® and Linux® software.

WTF! The core of Lindows is LindowsOS??? No it's not! The core is the Linux kernel. Wine is not an operating system, it is an emulator. It's not like they wrote even a significant portion of any of their components (yeah, a little bit on Wine, but not much in comparision to the entire project).

I'm sorry, I just don't see why more people don't despise Lindows... Is this not a big FU to the Free Software community?

Re:strange relationship between Windows and Linux

[prisoner-of-enigma]

People are trying to make Linux more "Windows-like" with increasing amounts of window dressing (pun intended) simply because they realize the reality of the world: 95% of the users on this little globe use Windows in some variation or another. They don't care that it's slow (I.T.'s problem), they don't care that it's big (ditto), or expensive (the company paid for it), or proprietary (gee, what's that mean?). They just know that it works well enough for them, and they're used to it. NEVER underestimate the power of familiarity.

Also don't underestimate Microsoft. Regardless of their many faults, they have as of late started spending lots of cash on usability enhancements and studies to see how people like things to be. When I say "people", I don't mean geekheads who tweak kernels and make their own Cat5 cables, I mean the AVERAGE user out there who never, ever wonders where the command line prompt is. Believe it or not, dumbass technophobes outnumber tech-heads by about 50-to-1 if the average company I.T. to user ratio is to be considered. These people can't even program their VCR, what makes you think they can appreciate Linux's CLI?

KDE, Gnome, and all the rest are chasing Microsoft because (deep breath here, folks)...Microsoft is where all the other folks WANT to be! They don't want to be buggy, huge, and expensive, but they do want to take advantage of the huge Windows penetration into the average Joe's computing experience. Linux folk consistently underestimate this factor, and then are puzzled why Linux is not gaining widespread acceptance on the desktop.

Cardinal rule: a product does NOT have to be the BEST at anything, it just has to be GOOD ENOUGH, and CONVENIENT ENOUGH, to get the job done MOST OF THE TIME. OS/2, Novell, Macintosh, UltraSPARC...I could name a thousand technologies that are (or were) the best in their respective classes but failed to achieve market dominance. Intel's processors are not the fastest, they do not have the most elegant design, and they sure as hell aren't the cheapest, but they rule the PC world completely while Alpha and PowerPC occupy niches. Macintosh arguably has one of the better GUI's out there, yet they languish with only about 4% of the market. OS/2 was 32-bits long before WindowsNT was even a glimmer in the eye, but does anybody really run Warp anymore?

Being the BEST at one thing frequently means you've neglected something else somewhere. Linux is a technological marvel in its configurability and flexibility, but has neglected usability with respect to contemporary products from Microsoft and Apple. Don't try to deny it, it's true. When your grandmother can successfully get a PC and load RedHat on it unassisted, and then actually troubleshoot it if something goes wrong (can she understand cronjobs? fsck?), THEN Linux will have risen to the top. Unfortunately, I have a funny feeling that in order to become that user friendly, Linux will have to become bigger, slower, more expensive, and more proprietary. Perhaps it isn't true, but I'd be willing to bet that it is.