MS Asking Makers of 'Windows' Software To Rename

An anonymous reader writes "Today WebWereld is running a story (http://www.webwereld.nl/nieuws/13347.phtml) on Microsoft's attempts to stop other software makers from using 'Windows' in their names. Several software makers that are listed on the Lindows-list (http://www.lindows.com/lindows_home_list.php) have received a letter from Microsoft's lawyers. Basically Microsoft asks them to stop using the word 'Windows.' Windows Commander and Windows Spy have changed name as the result. Christian Ghisler (of Windows Commander) changed the name into Total Commander and Sureshot changed the name of Windows Spy into Farsighter. Alexander Tchirkov of Windows Backup Wizard also received a letter from Microsoft, but he is not willing to change the name of his software, he tells WebWereld. 'I received a letter from attorneys Microsoft (SEED Intellectual Property Law Group) with the recommendation to change the program name into Backup Wizard for Windows(R).' Tchirkov says Windows is not a registered trademark in Russia."

Comments

How about XWindows?

[teetam]

How about X Windows?

Re:How about XWindows?

[Spooge Demon]

It's either X, or the X Window System. XWindows is considered incorrect.

Re:How about XWindows?

[gazbo]

Ignoring the error pointed out by the other reply, there would be no reason that MS would want to change that name. Nobody is going to say "hey look, there's something called XWindows, let's installit on my windows PC because it might be useful".

Windows Backup on teh other hand sounds like the MS approved backup solution for Windows. Same goes for other products; note that they don't say to remove Windows, just to make it not sound like it is a part of Windows (hence Windows Backup becomes Backup for Windows)

Re:How about XWindows?

[ActiveSX]

I assume you mean the X Window System. No S there.

Re:How about XWindows?

[spakka]

Nobody is going to say "hey look, there's something called XWindows, let's installit on my windows PC because it might be useful".

Well they say "hey look, there's a newsgroup called comp.windows.x - maybe someone can tell me how to use Outlook Express."

Re:How about XWindows?

[seschmi]

1. It's older (in trademark law, that's not as important as in patent law, but it is an issue) 2. "Windows" is not really distinctive (less than "X" is). Actually, that's the problem Microsoft has all the time: "Windows" is a normal english word, a search in the trademark-database of the EU lists 20 trademarks containing windows. One could even say, that "X-Windows" (BTW: What does the X stand for? uniX? Xor?) is a clear sign that "windows" was a commonly used word for a graphical user interface for computers long before MS registered the trademark. This would mean, that the trademark was erroneously registered and has to be deleted. To give another example: You cannot register "car" as a trademark for automobiles, because it's already a common word.

Re:How about XWindows?

[MrWa]

It is X Window, no "s", by the way...

And what of it? When did Microsoft trademark Windows as a term by itself? Is this the extent of the trademark, or is it only when used in reference to software (any software?) or operating system? What do I call these things that pop up on my screen when I doubleclick on icon, if not windows?? I seriously hope they go to court and lose - then they will have to think up better named for their product like Intel did when it found out trademarking a number wasn't such a good idea.

Re:How about XWindows?

[jemoody]

"X Windows" is slang. The proper name is "X Window System". From the X man page:

"The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when referring to this software:

• X
• X Window System
• X Version 11
• X Window System, Version 11
• X11

X Window System is a trademark of X Consortium, Inc."

They seem pretty clear on the legal issues.

Re:How about XWindows?

[pne]

BTW: What does the X stand for?

According to the Jargon File, it was so named because it was the successor of an earlier window system called "W".

Re:How about XWindows?

[helix400]

How about X Windows?

I think the article plainly answered this question when they said:

"Microsoft heeft diverse makers van software met in de naam 'Windows' gevraagd om een andere naam te kiezen."

---
Abortions for some, minature American flags for others! - Kodos

Re:How about XWindows?

[glitchvern]

(BTW: What does the X stand for? uniX? Xor?)

It does not stand for anything. X comes after W which is what X's predecessor windowing system was called. The W window system was developed at Stanford. I do not know what W stood for if anything. It probably stood for window or windows.

Re:How about XWindows?

[richie2000]

But do you pronounce it [ten]? ;-)

Re:How about XWindows?

[Andrewkov]

Better make sure you're wearing an asbestos suit before asking that question...

Re:How about XWindows?

[Negatyfus]

So what does the W stand for? :)

Re:How about XWindows?

[tigertigr]

When can we expect Y Windows to be released?

Re:How about XWindows?

[EvanED]

Unlike many people, you're not computer illiterate. (Or for that matter, illiterate in general)

Re:How about XWindows?

[caluml]

"Microsoft heeft diverse makers van software met in de naam 'Windows' gevraagd om een andere naam te kiezen."

Microsoft has diverse makers of software with in their name Windows asked them an other name to choose.

I'm English and I could work that out. Put some imagination into it, eh? :)

Re:How about XWindows?

[tomhudson]

And if you're running it on your box, then it's an 'X Box', and would be referred to as such, as opposed to console-only boxes, or ttys - long before Micro$haft began making the XBox.

Re:How about XWindows?

[chewedtoothpick]

From what I have read, X is the latest in a large string originating from O Window meaning Open-Window... If you read all of the different 'history of unix' or 'history of X' pages and books, you will get that far back. Now if it goes any farther back, I do not know, but it would be kind-of cool if they had all the way from A to X... in some form of unknown geekish way.

Re:How about XWindows?

[IXI]

When can we expect Y Windows to be released?

Don't we have it already? Everytime I see a Windows PC I ask myself "Y Windows?"

Re:How about XWindows?

[Ross Finlayson]

"So what does the W stand for? :)"

"W" was chosen because it was the next letter after "V".

No kidding. "V" was the name of a research distributed operating system at Stanford at the time (mid-80s). Paul Asente thought he could improve upon its window system, so he called his new system "W". MIT later used this as the model for "X".

Re:How about XWindows?

[thogard]

"X Windows" is slang.
Thats the stupididity that caused this mess in the 1st place. Had the X Consortium added "X winodws" to their list of trademarks, Microsoft would be telling the world "please don't use Windows now, use $MARKETERRING_NAME"

I'm not sure the X Consortium is clear on the legal issues.

Re:How about XWindows?

[tunah]

I assume you mean the X Window System. No S there.

I assume you mean the X Window Ystem.

Re:How about XWindows?

[xigxag]

Wow. Just like "B", "C" and "C#" ;-)

Re:How about XWindows?

[ActiveSX]

I assume you mean the X Window Ystem.

I aume you mean the X Window Ytem.

Re:How about XWindows?

[Ross Finlayson]

"so that begs the question - why the hell was his os called "V"?"

The principal investigator of that project (David Cheriton) named the system "V" at least in part because an earlier system of his was named "Verex". (I think that name came about because the system had some vague association with program verification.)

So the full etymology is:
Verex -> V -> W -> X (Window System)

Re:How about XWindows?

[Dahan]

Nah, man X:

The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when referring to this software:

X
X Window System
X Version 11
X Window System, Version 11
X11

X Window System is a trademark of X Consortium, Inc.

Re:How about XWindows?

[goldfndr]

Three generations? How about just the next? Slashdotters ask "Y Windows?" in a negative tone all the time!

Re:How about XWindows?

[Autonomous Crowhard]

I assume you mean the X Window System. No S there.

And Lindows is so much closer to the name of the MS product?

I don't know about you but I have never seen a Lindow before.

Why dont we just call it ALL windows...

[joelwest]

The problem is that the word 'Windows' can be used for those transparent panes of glass. I suggest we rename them to "Gates Holes" as in The microsoft building has HUGE Gates Holes.

Joel "Windows" West

Re:Why dont we just call it ALL windows...

[Mechanik]

The problem is that the word 'Windows' can be used for those transparent panes of glass. I suggest we rename them to "Gates Holes" as in The microsoft building has HUGE Gates Holes.

Then people will think Bill Gates is the goatse.cx guy, and we'll all be sued for libel.

Mechanik

It's Microsoft's fault...

[tshak]

... for creating a non-unique product name. If they want to control branding, then they better make sure to label the product "Microsoft Windows", or next time they can be a bit more creative.

To be perfectly honest...

[EraseEraseMe]

Microsoft has a point. These companies are selling their products by the customer association with "Windows", Microsoft Windows. Of course, it's rather DUMB of them to do it, as when walking through a software store, seeing a bunch of programs marketed as "Windows This" "Windows That" creates a mindset in the consumer that Windows has a lot of programs running for it. Just like we have KOffice, KCalc...or GProducts.

Getting out of hand

[thatguywhoiam]

This is totally crazy. As usual, MS is running amok, mostly - seemingly - because many of their top executives have nothing better to do than fuck with other people's lives.

Okay, that was a bit troll-ish, but really... Windows? It's a very common word, Microsoft. I remember when WIndows first appeared and I saw the name/logo. I thought, Yeah, that's about right. Such glaring uncreativity from the business app company. Windows. Uh huh.

Then it got scarier. Word. Office. Money. Microsoft's penchance for naming software after everyday items seems to have the subtext of usurping those items. Who hasn't had this conversation in a modern workplace?

"My office is really messed up, I've got to fix it."
"Your Office or office?"
"Huh?"
"MS Office or your real office?"

Totally asinine.

Did anything ever happen with the Lindows challenge to this practice?

Re:Getting out of hand

[Evil Adrian]

If this stuff pisses everyone off, why doesn't everyone write to Microsoft instead of bitching on Slashdot? Bitching on Slashdot gets you nowhere.

(No offense to the poster, just trying to get those that are angry to do something about it.)

Re:Getting out of hand

[Jippy_]

If this stuff pisses everyone off, why doesn't everyone write to Microsoft instead of bitching on Slashdot? Bitching on Slashdot gets you nowhere.

Dear Microsoft.

Your product names are too ambiguios. Please change them now.

Signed,
Some angry slashdot reader.

That's what our emails look like to Microsoft. They could care less. At least on Slashdot we get karma points.

Re:Getting out of hand

[Jim Norton]

So one day I was sitting in my home-[censored due to patent infringement], counting my [censored] when all of the sudden I read this story on Slashdot telling me that my science [censored] infringes on their intellectual property rights. Obviously Microsofts lawyers [censored] in finding new ways to annoy people.

This story is stupid on so many levels, but I can't think of an adequate [censored] to describe it ...

Re:Getting out of hand

[Scooby Snacks]

Actually...

According to the FAQ (and most people you'd ask today), KDE stands for "K Desktop Environment". However, the original Usenet post announcing the formation of the project refers to it as the "Kool Desktop Environment". A Google Groups search confirms this.

Re:Getting out of hand

[tjwhaynes]

I think Bill has problems stringing sentences together, after all he droped out.

Looks like it's contagious :-)

Re:Getting out of hand

[oliverthered]

try replacing wealthy with greedy.

I'm probably more wealthy then most people on /.
since there is very little I want. I have too much money, far more than I could spend though probably not enough for most people.

Re:Getting out of hand

[lvdrproject]

... Fuck, i knew i should've refreshed the page before i posted that. I failed, i'm sorry. :/

Re:Getting out of hand

[Bert64]

No, we just despise the way they got big with underhanded tactics and marketting rather than by spending all that time/effort on improving their products.

Atlanta Olympics Anecdote

[jazman_777]

I remember in the run-up to the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. The Atlanta Olympic Committee (AOC) was going after people aggressively. You just about couldn't even say "Olympics" without a license. There was some old family-run Greek restaurant, called The Olympic Diner (or somesuch) and they had been around for years. Of course, they hadn't _trademarked_ their name and the AOC made them change it.

Re:Atlanta Olympics Anecdote

[Simon Brooke]

I remember in the run-up to the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. The Atlanta Olympic Committee (AOC) was going after people aggressively. You just about couldn't even say "Olympics" without a license. There was some old family-run Greek restaurant, called The Olympic Diner (or somesuch) and they had been around for years. Of course, they hadn't _trademarked_ their name and the AOC made them change it.

When I was at University in Lancaster, England, there was a pub called the Red Cross. Then, one day, lawyers from the International Committee of the Red Cross wrote to them and said ' you can't call your pub that', it's our name'. So the owners did a little research and wrote back saying 'we've been trading under this name since 1155AD, when did you start using it? Oddly enough, that was teh end of the matter.

Company names too

[wackybrit]

This reminds me of the case of MS against numerous local double-glazing companies (formerly known as 'Colorado Windows', 'Joe's Windows' and 'Windows Windows Windows').

The outcome of that case actually resulted in a proposal to Merriam-Webster to introduce a new alternative spelling of 'window' to 'whindow'. The M-W took up the offer as they like to change any words possible from British English for superiority reasons.. so now if you look it up, you'll see 'whindow' listed there.

Re:Company names too

[0x0d0a]

Actually, the article author planned all this in advance, and the entire point of the article was to produce this thread.

"Boost your Windows reliability!!!"

[Jacco de Leeuw]

If only Microsoft would send their lawyers after those WinFix spammers...

Watch out folks

[OrangeSpyderMan]

These people have it coming! :-)

Re:Watch out folks

[Dark Lord Seth]

Cute :) Though harmless; Windows is NOT a trademark (If it was, you'd have to pay annual license fees for any window in your house and they'd mysteriously shatter after about 6 to 12 months.) and neither can numbers be trademarked, as Intel has proven with their 586/Pentium initiative.

Re:Watch out folks

[David Jao]

You can have two products with the same names but in different markets without having a trademark problem.

This may be true on paper (just like, on paper, laws have to be constitutional), but it is certainly not the way trademark law is actually being used today.

For example VISA the credit card company is currently (successfully) suppressing the web site evisa.com even though the latter is in a totally different market than the market for credit cards. Also note another similarity to this case: visa is a common english word that existed long before the credit card company obtained its trademark.

Re:Watch out folks

[xigxag]

The reason VISA® can get away with this is because of The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995, an expressly pro-big-business law which made it easier for companies owning "famous" marks to prevent others from using the same or a similar trademark. According to the referenced site, "it is possible to use a dilution cause of action against users of the same mark even when the defendant's goods and services bears no relation to the goods or services of the famous mark."

It also mentions that it's somewhat harder to successfully prosecute such a cause of action if the trademark is a common English word, (e.g. VISA®) as opposed to a distinctive word (like "Reebok"). Hpwever, given the cornucopaeic depths of VISA®'s pockets, I don't doubt they will be able to make the law bend in their favor.

Bogus?

[johnos]

AFAIK, they got turned down flat for a preliminary injunction in the Lindows case. With the judge expressing doubt that "windows" was a term that could be trademarked. So are these letters not an extra judicial effort to obtain by intimidation what they have been denied in court? If so, does it constitute contempt? Anyone have an informed opinion?

Re:Bogus?

[mbourgon]

What may be happening is that Microsoft is trying to prove that they should keep the name, and is trying to coerce all these companies so they can say to the judge that they're going after other companies, so (1) they are attempting to protect their name, and (2) they're not just going after Lindows.

If trying to prove #1 is their idea, I hope the Judge realizes what a BS move this is, and that it's too late for them to do this.

Re:Bogus?

[adrizk]

IANAL, but a thought experiment: I try to get a restraining order against someone. I'm turned down right away. I then decide to ask that person "nicely":
"Will you please stay away from me anyway?"
Is that contempt of court?
I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact that MS is 'asking' companies to remove Windows from their product names.

Of cource, if a case can be made they're *coercing* companies - then that opens up the whole "abusive monopoly" thing again..

Re:Bogus?

[kcbrown]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact that MS is 'asking' companies to remove Windows from their product names.

Microsoft (in Godfather-like tone): We noticed you're using "windows" in the name of your business. Your business is very important to you. I'm a businessman, so I understand these things. I also know that there are many ... uncertainties ... in running a business. I like you. I don't want to see anything happen to you. And it would be very ... unfortunate ... if something were to happen to you or your business because you continued using "windows" in the name.

They may have a case...

[dirk]

While I hate to say it, MS may have a small chancew of winning these. I don't like the idea of "Windows" being a trademark, but these programs weren't using windows in any generic sense. They were obviously using the term to refer to MS Windows. Windows Commander gave you better control of your MS Windows. Windows Spy let you spy on MS Windows. If the programs also worked under say XWindows they could claim they were using it as a generic term, but as it stands, they were obviously referencing MS Windows, which may put them on shaky ground.

A little too late

[FurryFeet]

If they had tried that before the Lindows case, they might have had a leg to stand on. But the judge's findings in that one do not bode well for MS. I'd say, stuff'em.

Re:A little too late

[FurryFeet]

OFFTOPIC?!?!? How in hell is that off topic? The whole Lindows case was about their ability to use the word "windows", and this action by MS appears to be a response to that.
Darn. First I fed the trolls, and now I'm feeding the crack-addict-moderators. Next I'll be feeding Natalie Portman some hot grits... (hhhmmmm.... grits.... I mean, Natalie Portman....)
There I go, off topic. And now I'll get modded Insightful, or Funny, or God know what.

Re:A little too late

[FurryFeet]

Redundant. I get "redundant" for an idiotic, (yet original), rant.
Figures.
I foresee this one will get Flamebait, but who knows. Crack must be real good today ;)

Yes, Windows is a common term

[tmark]

But does anyone doubt that the software in question is playing off the Microsoft Windows brand and mark ? I'd understand the argument if the software described did things totally unrelated to MS Windows, but I bet (without actually looking up these products) from the sounds of their names that their functionalities are intimately related to MS Windows.

As for whether or not Windows is a registered trademark in Russia or not, I have to say I'd be very, very surprised if it is not. And if it isn't , then someone in Russia ought to go and register that trademark NOW. In fact, it makes me wonder why the Russian programmer in question wouldn't register the trademark if only to protect HIS mark.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[Synn]

As for whether or not Windows is a registered trademark in Russia or not, I have to say I'd be very, very surprised if it is not.

It's not even a trademark in the US.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[sheldon]

It's not even a trademark in the US.

Really? You're sure about that, are you?

Word Mark WINDOWS
Goods and Services IC 009. US 038. G & S: computer programs and manuals sold as a unit; namely, graphical operating environment programs for microcomputers. FIRST USE: 19831018. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831018
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 74090419
Filing Date August 20, 1990
Published for Opposition June 21, 1994
Registration Number 1872264
Registration Date January 10, 1995
Owner (REGISTRANT) Microsoft Corporation CORPORATION DELAWARE One Microsoft Way Redmond WASHINGTON 980526399
Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Attorney of Record Richard W. Seed
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)
Affidavit Text SECT 8 (6-YR).
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[lfourrier]

FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831018
I remember Windows 1 or 2, I dont remember which one, in 1990. but in 1983, I'd like to have more informations about this.

And what does mean TYPED DRAWING??

One last remark, as M$W does no longer come with manuals (it even often don't come with media) is it still covered by this trademark application?

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[doctormetal]

Where I live (The Netherlands) trademarks that are words of a natural language are not protected in any way. Everybody can use windows, word, office, money the way they like. If it is listed in a dictionary it can be freely used. Almost all microsoft product use plain english words and are not protected.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft applied for a trademark on Windows, but in the Lindows case Judge Coughenour ruled that it was invalid:

"Lindows.com has presented sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of validity of the Windows mark," Coughenour wrote. "It is necessary to emphasize that, at this nascent stage in the litigation, the court's determination that there are serious questions regarding whether Windows is a non-generic name and thus eligible for the protections of federal trademark law is not a conclusive finding that the trademark is invalid."

source.

Another informative summary of the same ruling on MS's preliminary injunction.

Yet another report, or, uh, bricolage, whatever.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[Audacious]

From what I understand of Trademark law there are a few rules which have to be followed in the United States:

1. Not in use prior to the origination of trademarks as a general term. (ie: "Windows" is a general term, "Microsoft Windows" is not. Microsoft's big problem is that they trademarked just "Windows". (If I remember correctly.) Therein lies the rub.) This is where the "Olympics" problem also occurs. Since the Greeks coined the phrase "Olympics" over 2,000 years ago - no one can claim to own the word "Olympics" and would be laughed out of court for trying to claim it. (However, again - you first have to go to court and be willing to fight for it in order to have it thrown out. And that is the catch. If you aren't willing to stand up to a bunch of bullies - then you get what you deserve. And that is why things are the way they are.)

2. Trademarks can be made to cover entire areas or everything dependent upon how the wording is done on the application. (See Apple Computer Inc.'s having to deal with the company who created the Macintosh Stereo Systems. Or look at the Beatles trademarking the "Apple" logo for their records. [Notice also that the Beatles' Apple logo isn't just the word but is also a pictograph. So that has to be taken into consideration as well.)

3. Trademarks have to be defended or they return to the general public. This is why you see so many threats of lawsuits. McDonald's is very aggressive in their pursuit of anyone who might have a name even remotely sounding like theirs.

4. Trademarks also can not become general terms. This is called "dilution of a trademark." This is also why people can no longer refer to making a copy of something on a copying machine as "Xerox'ing something" or "making a Xerox". Why colas sold in restaurants have to be distinguished by trademark name and not just as "cokes", and why you use a tissue and not a "kleenex". All of these companies had to fight to keep their trademarks from becoming so diluted in normal speech that they no longer were considered trademarks.

(Offtopic: I have a new idea for submitting stuff to SlashDot - integrated spell checker! Put it next to "Submit" and "Preview". I know I could have used one writing this up. :-) )

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[stevew]

If I recall correctly, and this is from memory so I'm not claiming it's accurate, but MS was denied twice before the Trademark was granted. Note the Filing date of 1990! That sort of supports my conjecture.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[axxackall]

As for whether or not Windows is a registered trademark in Russia or not, I have to say I'd be very, very surprised if it is not. And if it isn't , then someone in Russia ought to go and register that trademark NOW.

Forget it. Russia uses a different alphabyte and there is no way to get Windows registered in Russia using that alphabyte. It might be registered as "Okna" (just written in cyrillic), but if so - most of Russian will laugh to the death upon it. Besides, same as in Nitherlands, Russian gov will not approve a common Russian word for a trademark - they are more corrupted than in America, but less stupid.

Re:Yes, Windows is a common term

[sconeu]

Win1 was announced '83, release 85? 86? Win 1.03 was bundled with my Tandon 286 back in Nov 1988.
Win2 was released somewhere between mid-88 and mid-99.
Win3 was released Jun '90. (I remember sitting in the hospital, with my wife in labor, having brought the BYTE mag with "Who needs OS/2?" on the cover -- she was asleep at the time, before you flame me).

What about ' works with windows'

[nurb432]

Wonder if you can even use the word Windows *anywhere* in your ad campaign...

Sure they have to defend a trademark or loose it, but this is a bit silly.

What about Windex?

[DJ_Goldfingerz]

Now would M$ add windex to the list?

I mean it is a windows product ;-)

Not windex, windex!

Grow up?

[Doomrat]

Come on Slashdot editors, the whole reporting-on-M$'s-every-move thing is getting REALLY old now. Do you realise that the people who are capable of thinking for theirselves are generally rolling their eyes at almost every headline posted? Why don't you try being a little less biased, and maybe we won't think you are all whining geeks. Sure, nothing wrong with being a geek, as long as you embody some of the positive qualities rather than all of the negative ones.

Moderators: Mod me down all you like, but perhaps a better use of your time would be to reply with constructive criticism.

Re:Grow up?

[MarvinMouse]

Normally I don't rant, but I feel it is necessary after reading one after another of these useless postings...

Slashdot is not a democratic system, you cannot vote which stories will get posted. It is a system run by the editors and they have full license to place whatever they want on the front page. Now, I understand you don't like Microsoft stories obviously, but some people do, and if you crawl out of your hole and look around you may notice these other people, and then realize why the slashdot editors post these stories.

If you want something else, go somewhere else, or block it using your front page settings for Slashdot, but don't waste posting space and time just to complain that someone isn't putting the stories you want all the time.

Right now, I think the grow up you put in your subject line is appropriate for you. Grow up! and realize that the world is not always how you want it. A part of slashdot and something that the editors like is the the "whole reporting-on-M$'s-every-move thing" If you don't like it, then block it, read other sites, or just ignore it. Hell, e-mail the editors, their e-mails are at the tops of the page. But complaining about it in the postings for that story is off-topic, annoying, and pointless.

*sigh*

I am sorry if I sound harsh, I am just tired of reading these postings over and over again.

Re:Grow up?

[Doomrat]

Well, no. Posting a criticism against something in the hope that I can find out other people's opinions (and it worked) is not the same as stamping my feet on the ground and screaming like a kid because I can't get my own way. Valuable posting space? Do you really think that other people will miss important posts because of this single thread?

Re:Grow up?

[Tony-A]

the whole reporting-on-M$'s-every-move thing is getting REALLY old now.
Hmmmm, either Microsoft is getting sensitive or slashdot is getting some influential readership. Time will of course solve the problem. When Microsoft quits moving. Until then, I like the reasonable assurance that I can point a suit to http://slashdot.org at any time of his or her choosing to get a feel of what Microsoft is up to.

Re:Grow up?

[Stormie]

Slashdot is not a democratic system, you cannot vote which stories will get posted. It is a system run by the editors and they have full license to place whatever they want on the front page.

..and as many times as they like, too!

The horse has bolted

[Alain Williams]

Vendors have been calling things 'XXX for Windows' for years. M$ liked it to start with because it enhanced the visibility of their operating system.

Then they came to not bother, everyone knew about M$ Windows.

Now they are trying to grab control of a generic word so that they can get at 'Lindows'. Sorry: precedence has been set for such a long time.

The above is the rational view. To know what the legal view is, first find a dice ...

Next MS Word

[MacAndrew]

"monopoly"

I really wonder...

[Mac Degger]

So why did Windows Commander change it's name? I mean, the name pretty much sums up what it does, it has brand recognition...and I assume they have an up-to-date lawyer (one familliar with the recent Lindows case). So why? Did MS threaten something, or what?

Make your own name

[DeadSea]

Even if Microsoft doesn't own the word Windows, I would still advise software authors to choose creative names. Product names do not have to be descriptive, they are often better wacky. Yahoo does just fine without the word "directory" in its name. Same your Ebay without "auctions".

If your product does something useful, people will associate any name you choose with the functionality of your product. Just because your product runs on Windows or is written in Java, you should not feel that you should include the word in the title. Just because your software is an FTP client, you don't have to name it JoeFTP.

Naming your product similarly to another project piggy backs on their efforts. I would rather have my stuff stand on its own merits. Naming after functionality, platform, or language can later be limiting if you ever want to expand your functionality or port it to other platforms.

Re:Make your own name

[david_g]

kYou gKnow, gI'm kGlad gMost kOpen gSource kDesktop gProgram kDevelopers gAre kPretty gOriginal kWhen gChoosing kTheir gProgram kNames.

Re:Make your own name

[richie2000]

Naming your product similarly to another project piggy backs on their efforts.

Exactly. What if people started naming stuff after other stuff, maybe like naming Linux GNU/Linux, getting a free ride from the fine folks doing the GNU? ;-)

Re:Make your own name

[rudedog]

Please please please mod this up.

Re:Make your own name

[Artifex]

If your product does something useful, people will associate any name you choose with the functionality of your product

To a certain extent this is true, anyway. However, sometimes technical-sounding names, or derivatives of other names, are better for propagation, especially if they're easy to say.

"MP3" became a hit because it showed a connection to "MPEG" but wasn't "MPEG 2 Layer 3," the original name. This is probably why the "Ogg" series of names is virtually unknown outside of geeky types - what "normal" person can speak Klingon with a straight face? It's also why "DivX ;-)" is always just called "DivX," even though that name really refers to an obsolete media distribution platform. This is why "MS Windows" has become known as "Windows."

On the other hand, there's also "Xerox"...

Tune in tonight for...

[DahGhostfacedFiddlah]

Your Rights Online: But what about the glassblowers?
Posted by Hemos on Friday, November 29, @7:32PM
from the 500-pound-gorilla-named-Steve dept.
Clevername writes "It's not like we didn't see it coming. Micro$oft has apparently decided once again that all our Windows are belong to them. This time they're attempting to stop the use of the word Windows in all software packages but their own. This has affected such software packages as Total Commander (nee Windows Commander) and Farsighter (nee Windows Spy). When will the madness end? Another reader pointed us to this list of potential targets. Will I have to start getting Microsoft's prmission to rennovate my house?

( Read More... | 4 of 330 comments | Your Rights Online

How can you trademark a word?

[Lokist]

A door is a door... Plural its "Doors"... A window is a window... Plural its ....Guess we have to rename that one don't we... Hey buddy... Go over there and open those windowetts.

Translation

[hankwang]

Microsoft: 'Windows' in software name is not allowed.

Friday, November 29, 2002 - Microsoft has asked manufacturers of software with the name 'Windows' to choose a different name.

by Maarten Reijnders

This appears after a quick tour along the manufacturers of software listed on the lindows.com site. The makers of 'Windows Spy' and 'Windows Backup Wizard' received a letter from Microsoft's lawyers, as they confirmed to WebWereld.

Earlier, the maker of 'Windows Commander' had changed the name of its program into 'Total Commander'. He did so after having received a letter from Microsoft's lawyers.

The Russian maker of 'Windows Backup Wizard' decided not to conform to the request he received from Microsoft in July. Alexander Tchirkov of Windows Backup Wizard: "I received a letter of Microsoft's lawyers with the recommendation to change the name of my program into 'Backup Wizard for Windows(R)'."

"I am not planning to change the name of my program. But Christian Ghisler (maker of Windows Commander, MR) had already been forced to change the name of his software, so anything is possible", says Tchirkov who points out that Windows isn't a registered trademark in Russia.

Software manufacturer Sureshot, however, did decide to change the name of the program 'Windows Spy' into 'Farsighter'. "Microsoft appears to possess the term 'Windows'", Jon, of Sureshot, sighs.

Windows Commander, Windows Backup Wizard, and Windows Spy are mentioned on a list composed by the manufacturers of the Linux-based operating system Lindows. The company plans to use this list in a juridical procedure that Microsoft has started against Lindows.

Microsoft believes that 'Lindows' is too similar to 'Windows' and demands therefore that Lindows stops using that name. In March, the judge ruled that Lindows is allowed to use the name until the final decision of the court.

Since the list at Lindows.com was published, it appears that not only the names of Windows Commander and Windows Spy have been changed, but also the ones of Windows Network Booster and Windows Personalizer 2000. At least, the programs are no longer available at their original name at Download.com

Understandable actually

[CoffeeJedi]

When I see the name "Windows Backup Wizard", I assume that its a wizard included with Windows to do backups, and as such, an MS product. However the name "Backup Wizard for Windows" is much clearer in showing that it is not part of the Windows OS. They just don't want to be blamed if something goes wrong with that software and someone's hard drive get eaten.

Famous last words

[EMH_Mark3]

"Tchirkov says Windows is not a registered trademark in Russia."

Heh.. I hope he doesn't plan to ever come to the US :)

Windows ownership argued in Apple Lawsuit

[goombah99]

As I recall way back when Apple sued Microsoft over the look and feel of its operating system, Microsoft argues that Windows was a generic term. Now they want to reverse their position. Mayb we should reveit the look and feel issue.

Besides lots of thigs run on windows besides software. Windex runs on windows, bird shit runs on windows.

What's the fuss?

[JMZero]

The name Windows Backup certainly gives the impression that it might be produced or sanctioned by MS (as THE Windows Backup Wizard or some such) even though MS isn't in the habit of calling things "Windows Doongle Dongle".

First off, this isn't a generic use of the word "Windows" and saying so is really stupid. Similarly, I surely hope I wouldn't be able to call my new product "Sun Network Management Administrator" (even though sun is a dictionary word). I would expect to be able to sell "Sun Dishwasher Liquid" (although that would be a poor name for a network management system) or to make a movie called "Solaris".

They may not be able to win, as (as other's have pointed out) I don't know that they have a trademark on the word "Windows". Either way, in the "spirit of the law", this is a reasonable request. The suggested alternate name is a perfectly reasonable compromise (it's clearer, too), and I'd suggest that they don't want to switch to it specifically because they want to continue getting goodwill off of their current name and/or get free press.

And don't bother telling me MS is evil - in this case that would be a real strong signal of a dull, well-rutted mind.

Re:What's the fuss?

[Reziac]

As a somewhat bizarre example.. the word "telesis". It's a perfectly good Greek word that could be roughly translated as "foresight". It's a registered trademark for all sorts of different things worldwide, but the one most people think of hereabouts is the late Pacific Bell.

I use interesting Greek words to name one branch of my Labrador bloodline, hence I hung one with "Longplain Telesis". It took about 6 extra months to process, probably because it tripped a trademark flag and had to be researched.

Re:What's the fuss?

[stratjakt]

And you can see by MSFTs actions they are being reasonable.

They don't have a problem with:

Backup Wizard for Windows(R)

But they do have a problem with:

Windows Backup Wizard.

And, parent already stated the reasons why. The second is misleading, and connotes some sort of MSFT sanction. The first plainly denotes a 3rd party product designed for Windows.

I might just write a military strategy game and call it "The Linux Colonel".

Re:What's the fuss?

[Rogerborg]

I surely hope I wouldn't be able to call my new product "Sun Network Management Administrator"

Why would you do that when you probably mean to call it "Solaris Network Management Administrator", which describes what it is rather than passing off who made it. Similarly "Windows Gadget" is descriptive and very different from "Microsoft Gadget". Your example is badly flawed.

Re:What's the fuss?

[11slashdot]

If I have software called Linux Commander, do you really think
its part of the kernel?

And your Sun comparison is way off. The direct analogy would be

Solaris modifier

Or, it would have been analagous if the M$ targets were calling their software

Microsoft modifier

In other words, to refute your first sentence, absolutely nobody
I know would think that "Windows Backup", presented in
an appropriate manner, was produced or sanctioned by M$

Said another way, don't you think the intention of the targets
is a relevant question in this case? - are they trying to give
the impression of being a Microsoft product?

Re:What's the fuss?

[mjh]

In other words, to refute your first sentence, absolutely nobody I know would think that "Windows Backup", presented in an appropriate manner, was produced or sanctioned by M$

Well, that's the rub, isn't it? Of course if it's presented in an appropriate manner, it's not going to be confusing. But the only presentation that matters for this is the name (i.e. "Windows Backup"). Without any additional context, it's not too difficult to imagine someone getting confused as to who produced it or sanctioned it.

Re:What's the fuss?

[Bas_Wijnen]

And don't bother telling me MS is evil - in this case that would be a real strong signal of a dull, well-rutted mind.

Except for that line, your comment makes sense. They're still evil, though. But not because of what they're doing here ;-)

Re:What's the fuss?

[nrosier]

Similarly, I surely hope I wouldn't be able to call my new product "Sun Network Management Administrator" (even though sun is a dictionary word). I would expect to be able to sell "Sun Dishwasher Liquid" (although that would be a poor name for a network management system) or to make a movie called "Solaris".

There would be a difference: Sun stands for Stanford University Network and is the name of the company. Thus calling it Sun Network Management Adminstrator would be using another company's name.
They aren't calling it Microsoft or MS but a generic word: Windows. Calling it Solaris blablabla would be OK. Calling it Sun Solaris blablabla again would be confusing.
Just run winver and you'll see it's Microsoft (R) Windows. Every application I've seen says Microsoft blablabla.
MS just doesn't have a case

Re:What's the fuss?

[phillymjs]

...even though MS isn't in the habit of calling things "Windows Doongle Dongle".

What are you talking about? They use it all the time! "Windows Update," "Windows Catalog," "Windows Media Player," "Windows Messenger," "Windows Movie Maker," and "Windows Explorer" are all sitting in the Start menu of my XP box.

Having said that, I think these third-party software makers should tell Microsoft to go fsck themselves. Microsoft chose their product names with the specific intent of co-opting the generic terms-- they reaped the benefit of that almost from the day they started doing it, and now they're going to cry about it when the pendulum swings the other way? Forget it! I know that all the targets will knuckle under because they can't afford the lawyers to fight this bullying, but if this ever made it into a courtroom, I think the little guys would prevail.

~Philly

Re:What's the fuss?

[JMZero]

"Windows Update," "Windows Catalog," "Windows Media Player," "Windows Messenger," "Windows Movie Maker," and "Windows Explorer"

You're right - I just couldn't think of any boxed MS products that they might see on a shelf next to "Windows Backup Wizard". Still, certainly a valid point.

I think the little guys would prevail.

Quite possibly right, and perhaps, as you say, MS would deserve the loss for choosing a generic name.

In this particular case I would have advised them not to fight, though. Even if they win, they now have an enemy that has a lot of power over their destiny (Oops, we now include backup features. Oops, with our latest security patch you can't read those files without doing something special when you install your software). When you make add-ons, do you really want to be biting this kind of hand? Certainly not an argument on principles, but it's a practical consideration I'd think.

The other consideration is that the name MS suggested would have been pretty much just as good.

Re:What's the fuss?

[Kashif Shaikh]

If I have software called Linux Commander, do you really think its part of the kernel?

Yes, because you didn't call it GNU/Linux Commander.

Dimmwit:)

Re:What's the fuss?

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

Oops, we now include backup features.
They already do. Nothing intricate, but they hae backup stuff.

And you don't need to piss off MS to have them try to destroy you. Ask Citrix, Spyglass, or Stac, the makers of Stacker, or a bunch of other companies I can't think of off the top of my head.

Re:What's the fuss?

[Tony-A]

"Developers, Developers, Developers."
Developing what? Windows Software?
Seems like Microsoft is heading in the direction of owning ALL Windows Software.
Yours?

In defense of maturity

[smoondog]

I find the Microsoft posts interesting and useful. This sort of badgering (by posting headline after headline) keeps us informed of Microsoft's (generally shitty) moves. Slashdot is definately biased and the editors have admitted it in the past. Perhaps you aren't aware that you can remove all Microsoft stories from your view in your user preferences?

-Sean

Re:In defense of maturity

[Doomrat]

It's not so much the amount of M$ stories, but the ratio of anti-M$ stories to anti-other-stuff stories. Of course, I'm not a fan of M$, but I believe that the war would be won a lot more quickly if the advantages and disadvantages from both sides were pointed out and weighed/discussed.

Re:In defense of maturity

[Reziac]

Good points. Unfortunately it's much more fashionable to be seen bashing M$ (guaranteed to get +1, Insightful) than to be seen bashing Linux or Apple (guaranteed to get -1, Flamebait), regardless of how much they may or may not deserve the bashing (which they've all earned at various times, I'd say in about equal measure albeit for different things).

Ironically, when I complained that M$'s activation and licensing bullshit was damaging the value of my M$ stock, I got flamed!! How's that for Slashdot logic??!

Re:In defense of maturity

[Reziac]

Maybe karma should be split up so you have to earn it separately for every major topic. ;)

What's the big deal?

[MacAndrew]

Window, huh?

I don't understand why these smaller companies don't just stand up to Microsoft and take them to court. I mean, I think the Department of Justice and various states demonstrated pretty clearly that all you need to go up against Microsoft is millions of dollars and a small army of lawyers. If you don't believe me, or squeak something about DOJ not really being successful, consider "little guy" Sun Microsystems, who sued over Java.

More seriously, this is getting ridiculous. I can understand Microsoft wanted to protect its branding -- names like Lindows are meant to draw people away from MS Windows -- but they're just bullies.

You know, a real solution would be for someone to come up with a new metaphor, or paradigm.

But I'll never cave to this intimidation! See, I've bared a Window® into my soul. This is our Window® of opportunity to take a stand against this Window® dressing. It's our Window®

Damn, it's getting stuffy in here, excuse me while I go open the f*cking Window®.

Re:What's the big deal?

[MacAndrew]

Wow. Someone actually follows my links?

I was tired of dictionary.com's rather thin definitions, but hardly expected one so ... poetic ... for such a common and untrademarkable (!) word.

at one time windows contained no glass

And just how cold did THAT get?

I have the answer...

[Nefrayu]

As any avid /.er knows already, we can from here on out refer to any incarnation of Windows (software, automotive, or building portal) as a "security hole."


"Dear ___,
Please cease and desist the use of the phrase "security hole" as this is a registered trademark of the Microsoft corporation. As is well known throught the international community, we make the biggest and best security holes, and wouldn't want people to confuse your small, easily fixable holes with our more presigious, gaping security holes (heretofore refered to as "new features" and/or "Outlook") in all of our software products.
Thank you for your time.

How can this work?

[haggar]

Company A contacts company B and says "you can't use the name X for your product, we suggest you use Y".

So, company B obliges....

What the fuck? Why? If X is something as generic as Windows and is not trademarked, I can use it for whatever the hell I like.

Does this mean we may not use Office, Money, Exchange etc. etc. in naming our porducts? I have an incredible itch to challenge this.

Re:How can this work?

[0x0d0a]

Because company A is large and not making idle threats about suing, and company B's costs in changing their name may be less than paying for defending against the lawsuit (which they might end up losing, anyway).

Comes with the territory

[bstadil]

The best defense I can think of that I have never seen (Maybe its there just missed it) in any articles let alone legal Briefs on using common names for a product is that the risk of dilution comes with the territory.

This is offset by the initial benefit you get when you chose it. Choose a generic non descript name and your effort to make it stick in peoples mind is MUCH harder than using a descriptive name.

Take the story we had the other day about eVISA. The Credit card organization chose VISA precisely because it was a well known word with a meaning that dovetailed with their positioning idea. IE Something that allows you to go some place with no problem. They got the benefit now live with the drawback.

Now Windows. What the F.... It was chosen because it described exactly what the program was trying to do with a metaphor that everyone understood. They reaped the benefit now they should live with the drawback, or change themselves.

Good initial names that turns on the corporation is common. Take Kentucky Fried Chicken. They now spend millions to get rid of the Fried connotation as they repositions themselves as KFC. Does that mean that using the initial name was foolish? No, They wouldn't have got to where they are without the initial descriptive name.

Same can be argued for Microsoft's Windows,

Truly Amazing

[woogieoogieboogie]

It isn't the use of the word windows which is pissing off Microsoft, there is nothing they can do about that. It is the deceptive marketing of crap companies trying to legitimize themselves by insinuating they are "approved" by Microsoft for the Windows operating system. Even worse is the fact that these crap software companies are putting out crap products which adversely impact a computers performance and it is Microsoft who bears the burden of support for those customers as well as having their brand tarnished.

Try and make a steering wheel cover and call it Porsche Commander and claim that it makes you drive your Porshe better, Porshe would sue your balls off.

Re:Truly Amazing

[Ektanoor]

And why wouldn't be cool for X, Apple, IBM and Xerox to sue the deceptive marketing of a crap company that stole everything outta their interfaces to create Windows??? As an ex-system programmer I very well know that lots of that damn kernel crap inside Windows were purely and simply OS/2 core components... And don't tell me that this was M$'s part. Anyway, lots of development and a huge part of testing was made by IBM, before BG made that huge party back in 1987...

And besides, Before hold your tongue before calling anyone else's product "crap". Windows Commander is a very popular product and I know this because lots of Windows fans use it and prefer it to the real crap of Internet Explorer playing File Manager.

Re:Truly Amazing

[bstadil]

No, I understand that they want to Leech of Microsoft. The point I was trying to make is that Microsoft implicitly accepted that risk when they picked a generic name.

Your point is a valid but different from the point I was trying to make.

Re:Truly Amazing

[Tony-A]

Try and make a steering wheel cover and call it Porsche Commander and claim that it makes you drive your Porshe better, Porshe would sue your balls off.
Nah, you'd have better luck with calling it Jeep Commander which would be more likely to raise a few hackles.

Sorry, trademark on "Windows" invalid

[dh003i]

Windows is a generic term. It always has been a generic term and always will be a generic term. In every GUI, different frames of programs are called "windows". "Windows" should have never received a trademark in the first place, as it was generic when the trademark was granted.

Thus, no one should heed MS's demands to change their name. The Lindows case already proved the "windows" trademark was void.

How to say "Windows"

[msquadrat]

Microsoft very clearly tells you how not to say "Windows" and the right way to call it:

Incorrect
When you start up Windows, click on the...
Correct
When you start up Microsoft® Windows® operating system, click on the...

They must have interesting keyboards in Redmond, typing "®" in their everyday correspondence...

Re:How to say "Windows"

[EzInKy]

Every one of their links gave me this error:

"%1 is not a valid Win32 application"

I guess they don't think they suck that much, eh?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Getting out of hand.. damnit hell

[Jippy_]

ugh.. can I spell or what...

Windows Trademark?

[WPIDalamar]

I thought the trademark was on "Microsoft Windows" not just "Windows". I mean really, if I trade mark something like "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." I can't go on and claim ownership to "Stuff that matters", or "Nerds" can I?

I hope NullSoft receives a letter...

[blonde rser]

and is intimidated enough to change the name of WinAmp. Seems like rough just for the whole FreeAmp -> Zinf event

Re:Windows ownership argued in Apple Lawsuit

[Reziac]

Someone should dig up the old Apple vs M$ case and waggle it in court during these new M$ vs Anything-Called-Windows cases. Would be fun to watch M$ backpedal and explain their way out of their own words.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

These letters

[Mr_Silver]

Given that it's been repeatidly pointed out that Microsoft couldn't trademark the name "Windows" I'd be interested to see the letter.

ie. Was it a "friendly" request that they consider changing their name or did they actually threaten them with something?

If it was the former, then it's up to the owner of that product to decide whether or not he/she would like to change. If it's the latter, then MS are definately pushing the boundaries.

Mind you, seems to be a completely silly thing to get upset about, after all, "Windows Blah" implies "Blah for Windows" - so I really can't see the point in asking for a name change.

This Sucks!

[spoonist]

I amd the recipient of one of these letters. Here's the deal:

I was told to stop using the term Windows(tm) in conjunction with my home improvement project. I was informed that now I have to call the items openings especially in the wall of a building for admission of light and air that is usually closed by casements or sashes containing transparent material (as glass) and capable of being opened and shut .

This has put a real crimp in my dealings with my contractor. They think I'm crazy for using such a long phrase when a common word would suffice.

Is that insane, or what?

Re:This Sucks!

[uncoveror]

We printed an article about just this thing at uncoveror.com. Microsoft sued Andersen and Pella over use of the term, "Windows."

Hint: It's not because they're using "Windows"

[Gruneun]

There's a huge implication made by calling something "Windows Widgets" instead of "Widgets for Windows" The latter implies that it's an add-on utility for the Microsoft OS, while the former implies a more direct relationship. If enough people eased up on the bandwagon MS-bashing, they might see the point.

I have a strange feeling that if Microsoft came out with a product called "MS Linux Toolset" the vast majority of people here would have an aneurysm. They may be a little less rabid about "MS Toolset for Linux"

Re:Hint: It's not because they're using "Windows"

[Gruneun]

Linux is a made up word that is trademarked. Not a common word that was used before Microsoft decided to try to claim it.

Right. That would be fine if someone came out with "Windows Cleaner" and the software had to do with pieces of translucent material that provide a view to the interior of a building. They don't. They are trying to imply a direct tie to the Microsoft OS.

Read the damn article. MS isn't trying to prevent them from using the word. They're just requesting that they use the OS name in a way that separates it from the third-party product.

They have to do it.

[AzrealAO]

Trademark's are defend it or lose it. Unlike a Trademark, Copyright and Patents can be selectively enforced or licenced with no bearing on the status of the Copyright or Patent.

This just in �

[Snork Asaurus]

Popular Canadian rock group Rush has received a letter from Microsoft's lawyers, directing them to cease and desist selling their 1985 album under the title "Power Windows". Several hundred other artists (some of whom are dead) received similar letters ordering them to remove the word "Windows" from their song titles.

The RIAA rushed to the artists' defense and had this to say: "Bug off".

A court battle of unprecedented magnitude and length is expected to follow as the two Titans square off.

Elsewhere in the news ...

- a worldwide shortage of lawyers is forecast for the next 5 years for obvious reasons

- Webster's dictionary is bracing itself for a legal battle with Microsoft for including some definitions of the word "Windows" other than "An inexpensive and secure computer operating system from the philanthropic people at Microsoft (All praise Microsoft!) that should by law be the only operating system allowed on any computer".

- Home Depot has been requested by Microsoft stop advertising "We Sell Windows" and are evaluating a suggestion from Microsoft that they instead advertise "Well Sell Transparent or Semi-Transparent Glass Coverings for Holes Often Found In The Sides of Buildings and Other Structures That Usually Allow The Passage Of Some Degree Of Light"

bluff

[Veteran]

All Microsoft is doing is running a bluff. Companies do this sort of thing all the time. For example when they give you an employment contract to sign they don't tell you that you can change the contract; they try to bluff you into signing it as it is.

If the companies back down Microsoft wins. If they go to court Microsoft will eventually fold - but only after it costs the other company a lot of money. Most companies fold because they can't afford the monetary hit; even though Microsoft hasn't got a legal leg to stand on, and has lost in court every time they have tried to enforce a trademark on the word "windows".

Guess what? Not everything in life is fair. Microsoft's behavior - if you don't recognize it - is exactly that of a school yard bully. They figure they can get away with it, and so far no court has been willing to give them a bloody enough nose to get them to stop.

BS You can use Windows FREELY

[xintegerx]

Trademarks like ASPIRIN and ESCALATOR are no longer trademarks because people begun calling those types of products by their trademark. ESCALATOR could still be a real trademark if people were told to call it ESCALATOR BRAND moving stairway. Since people say WINDOWS when they mean OPERATING SYSTEM, Windows is generic like the court says! Remember, Asprin and Escalator used to dominate the whole market so NOT using their name was hard... But the terms died!

This is a HUGE win. I wonder if Microsoft will keep pursuing this to higher courts to be told that their trademark is still generic? That's a big risk, and they may or may not.

However, they are showing they are Enforcing their trademark, which is a good way to demonstrate that they care about the trademark. Still, they might fall to something else..

WHY????? Here's the scoop: If a court declares a trademark to be generic, then it is closer to its death.

It is very simple. Trademarks like ROLLERBLADE could go to genocide when people keep saying "I'm gonna go rollerblading." That's why ROLLERBLADE has been putting ads to remind consumers these are ROLLERBLADE BRAND In-Line Skates.

when people refer to those types of products by the trademark name

then it stands to become generic. I suspect the way it happens is through courts.... That's why I suspect Microsoft might not pursue the generic argument in higher courts ;) And if it doesn't, maybe the ruling stands that it is generic!

So, the term Windows is now generic. YOU CAN USE IT FREELY. Microsoft used the term Windows, which is like generic already especially in windowed operating systems. However, its biggest death is that Microsoft did not use the term "Windows Operating System."

A LOT of people talk about Windows when they should be saying "Operating System(s)". Hence, Windows IS generic like the court says. THATS Why the court said it's generic, not because Windows are real glass things in real life...

Re:BS You can use Windows FREELY

[inode_buddha]

very reminiscent of "kleenex", which probably set the legal precedent for all this. Notice now that there are probably a dozen different manufacturers of "kleenex" in North America... great point you made, BTW.

Just IMHO, adding the term "operating system" would only confuse most users. Not that this is a good thing, it just shows how MS has abused technical literacy (and sheer laziness) to its own ends in North America.

Re:BS You can use Windows FREELY

[no soup for you]

Trademarks like ASPIRIN and ESCALATOR are no longer trademarks because people begun calling those types of products by their trademark

Aspirin was a trademark of the Bayer AG, a German Corporation. It was given up following WWI. From The 100 Year History of Aspirin:

Aspirin was first sold as a powder. In 1915, the first Aspirin tablets were made. Interestingly, Aspirin ® and Heroin ® were once trademarks belonging to Bayer. After Germany lost World War I, Bayer was forced to give up both trademarks as part of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.

Re:BS You can use Windows FREELY

[no soup for you]

True, but you also said "because people begun calling those types of products by their trademark"

My point was solely that Aspirin was no longer a trademark because of a treaty, not because they didn't defend their trademark.

Here's hoping

[Rogerborg]

That Phoenix changes its name to "Windows of Perception" or something similar

"Microsoft Windows"

[0x0d0a]

Microsoft chose to call their product "Microsoft Windows" in an attempt to get product-company association. That's fine, but they forego the ability to attack people making products called "Remote Windows" or "CacheWindows".

Oh, they'll probably make some stupid case about how the thing is close enough to cause confusion, but I have a hard time seeing a judge buying it.

Re:"Microsoft Windows"

[EvanED]

They don't need to get a judge to buy it. All they need to do is cause a judge to consider it until their opponent runs out of legal money.

Re:"Microsoft Windows"

[IXI]

but I have a hard time seeing a judge buying it.

If the judge doesn't buy it, M$ will buy the judge.

AOL

[bstadil]

Nullsoft is owned by AOL Time Warner. The likelyhood of them getting a letter is zero, (or close) AOL would probably welcome such a request as they can go to court and most likely invalifdate MS' right to the generic name windows.

Re:Getting out of hand.. damnit hell

[Jippy_]

That could have been intentional, you know

Haha.. I thought the same thing myself after I posted my second reply there. I'm glad someone else thought so too. :)

MS wasn't *that* stupid

[0x0d0a]

It's kind of ugly for everyone involved. "window" is definitely a generic term for a windowing interface. When MS chose the term "Microsoft Windows", they sure as hell weren't thinking of trademark issues.

The problem is that then Lindows came out. Now, "Lindows" isn't just a windowing system -- it's an operating system, rather similar to what MS is selling. Furthermore, Wal-Mart sells these damn little boxes to people who have little computer experience and say that they have "Lindows" and are "Windows compatible". There's a pretty good case for confusion there if you have an inexperienced buyer. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the Lindows people -- I think it's fair to claim that they were trying to take advantage of confusion.

So MS sues them. Probably the only justified legal move MS has made in the last decade. The judge not *only* denies the injunction, but states that "Windows" is/has become a generic term. So now Microsoft is panicking and trying to do damage control to regain control of their product name. They go after everyone using Windows to try to build up a stronger case for future trademark infringement suits. There's nothing MS would hate more than ten companies out of China selling WINE+Linux+GNOME systems called "Super Windows".

Frankly, this whole thing wouldn't have happened if the Lindows people hadn't pulled their attempt to grab a little MS market share...

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[Dan Ost]

Hmm...Super Windows...sounds like good fodder
for a Simpsons episode.

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[flossie]

say that they ... are "Windows compatible"

Saying that something is {some trademark} compatible isn't a problem. You can sell a Ford compatible wheel without Ford's permission. It is only if you try to claim or imply that you have Ford's approval or are in some way connected with the company that you could run into legal difficulties.

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[thogard]

What happens when the {some trademak} is no longer a name but a symbol and only a symbol? That is going to be a interesting long term question and there are several cases that show you can protect your self aginst bad publiscity by using just a symbol. I wonder how long it will be before McDonalds drops the name and just goes with the arches.

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[hayden]

So MS sues them. Probably the only justified legal move MS has made in the last decade.

Ummm, no. "Windows" is a generic term describing graphical user interfaces. MS has a trademark on "Microsoft Windows". You can't release a product called that but you are most entitled to call your product windows. What they were trying to do is make "windows" a trade mark by default.

MS made a mistake when they sued Lindows. If they'd have just ignored them they would be in a much better position.

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[orthogonal]

I wonder how long it will be before McDonalds drops the name and just goes with the arches.

Judging by the lack of literacy displayed online... all 2 soon now.

Re:MS wasn't *that* stupid

[0x0d0a]

No, "Windows" is a generic term used for a particular element of a GUI. It's not a generic term for an operating system as a whole.

Also, trademark law is built mostly to prevent companies from profiting by consumer confusion. There's a pretty strong argument (see my first post) that that's what the Lindows people were trying to do. So, yes, I don't think that "Lindows" is a reasonable choice on the part of the Lindows people.

It's only KDE

[0x0d0a]

The GTK/GTNOME people did it at first, but there's so much GNOME software now that it's pretty much abandoned -- essentially no new software starts with a g.

The KDE folks are still guilty. It makes the product names sound *dumb*, not "integrated" or whatever they're trying.

Microsoft Windows should change their name...

[dagg]

I think the obvious choice would be:

Operating System for Windows

For the majority of computer users... that would somehow make sense to them.

--
Your sex for windows

Linux! Safe for Colors, Makes Whites Brighter!!!

[Picass0]

Perhaps someone could make a laundry detergent named Windows and Microsoft would be forced to get a sense of humor.

point of trademarks and how this sucks.

[twitter]

The point of trademarks is to protect a company name and to protect the rest of us from confusion.

This move on M$'s part will dilute the trade marks of all the other companies involved and confuse each and every one of us. Take the "Windows Commander" example. Christian worked for years building up a name and reputation. Can you tell me what he's changing his name to without scrolling up the page? Christian just got ripped off and his new program is indistiguishable from many other utilities that do the same thing.

Nothing new really. Do business with or have anything to do with M$ and you will be burnt.

Selling you house?

[Openadvocate]

Also, if you are selling your house, you can no longer use the term Windows, you now have to call them "looking holes" or "those things made of glass"

Today Windows, Tomorrow "Win"

[Picass0]

The next step in the bullying will be to contact companies like Winzip Computing and force them to change the names of their software. Microsoft will claim to own "Win" and claim exclusive use.

And that means they go after all of the Spammers who send out the "Win a free vacation" emails. Slashdot will be forced to take the sides of spammers, which will be a distasteful but neccesary alliance.

And ultimately Microsoft goes after the companies that make those big clear glass things you look through.

OK, so I'm just in a very foul mood at the moment

[inode_buddha]

or maybe just becoming truly paranoid. Is it my imagination, or would these legal eagles trademark every possible combination of letters which form intelligible words as defined by an agreed-upon authoritative reference such as the Unabridged Oxford dictionary, if it were possible to do so?

It makes you wonder whose definition of "practical" the legal industry uses, and why on Earth should it prevail?

In the vein of being "practical", just try to read and understand an EULA or a mortgage contract from start to finish without assistance. Buzzards, the whole lot of 'em.

Well, ok maybe I've been reading The Register too much lately...

New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[Kashif Shaikh]

According to the Jargon File [tuxedo.org], it was so named because it was the successor of an earlier window system called "W".

In the beginning there was 'B', then came from it 'C'. Followed by C++, which is technically 'D'(stemming from the ++ operator).

Unfortunately an infidel has broken the 'ye olde code of law' and mistified everyone with C#. How does C# follow? Is it from C? or is it from C++?

Rather, the infidel has created a bastard language after sipping some java!

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[Col. Panic]

From Bjarne Stroustrup's, "The C++ Programming Language",

The name C++ (pronounced "see plus plus") was coined by Rick Mascitti in the summer of 1983. The name signifies the evolutionary nature of the changes from C; "++" is the C increment operator ... The language is not called D, because it is an extension of C, and it does not attempt to remedy problems by removing features.

I assumed the name C# was a clever way of playing on the name - calling it "C-sharp" as the next evolution. But I could be way off :)

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[Bert64]

There was already a programming language called E, it was for the amiga

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[The Smith]

Being British, I assumed that C# was pronounced "see hash" the first time I saw it.

Which seems oddly appropriate...

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[fishbowl]

"Being British, I assumed that C# was pronounced "see hash" the first time I saw it. "

What does being British have to do with not being a musician?

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[The Smith]

What does being British have to do with not being a musician?

As it happens I'm a musician as well, but for me the default pronunciation of the '#' symbol is "hash", unless the context implies it to mean either "number" or "sharp". As you might expect, music was far from my mind while reading about a new programming language from Microsoft.

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[Monkelectric]

As I understand it C# means (C++)++ . If you imagine the four pluses on top of eachother they become a sharp...(this could just be a rumor)

Re:New Infidel of Ye Olde naming convention.

[Simon Brooke]

In the beginning there was 'B', then came from it 'C'. Followed by C++, which is technically 'D'(stemming from the ++ operator).

How quickly history is forgotten.

Once upon a time (but by no means 'in the beginning'), on a continent so far away that the people spoke a language known as 'English', the sages of the City of Cambridge held colloquy with the sages of the City of London, and agreed upon a great programme and quest to create the ultimate programming language, which they named 'CPL', for 'Combined Programming Language'. And having named it, they argued and disputed for many bitter months about the nature of this language, and nothing was made which worked.

Then arose Richards of Cambridge, crying 'a plague on both your houses. I shall go off on my own and write a language which works, and I shall call it Basic Combined Programming Language, or BCPL for short. And this language shall run on a Virtual Machine, so that programmes[1] written in it shall be portable to all manner of hardware architectures.'

But this language went forth even to the land of the Merkins, for whom long words are unduly difficult, and so they had to make the name shorter. And because they (those primitive heathen) were not subtle enough to understand the value of portability, they also stripped out the virtual machine and made the compiler compile down to the bare metal.

And that was B, oh best beloved, but as you can see it wasn't the beginning.

[1]Richards also knew how to spell.

Trademark's are narrow in scope...

[AzrealAO]

Microsoft can't try to defend their Windows Trademark (which is in computer software) against Companies that make glass Windows, or Companies who install Windows in cars, or who create decorative Window artwork.

Just computer software, and especially when there is substantial risk of dilution of their trademark or confusion over the nature of the products. Which is precicly why they suggested that the Backup Software be changed to Backup Wizard for Windows(R). There is no risk of confusion that the product is actually sanctioned by Microsoft, and it acknowledges the Microsofts registered trademark.

National Fenestration Council

[Animats]

That's not a joke. The window industry's trade association is called the National Fenestration Rating Council.

Well...

[JMZero]

I'm sorry that I couldn't think of another OS that had a dictionary word as its name. I had figured my intent would be clear enough. I suppose "Macintosh File Thwicky" would maybe have been a little better example, though a little outdated in terms of what would actually be confusing.

But according to your scheme, I should still be able to write my tool for "Sun Networks". "Sun Network Management Administrator" - that's just descriptive. Similarly, I could write a tool called "Microsoft Network Admin Tool". I'm just describing what it does, not passing myself off as Microsoft. (And does it really matter how many people would refer to something as a "Sun Network"? Lots of people talk about Microsoft networks, and we're trying to be hypothetical).

I think we need a reasonable standard in terms of what's reasonable and descriptive and what is wrongly confusing to consumers. I posit that the name "Windows Backup Wizard" crosses what is at least a reasonable definition of that line. Where exactly that line is might be hard to legally define, and I certainly don't know how things will turn out in this case.

But given that there's at least a potential for this kind of confusion, why didn't this company just agree to change the name? Perhaps they benefit from this confusion? Perhaps they want free air time?

Ummm Hold on Is this not Illegal..

[Merlin_1102]

Microsoft cannot do this and if they took it to the courts I think it would fail (assuming that the defendant does not run out of money). This is because the Computer Defintion of Windows is Windows A trademark for any of a series of GUIs or GUI-based computer operating systems. - Dictionary.com The definition is NOT "A Microsoft Operating System". It is a GUI- for a series (does not specify microsoft) of Operating Systems. They cannot copyright a word like they are trying to do and if they can copyright the word then someone else could easily copyright the name George and sue everyone with that particular name claiming that friends and relatives are confusing him with other Georges.

I just saw a TV commercial with Dick Van Patton

[SensitiveMale]

selling some product called 'Hole in wall with glass'.

FYI, Microsoft's "Windows" trademark listings

[phillymjs]

These are all the listings I could find for the single word "Windows" that are registered to Microsoft.

Just from a cursory look at these, it would appear that the only way you could use "windows" in reference to a computer or electronic device without fear of a cease and desist letter from Microsoft would be to say, "If there weren't windows in my computer room, I would never see daylight."

Listing 1, Listing 2
Listing 3, Listing 4
Listing 5, Listing 6
Listing 7, Listing 8
Listing 9, Listing 10
Listing 11, Listing 12
Listing 13

~Philly

Hmmm

[JMZero]

Another replyer made your point much better than you did.. Go read my response there if you really want an answer.

They aren't calling it Microsoft or MS but a generic word: Windows. Calling it Solaris blablabla would be OK.

Calling it "Solaris Backup Wizard" would be OK? Is that what you meant to say, because I think Sun would have a shot at getting "Solaris Backup Wizard" shot down as confusing to consumers? Wouldn't "Backup Wizard for Solaris" be a clearer title?

If your case is instead that "Windows" is a generic word and doesn't get the same protection, then you may well be right in terms of how this case turns out. However, I think it's silly to pretend that "Windows" could have been referring to anything but the MS operating system in this case.

Just run winver and you'll see it's Microsoft (R) Windows. Every application I've seen says Microsoft blablabla

"Hmm. I'm not sure who wrote this Backup program. Was it Microsoft? I guess I could look at the box, but instead I'll buy it, take it home, and read the about box."

I don't think they're worried that "Windows Backup Wizard" is going to be confusing to people who have any idea what they're doing. However, it's certainly potentially confusing to MS's consumer base.

Ah, fuck. I HATE "EXPIRING" LINKS!

[phillymjs]

The point of the WWW is to be able to link to information! Deep links that expire are an abomination! Tim Berners-Lee is spinning in his grave (or would be, if he were dead)!

~Philly

alternatives

[hdparm]

All software written for that particular platform could be safelly called:

"XXX For Crappy Operating System From Redmond"

Replace XXX appropriately to get:

BFCOSF --> Backup Software

CFCOSF --> Commander

AVFCOSF --> AntiVirus, and so on.

If nothing, these ugly names may help in a battle to stop using said operating system.

This is the fuss

[Tony]

Microsoft hasn't concerned itself with software titled "Windows Foo" since the beginning. It's been over a decade since MS-Windows became popular, and nobody has confused Spinnaker software for Microsoft software; why the sudden interest in curtailing the "Windows Foo" titles?

Considering the companies that are being attacked are those listed on the Lindows site, this is a blatant tactic on Microsoft's part to reassert control over the word "Windows." This is yet another (admittedly mild) example of Microsoft's bullying tactics.

Microsoft is not evil, no more than the bully on the schoolground is evil. They are just big and stupid and incredibly fucking selfish, and they realize they must push everyone around if they are to have any power at all.

They are willing to hurt their supporters (makers of MS-Windows software) to get at a little enemy (Lindows). This doesn't make them evil. It just makes them untrustworthy, and there's nothing evil about an untrustworthy hippopatomus.

Not evil. Just dangerous.

Re:This is the fuss

[Tony-A]

Not evil. Just dangerous.
One degree of separation?

Re:OK, so I'm just in a very foul mood at the mome

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

Zilog tried to trademark Z (as in Z80), and Intel tried to trademark i (as in i486) when they got into their pissing match with AMD. Judge slapped them both down, and we get as a result way cool marketing names like Pentium (root: penta, 5, which is technically applicable only to Pentium and Pentium Pro, Pentium II, III, and 4 are all 6th gen processors) and Itanium.

During the Z80 case, the judge essentially said "If I let you do this, all I need is 25 other companies doing this and we have trademarked the English alphabet". Kind of true, the 240Z dates back to 1970, Zilog only started as a company in 1974, but if Zilog won, then there's no 'Z' car.

The other fun thing is Microsoft talking about how firm a trademark that Windows is - especially since there were windowing systems named windows, like XWindows - yet arguing in court that the pre-existing Internet Explorer trademark was weak, because it was too generic.

They're just going after little fish, ones that haven't gone through the MS approval process. If MS went after someone who'd actually fight this, they might weaken the trademark. If it's found in court to be too generic, it might be thrown out entirely. I'm surprised Billy decided to tread this thin ice. IANAL rules apply.

Microsoft has the full rights to do this...

[rye bean]

IMHO, Microsoft has the full right to do this.
Sure, windows is a common word, but Microsoft isn't sueing the glass making companies.
If you owned a company - Bobsoft and made an O/S -called BobOS - which you thought was really good, would you a)protect the name from people working off your achievment or b)Give everyone free reign over the name? You wouldn't sue all people who had the name Bob, but you wouls sue people using the name in their software to make it look like your brilliant company made it.

All in all, one heck of a legal minefield...

Re:Microsoft has the full rights to do this...

[glenstar]

wow... now we even have duplicate posts! Unfortunately, this was not a duplicate post to a duplicate story.

Good points...

[JMZero]

If I have software called Linux Commander, do you really think its part of the kernel?

I don't. Likely many people would. In a not altogether similar regard, you get plenty of people who say Linux sucks because their distribution has a poor window manager (or whatever). People are dumb, and don't know who makes what for whom. And they don't know that they shouldn't blame Linux when their window isn't the right size. Or Windows when Windows Backup Wizard didn't work the night they needed it.

People associate things that don't make sense to associate. I don't know how many people would think "Windows Backup Wizard" was an MS (or MS sanctioned) product, but I'm sure there would be some.

What Next? "Word"?...

[The Monster]

The English word 'Word', when capitalized, has been associated with Jesus Christ since at least the time of King James. I doubt that even Microsoft's attorneys are dumb enough to go there... The thought of ministers preaching that they are part of some kind of Satanic machinations in response should be sufficent to keep them from pulling that one.

Re:OK, so I'm just in a very foul mood at the mome

[inode_buddha]

Thanks for the very informative post; I hope it gets modded up. Unfortunately my attitude isn't improving. I *was* aware of Xerox's "windowing" UI, not to mention inventing the mouse to go along with it. (been around long enough to have used an IBM 608 with punch cards and all...)

Thank $DEITY a judge had some common sense. Thanks for the info, maybe I'll get over it.

IANAL applies to me too; I guess it's just the fact of using pedantry without an ethics to further one's own gain that ticks me off so hard.

For some reason, nothing that BillG and Co. do really surprises me that much anymore, they're all so predictable.

Embrace and Extend....

[siskbc]

Very interesting post. It sounds like their naming practice of their products is similar to their convention for "supporting" standards; ie, taking something existing (be it the word "Windows" or Javascript), and making it their own. With product names, they use trademark "law" (yes I use the term VERY loosely) to steal the word; with "standards" they make their version just different enough that small incompatibilities arise, thereby "owning" the standard as well.

It is brilliant, actually. Why come up with a name for a product when you can make yourself ubiquitous with an existing term AND proctect that term? Similarly, why develop a new protocol when you can steal an existing one, change it a bit, and make it your own? These bastards haven't innovated a damn thing. Ever.

Re:Embrace and Extend....

[Bert64]

Wrong, microsoft invented the emailvirus and the macro virus.
Was there ever a mail client before lookout which allowed recieved emails to auto execute themselves?

Ha ha! Delicious schadenfreude!

[Sloppy]

I love this! I think it's wrong, but I still love it anyway. I guess that makes me a spiteful pervert or something.

These people supported that proprietary platform and tied their fates to it and -- gosh, who would expect it? -- suddenly their, ahem, "partner" is trying to ram a pitchfork up their asses! Oh yes, bite the pain!.

Several years ago, Microsoft changed the license on their NT Workstation product so that it was only allowed to have a certain number of connections. Tim O'Reilly wrote a frustrated "open letter" whining about it, and it was funny the same way this story is. All that hard work that other companies put into legitimizing Microsoft's products, only to be stabbed in the back ... what a shame (*snicker*). Unfortunately, Microsoft caved in back then. I hope that by now they are arrogant enough to fight to the bitter end.

Few things give me as much pleasure as seeing Windows developers getting screwed by Microsoft. Oh, the crushed dreams, the shattered hopes and businesses, the shocked expression of pain and betrayal, ooh, is it getting warm in here?

KFC... (o/t)

[amarodeeps]

Actually the reason KFC changed its name to KFC was because the state of Kentucky decided it wanted to trademark 'Kentucky' and pull in royalties from that move. KFC didn't care for that, and refused to acquiesce.

Re:KFC... (o/t)

[bstadil]

Interesting I didn't know that. Kind of a bummer though as I have used the example of KFC in other discussions. That leaves me with Atomic skies as an example of a name once fine that became a liability. Not as good as the Fried in KFC though.

one can't trademark generic names

[inputsprocket]

but that doesn't stop the bug guns with the $$$ from screwing you. Why is this any different from Visa blocking the use of eVisa.com who offered internet help on travel visas?

Re:Did you even read the summary?

[nurb432]

Im so impressed you can read.

So, what does the W stand for?

[MarkusQ]

Tungsten.

-- MarkusQ

P.S. If you don't get it, don't waste a lot of time trying to figure it out.

No question about it: MS is in the right.

[Lord Bitman]

Though they can't neccessarily do anything about it (and should _not_ be able to enforce this) in countries where 'Windows' is not a trademark, that doesnt change that "Windows" is a specific product name, and calling something "Windows Backup" instead of "Backup for Windows" certainly does imply Microsoft endorsement->something which they do not have. They can't claim it has nothing to do with it, since they are making this product specifically for the product. "Oh, but windows is a generic term!" it doesnt matter if 'Windows' is a generic term or not when your product only works with and is specifically designed for that one[out of so many other possible] thing with that name which actually happens to be trademarked. If I made a golfclub called "Cup"[and trademarked it], and somebody else made a golfclub bag called "Cup Holder" you wouldnt expect that to hold up, would you? They're both generic terms, but "Golfclub" is a hell of a lot more generic than "Cup", which in this case refers specifically to a certain type of club. This program does not back up a graphical interface for another program(a 'window'), It backs up data using Microsoft Windows, and does absolutely nothing else. There can be no claim made that they are using Windows as a generic term, so they are infringing on Microsoft's mark of trade. [Not a legally qualified 'Trademark', just a mark of trade.]
MS should win this one.
And I use debian, which I love.

Re:No question about it: MS is in the right.

[Lord Bitman]

Cannot selectively enforce trademark? That's like saying you can't selectively enforce slander. If You have enough of a problem with a certain person using your mark of trade to pursue legal action, you may do so. There is nothing in the law for trademark that says you _must_ go after every person you see using your trademark. CNN doesnt go after Saturday Night Live for using their logo [-- that is an EXAMPLE. Take that to mean that I dont know the specifics of that case but you can still understand my implications. ie: Don't say "But NBC has a deal with CNN" or "But that's parody". You can see my POINT whether or not the example is truely accurate] But they still retain the right to go after anyone else they want to.

Works for me

[Kris_J]

The fewer third-party products that use the word "windows" in their name the less people will realise what operating system they're actually running. Heck, half the people I've ever met that use computers at work don't understand the difference between Office and Windows as it is.

Me: What operating system are your using?
Them: Office 98 -or- Them: Windows 97.

So...

[interactive_civilian]

If I run it on my XBox (gaming system), do I call it an X XBox? an X^2Box? An X Box XBox? an XBox^2?

oh, I'm so confused. ;)

Windows isn't a trade mark

[hayden]

"Microsoft Windows" is. Just as Word isn't a trademark, "Microsoft Word" is.

Excel got MS's 'out of hand' hand bit

[kris_lang]

Actually, when Microsoft first came out with its spreadsheet software, it (MS) was sued by a banking/accounting software firm which had a product that was already trademarked as Excel. Microsoft was required to refer to the MS software in all instances as Microsoft Excel. If you look at old versions of MS software on the Macintosh, you'll see that the finder menu calls MS-Word just "Word", but that Excel is referred to in its entirety as "Microsoft Excel" even in tight spots such as the finder menu.

Just one case where Microsoft lost a round. I'll find the reference and insert it later. (I believe I read this in Byte or in Creative Computing, way back when...)

Straight from MS website! Did AMD receive a letter

[MrFreezeBU]

http://www.microsoft.com/trademarks/t-mark/winxp-G uide.htm

Do Not Say:
[Your Product Name] Windows xp
[Your Product Name] XP
Windows XP [Your Product Name]

hmm.....now I can't legally say that I have an Athlon XP(R) CPU...nice

Registered Trademark law

[DaveOke]

Windows (R) ? Last time I checked, you cannot register a noun.

Re:Well actually

[Bert64]

Does that actually support authentication (ie, preventing unauthorized clients from connecting and taking a screendump of keystroking)
Many of the Xservers for windows dont support any way to prevent unauthorized ip`s from connecting.. Or almost as bad, have ALL hosts allowed by default.

I thought you people were geeks

[xant]

And not one of you has taken a piano lesson?

C-sharp is a musical key. This is catchy because it has musical connotations, and also because C# is one higher than C. There are doubtless other reasons a bunch of soulless marketing trolls thought this was clever.

See sig for what I think about the whole mess.

Re:I thought you people were geeks

[Kashif Shaikh]

"...because C# is one higher than C. There are doubtless other reasons a bunch of soulless marketing trolls thought this was clever."

Yeah but C# is part of a totally different framework, and(i'm trolling here) shouldn't have anything to do with C.

It seems more of a marketing buzzword to add psychological connotations of C(fast,efficient not bloated like Java) to their new language. And moreso, it is designed by a company who seeks "one language to rule them all, one language to bind them to their OS".

It is but the final piece(along with Pallidium) of the Great Pyramid of Microsoft.

What next?

[Bert64]

Are they going to sue everyone who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis (MS) for infringing on the trademarks too?

don't worry !

[twitter]

Big Brother is watching. All your posts are belong to US (TM).

Re:You think so, huh?

[dh003i]

Bullshit which will easily be overturned.

Totally wrong.

[mindstrm]

No, I don't see your point. NBC has a deal with CNN, that's how they operate at that level. That TOTALLY changes things. CNN agrees it's not a dilution of their trademark, and an obvious parody of their work, and probably good advertising for them, so they don't sue.

If it was ANOTHER news or TV station calling itslef CNN or stylizing it's logo very closely on CNNs, CNN *WOULD* have to defend themselves.. or lose their rights to the mark. If 20 other stations all had almost identical logos to CNN, CNN could not wait 10 years then go after ONE or TWO of them for infringement; they would only have to point out that the style is in common use, and obviously not specific to CNN.(That's not me guessing, that's how trademarks work)

Take a trademark like, say, Goretex. Those nice winter jackets of old. If 10 other companies start manufacturing materials and calling them goretex, then the trademark holder MUST take action; he can't let a bunch of other people use his mark, then pick ONE a decade later and sue them for infringing. By not acting, they basically permit their mark to become meaningless.

Hmm...looks like you might be right...

[amarodeeps]

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/food/kfc.htm

I could swear I'd heard that from a reputable source though...*sigh*

WIMP

[Martin Spamer]

WIMP - Window(*1) Icon Mouse(*2) Pointer was first coined by Parc Xerox early in 1970, this was well before Microsoft even existed.

(*1) Windows initially refered the concept we now know as a virtual or floating desktop. i.e. A 'window' on a larger space.
(*2) 'Mouse' changed to 'Menu' as a result of the text mode UI's that where introduced in the 1980's.

And Defenestration

[Martin Spamer]

And defenestration is the act of throwing someone or something out of a window. Usually because I've been thrown out of Windows by a BSOD.