Lindows Legal Challenge

pphrdza was one of several readers who sent in the latest on the Lindows front - it's a Ny Times (Free reg. blah blah) article entitled Glass Panes and Software. Not a whole lot of new information - more around the legal challenge blah blah.

Comments

It's Microsoft, what did you think would happen?

[KaiKaitheKai]

Okay, you take your proudct, that directly competes with Microsoft's. You change one letter of it, and market it. What do you think is going to happen?

The $200 and $300 computers are perfect for those people who just want to visit this new-fangled internet thing, or type something up. It provides a low-cost, low-risk entry into the digital world. This is why Microsoft feels threatened.

Now, Lindows is not Windows, that is true. It may not be able to run as many programs, etc, fill in whatever you want, but the average super-low cost user doesn't need this. All they want is word processing, and internet access. If you don't want to spend $400 For Office XP, and $200 for Windows XP, because all you want to do is type and surf, you will opt for the PC that costs less than your OS.

Re:Question

[stratjakt]

I've had trouble explaining to people how 129$ up front and 75$ a year from there on in is "Free" software.

Re:Who here has legs

[vrmlguy]

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office may only require an applicant prove acquired distinctiveness if the mark is merely descriptive of the goods or services. Common words or phases that are NOT merely descriptive of the goods or services are registrable without the need to prove the mark has acquired distinctiveness. For example, there is a well-known company that chose the word "apple" as a mark for the sale of computers. "Apple" is of course a common word. However, when used in connection with the sale of computers it is highly unique and even arbitrary. Apple Computer Co. was not required to show that their mark had a distinctive secondary meaning apart from the original meaning.

The trademark for "Windows" is in trouble because the word was used to describe computer GUI software long before Microsoft introduced their product.

Re:It's Microsoft, what did you think would happen

[blakestah]

What are you talking about? The article is about trademark law. Back in the day, Microsoft was granted a trademark on the name Windows. Now, you can't trademark a word commonly associated with the product you are making. For example, I couldn't trademark the name "ice cream" for my ice cream product. The word is commonly used for that already, and this has two negative effects. One, I gain value by associating my trademark with the words defining the product. Two, I shut out all my competitors from being able to market "ice cream".

In Microsoft's case, the answer will be pretty clear. The trademark on "Windows" should never have been granted in the first place. It was already a common name in computer software. The fact that Lindows changes one letter is irrelevant if the Windows trademark is invalid.

And the preliminary injunction said it was invalid, and allowed Lindows to use its name pending trial. Expect Microsoft to get slammed. But don't worry - this will not affect trademarks on WindowsXP, Windows2000, Windows3.1, or Windows NT, each of which can stand alone as its own trademark.

But the generic term Windows will be gone. And plenty of other computer manufacturers will be quick to use Windows in the names of their products.

Re:It's Microsoft, what did you think would happen

[theLOUDroom]

Okay, you take your proudct, that directly competes with Microsoft's. You change one letter of it, and market it. What do you think is going to happen?

You are not accutately describing the situation. Windows is a generic term. Trademarking windows is like me going and trademarking "wiper blades." It's a generic term already in common use, just like windows was. It shouldn't matter if my wiperblades company gets 90% market share, I picked a generic term.

BTW Xwindows only differs from windows by only letter too, so even with your logic MS should loose their trademark.

Re:Who here has legs

[bpowell423]

It seems Microsoft has a habbit of naming products "Microsoft Word", "Microsoft Flight Simulator", "Microsoft Windows", etc., and then dropping the "Microsoft" part to attempt to get the public to associate the generic term with Microsoft. I think it would be appropriate if the practice came back to haunt them.