Slashdot Mirror


Lindows Ordered To Stop Using Lindows Name

TheSpoom writes "InfoWorld reports that Lindows, a distribution of Linux and other software designed to emulate Windows, has been ordered to drop their name after Microsoft won a preliminary injunction yesterday from judges in Finland and Sweden."

922 comments

  1. Well... by AnnCoulterTroll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now will Wine have to change its name because of the Win part of its name?

    1. Re:Well... by Masarand · · Score: 4, Funny

      The problem with Wine is that is sounds like "Whine" and will therefore be associated with the Microsoft brand. I can see a trademark dispute here...

    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, its the dows part of the name that got them into trouble. Who will be next? Does doh! and "dows" sound too much alike?

      Never-the-less, it sounds like bad ju-ju beans to me.

    3. Re:Well... by BurKaZoiD · · Score: 1, Funny

      interesting point. I'm still waiting to see if I get sued for having windows in my house.

    4. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wine is a generic word, Lindows is not.

    5. Re:Well... by AnnCoulterTroll · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Wine is a generic word, Lindows is not.

      window is a generic word. windows is the plural of a generic word. what's the difference? should microsoft be able to copyright such a word?

    6. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Have you paid microsoft for them? $300 a window. I hope you called and registered them... Don't even THINK of modding them with curtains, either!

    7. Re:Well... by mutant+mouse · · Score: 1

      It's worse. Shell Oil recently sued tOILet makers for copyright infringement. WC is the trademark for Windows Calendar, so we may get int trouble finding that damn Gazw7a.

    8. Re:Well... by fredrik70 · · Score: 3, Funny

      indeed! especially since they already got the trademark for winCE!

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    9. Re:Well... by rifter · · Score: 2, Informative

      " Wine is a generic word, Lindows is not."

      window is a generic word. windows is the plural of a generic word. what's the difference? should microsoft be able to copyright such a word?

      It's a trademark, not a copyright. So far the courts have upheld this mark.

    10. Re:Well... by Ledskof · · Score: 1

      Maybe things would go better if they renamed Lindows to LexPea?

      --
      This is my sig. The post is over.
    11. Re:Well... by ripcrd · · Score: 0, Troll

      They could just call it Whine. For all the lusers who complain that Outlook or Office doesn't work on Linux. Or the crappy Flash and Shockwave ads. Whatever.

      --
      --Somewhere there is a village missing an idiot.
    12. Re:Well... by Ursius · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Curious... Just how old is the term XWindows? Hmm... Is this pornographic? I think not. Windows is a graphical interface definition. Didn't OS2 use the same premise as windowing? Thus windows? Microsoft Windows is Microsoft's version of a windowing GUI nothing more. The term Windows IS generic I believe. Xwindows, IBM windows, Xerox blah blah blah. Windows is just a word, Microsoft just wants to claim that whenever you use the word you think of their version. Next they will try to change the name of Windows in homes to ... Home Windows... :)

    13. Re:Well... by mapmaker · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It's a trademark, not a copyright. So far the courts have upheld this mark.

      Microsoft's trademark is on the phrase "Microsoft Windows", not on the word "Windows" itself. Microsoft was specifically denied a trademark on the word "Windows" by itself because it is a generic word.

      Therefore I can't see how the word "Lindows" infringes on the trademarked phrase "Microsoft Windows". By any common-sense standard, they would have to be using the phrase "Microsoft Lindows" to be infringing.

    14. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter - the more popular a trademark becomes, the more protections it gets. If Chevy came out tomorrow with the "Chevy Explorer" you could be 100% certain that they would lose that name in court since the Ford Explorer is a trademarked, extremely popular vehicle.

      If the Ford Explorer was well unknown, say maybe a car from a small company, with only 10 to 1000 vehicles in the market, it would have little protection. (Again, not trademarking the word Explorer, the word "Ford Explorer") Chevy could get away with making a "Chevy Explorer"

      Its all about protecting your brand and trademark.

    15. Re:Well... by Simonetta · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The point to focus on is not that one name is almost the same as some other corporate name, it's that one person in Finland or Sweden or Shitholistan thinks that they can change the behavior of millions of people. Then they believe that they have the authority to enforce this because they have some form of legal position in their own country.

      This is like some fundamentalist judge in Iran ordering the entire alchool industry in the world to shut down because it is forbidden by the Koran, and actually being taken seriously in areas outside the range of his private army.

    16. Re:Well... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "It's worse. Shell Oil recently sued tOILet makers for copyright infringement. WC is the trademark for Windows Calendar, so we may get int trouble finding that damn Gazw7a."

      Oh please. If Microsoft released their next server OS as "Winux", you wouldn't be cracking jokes like that.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    17. Re:Well... by angle_slam · · Score: 1

      No. It doesn't sound anything like Windows and is unlikely to be confused with Windows.

    18. Re:Well... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's the using the Lin from Linux with the, um, indows of Windows.

    19. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lindows didn't come out with a "Windows" it came out with a "Lindows"...It's the same as Chevy coming out with a "Chevy TrailBlazer" to use your "Ford Explorer" analogy. Just because the last syllable is the same doesn't infringe on a trademark, unless Microsoft's trademark is the "dows" part.

    20. Re:Well... by CaptainMurphy · · Score: 1

      cuz on linux, instead of playing computer games, people just play those ads where you punch gerbils and terrorists and weasels for entertainment!

    21. Re:Well... by IAmAMacOSXAddict · · Score: 1

      "It's a trademark, not a copyright. So far the courts have upheld this mark." Well then couldn't the originators of XWindows take that trademark away from M$ Windows as the Unix version of XWindows was out before Micro$loth's version... Bob

      --
      MacOSX, because making *NIX better is a lot better than waiting for Micro$loth to fix Windows
    22. Re:Well... by poptones · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The point to focus on is not that one name is almost the same as some other corporate name, it's that one person in Finland or Sweden or Shitholistan thinks that they can change the behavior of millions of people. Then they believe that they have the authority to enforce this because they have some form of legal position in their own country.

      Like those arrogant, fundamentalist-endowed leaders in that other country (starts with a U, and it ain't Ukraine) who seem to think they have the right to do exactly this all over the world... and are presently doing it.

      This is like some fundamentalist judge in Iran ordering the entire alchool industry in the world to shut down because it is forbidden by the Koran, and actually being taken seriously in areas outside the range of his private army.

      Hmmm... like some other puritanical government teetering on the edge of tyranny, bullying sovereign governments all over the world into conducting raids and arresting their own citizens even when their own local laws allow their citizens the exact behavior they are being persecuted for...

    23. Re:Well... by apg · · Score: 1

      You're right... We'd be cracking jokes about Microsoft's new Executive VP of Sales and Marketing, Elmer J. Fudd. (Or would that be FUD...?)

      Seriously, "Windows" is a generic term where "Linux" clearly is not. "Microsoft Windows" is a valid trademark, but "Windows" simply is not. Microsoft also has registered the trademark "Microsoft Game Studios." Do you seriously think that this means no one can use the term "Game Studios" now?

    24. Re:Well... by PierceLabs · · Score: 1

      Being out first applies to patents. If X Windows is indeed trademarked (and I wasn't immediately able to find one), then they could have said something years ago. But with trademarks, the more popular a brand - the more likely it is for the popular brand to trump the unpopular brand. Microsoft Windows enjoys wider popularity than X WIndows and as such there would be no brand confusion nor dilution with X Windows.

    25. Re:Well... by zurab · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Oh please. If Microsoft released their next server OS as "Winux", you wouldn't be cracking jokes like that.


      That just doesn't make sense. One of the main points of contention is that "Windows" is a generic term and "Linux" is not. You cannot generally trademark generic words on their own [1]. You cannot violate a claimed trademark that's a generic word. If you are trying to point out the hypocrisy, this does not qualify.

      [1] Trademark laws and language constraints in different countries probably vary.
    26. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      that other country (starts with a U, and it ain't Ukraine)

      Uganda? Uzbekistan? Utopia? (hah!)

    27. Re:Well... by puddpunk · · Score: 0

      I didn't see Linus Torvalds suing them because "Lindows" sounds like "Linux" :O

      (NOTE: all slashdot lawers, I do understand the corprate copyright holding rules, i was just pointing out something slightly amusing (okay, it wasn't even that amusing))

    28. Re:Well... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Seriously, "Windows" is a generic term where "Linux" clearly is not."

      It was still clearly trademarked, and Lindows inentionally infringed on it. The matter of whether or not it is a valid trademark is not relevent. It was already established as a trademark, they didn't accidently go wandering into it. They also didn't make a serious change to the name. One letter. That's it. Legitimate trademark or not, Lindows is still guilty of it.

      You guys are backing the wrong battle for the wrong reasons.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    29. Re:Well... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "One of the main points of contention is that "Windows" is a generic term and "Linux" is not."

      It's not a point, it's a rationalization to side against Microsoft. I might be willing to accept this rationale if Lindows had this happen by accident. Nope, they intentionally broke the law and are using this as a weak defense. And yes, generic terms can be trademarked. It's not a new grotesque phenomenon. Ask Palm.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    30. Re:Well... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "Now will Wine have to change its name because of the Win part of its name?"

      No because WINE isn't a copycat of a Microsoft Product who's name differs by only one letter.

    31. Re:Well... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "No because WINE isn't a copycat of a Microsoft Product who's name differs by only one letter."

      Gee, I wonder if it was common sense that prevented Mozilla from using the name Linternet Explorer.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    32. Re:Well... by snafu · · Score: 1
      You make a great point, but perhaps trademark laws in Finland and Sweden are different.

      You are correct regarding U.S. trademark law, and it might be suprising to see this ruling (though not impossible) in the U.S.

    33. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, now it will be called "beer"

    34. Re:Well... by EvilAlien · · Score: 1

      No, but based on this precident, you'd obviously get in trouble for using the term "Lame Studios".

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    35. Re:Well... by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      Or the crappy Flash and Shockwave ads.

      I solved that shit...
      I downloaded Firebird and clicked "NO" every time it asked me if I wanted to download the plugin for flash.
      Now if I want to be bothered by shitty ads or up-their-own-arses webmasters with huge flash downloads instead of HTML for a site I just open that other thing, or if I'm on the Linux partition, Konqueror.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    36. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's more likely that the word "Windows" cannot be trademarked in the US because it is a common English word used to represent part of a graphical user interface. On the other hand, English is not the most popular language in Finland and Sweden, so the word "Windows" was not in common use there.

    37. Re:Well... by BladeMelbourne · · Score: 1

      Surely there is some foreign language out there that has lindow as a generic word? That can be trade marked?

      I only have two dictionaries here:
      Spanish: lindo (meaning pretty, lovely)
      German: lind (meaning gentle, mild)

      Lin is also French for the flax flower.

      If you search google (latin +lindow english meaning), you will find that Lindow is a surname:
      http://www.oraltradition.org/bibliograph y/index.as p?alpha=L

      Lindow is also a place in West England. Lindow Man is the name of a homesexual druid from those parts.
      http://home.earthlink.net/~ekerilaz/lindow .html
      http://whysnape.tripod.com/languages.htm

      John Lindow is an author or Norse mythology.

    38. Re:Well... by PReDiToR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      window is a generic word. windows is the plural of a generic word. what's the difference

      The difference is brand recognition.
      Someone says "windows" with reference to a computer and MSFT Windows springs to mind. Admit that and we can go on. Deny it and ignore the rest of the post, you're just being awkward.
      If Lindows is bringing a system to market that imitates the function of MSFT Windows and uses a name similar, they are trading on the brand recognition of the MSFT product.
      This is wrong because they didn't create the brand recognition, yet if they produce an inferior (scuse me, I'm just pissing my pants laffing at the thought of anyone doing it worse) product, they could harm the brand perception of MSFT Windows.

      Lindows could harm Windows, and therefore should not be allowed to trade off the name. I hate MSFT as much as the next guy, but rules are rules, breaking them won't make the product better.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    39. Re:Well... by zurab · · Score: 2, Interesting
      they intentionally broke the law and are using this as a weak defense.


      The part "broke the law" is jumping a gun a little bit. Yes, Lindows used the mark deliberately and not by accident - whether to imitate Microsoft's "Windows" or generic "windows" does not matter - they are the same word and they are generic to software. Yes the courts ruled in MS' favor in Sweden and Finland as far as preliminary injunction; but that hasn't been the case in the U.S. where courts ruled in Lindows' favor and, I believe, it's still on appeal.

      Moreover, in all likelihood, Lindows probably didn't even challenge MS in all these countries that MS filed complaints and requests for preliminary injunction: Sweden, Finland, France, Netherlands, and probably more on the way. I am not international (or domestic) law expert but in many countries, if you fail to show up and actively defend yourself, there's a virtual guarantee that the plaintiff will prevail (under reasonable circumstances).

      Lindows.com spokeswoman Cheryl Schwarzman said the company was unaware of the Finnish preliminary injunction or the filing of a complaint in France. Lindows did know of the Microsoft action in the Netherlands, she said.

      I am guessing that's what happened.

      And yes, generic terms can be trademarked. It's not a new grotesque phenomenon. Ask Palm.


      Yes, but "Palm" is not a generic word with regard to software like "window[s]." Again, IANAL, but you can trademark generic words in certain circumstances for limited use, when the generic meaning is unrelated to those circumstances. Like "Palm" in your example, or "Apple" the computer. I'm sure if you are actually selling apples, trademarking the word "apple" will not be possible.
    40. Re:Well... by firewrought · · Score: 1
      The point to focus on is not that one name is almost the same as some other corporate name, it's that one person in Finland or Sweden or Shitholistan thinks that they can change the behavior of millions of people.

      Um... no. The judges ruled that Lindows could not use that name in their countries. Just because you're a global corporation does not mean you can ignore local law. The judges do have the authority to enforce it, and this is a clear case where they should enforce trademark law.

      Maybe it's just me, but purposely naming your product one-letter-off from your only significant competitor is just plain shady. What if Microsoft rolled out "Limux/BravoWolf Clustering Technology"? Phonetically, that's different from "Linux/Beowulf", but it's still unfair. Trademark law exists to prevent this bullshit.

      "Lindows" is very obviously a slimey rip-off of Microsoft's flagship product. Lindows is something of a leech in many ways... from charging people a subscription to use a GUI apt interface against Debian's mirrors (e.g., instead of Lindow's setting up its own mirrors) to having everything run as root by default (which might tarnish Linux's security record). Be careful and objective before you jump to defend them.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    41. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lindows picked that name because they were to have real Windows applications run on their OS, but that mostly fell through. Now, for an additional fee, they have Sun Staroffice, which any Debian user can get for about $80.00 or so at Compusa.
      It's time that they gave up the Lindows name.
      They have a decent product, and get money from additional services such as the Click and Run Warehouse, based on apt-get. I understand they have some nice applications there. So their business model somewhat follows Microsoft's in that you get an OS, then go back to Office Depot, and spend hundreds of dollars for Office 2003 and a few nice games to play.
      Since LindowsOS is pretty good as it is (based on Debian), then a new name will soundly establish them as a business, for the future of those who have purchased the OS, and for the owners/stockholders.
      Debian was named based on two peoples names, so perhaps Michael could do that, based on a couple of his offspring, relatives, best friends. Lots of choices there, and something with a nice ring to it could undoubtedly be Lindows new name.
      I say, give up the squabble with Microsoft, over just a name, and get on with their product's development. I have heard that LindowsOS 4.0 installs in perhaps 10 minutes. I have installed Debian (once), and now only copy it (dd, etc) since that took forever. SuSE was nearly as bad, so I have to knock back a stiff Scotch to get in the mood to try that again.

    42. Re:Well... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "Yes, but "Palm" is not a generic word with regard to software like "window[s]."

      Yes it is. The term 'palmtop' was commonly used before Palm Pilot hit the market. However, it's not as clear cut as NG tried to make it.

      My opinion is hovering between you and NG here. Personally, I think there is some case here, but I wouldn't put as much faith into it as you appear to be. There's huge ignored area of this debate that goes along the lines of "What did Microsoft do to evolve today's definition of a window?" 'Windows' were around before Microsoft came along with Windows, but since MS is on the scene, people's idea of what a window is today is a lot more sophisticated than it was in the olden days. Will that make a difference in court? Potentially. But IANAL.

      I don't agree or disagree with you, I just think it's dangerous to assume Lindows has a strong case.

    43. Re:Well... by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

      Of course this is in Finland and Sweden, not the US court system.

      --
      - Tjp

      I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

    44. Re:Well... by LittleBigLui · · Score: 1

      Maybe it just was the law of causality? You know, when Netscape chose the codename for their browser ("Mozilla", derived from "mosaic killer"), there was no internet explod^hrer yet.

      Maybe we should joke about how IE should be called .NETscape instead ;)

      --
      Free as in mason.
    45. Re:Well... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but Andersen and Pella will have to stop doing business in Sweden and Finland.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    46. Re:Well... by LittleBigLui · · Score: 1
      Someone says "windows" with reference to a computer and MSFT Windows springs to mind.


      Depends on the context:

      "Windows just wouldn't boot anymore!"

      "The Macintosh user interface is based on the metaphors of windows, icons, menus and a pointer."

      "How do i configure Mozilla (note the clever use of an application that's available for zillions of non-MSWindows platforms) to open links in tabs instead of windows?"

      and (just for the heck of it)

      "Designing windows in AutoCAD, that's what i always wanted to do for a living!"
      --
      Free as in mason.
    47. Re:Well... by apg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Simple question then: If Lindows is so clearly infringing on a valid tradmark why was an injunction not issued against them back in March in Microsoft's U.S. suit against them? Anyone can assert that anything is a trade- or servicemark, but that doesn't make it enforceable. Even in the case of a registered trademark validity can be questioned.

    48. Re:Well... by cintyram · · Score: 1

      and LindowsOS is the name of the OS not just Lindows. and M$ doesnt have any offering with just the name Windows. also Lindows.com does a good job of specifically assuring ppl that their product is not from micro$oft so they can be sure of no crahses and viri :)) ; To Sig or not to Sig, thats the sick part!!

    49. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC it's not XWindows but "The X Windowing System".

    50. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded Interesting? For what? Being wrong? Look it up, fucko. Microsoft has dozens of trademarks for the word "Windows" by itself without the company name as a tagline.

    51. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      they would have to be using the phrase "Microsoft Lindows"

      I always thought LINDOWS = LIN(ux) + (xwin)DOWS.

    52. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like those arrogant, fundamentalist-endowed leaders in that other country (starts with a U, and it ain't Ukraine) who seem to think they have the right to do exactly this all over the world... and are presently doing it.

      If you think the U.S. is engaging in this behavior, then you should lobby your elected (or un-elected, depending on where you live) officials to take military action.

      Yes, you heard me ... come show us what for.

    53. Re:Well... by zurab · · Score: 1
      Yes it is. The term 'palmtop' was commonly used before Palm Pilot hit the market. However, it's not as clear cut as NG tried to make it.


      Yes, that's not very clear-cut at all. I'm not sure of how commonly "palmtop" was used before Palm started using its trademark but that aside, they are different words. Even though "palmtop" has the word "palm" in it, it was probably derived from "laptop" or something similar. Again, IANAL, but the words "palm" and "lap" could be trademarked in that case for some limited use. Even if some conditions exist that put those trademarks in doubt, it would be a stretch for someone to argue that "palm" is invalid because of "palmtop." It's possible that someone could argue that, but my guess is it would be a lot more difficult than Lindows case.

      Personally, I think there is some case here, but I wouldn't put as much faith into it as you appear to be. There's huge ignored area of this debate that goes along the lines of "What did Microsoft do to evolve today's definition of a window?" 'Windows' were around before Microsoft came along with Windows, but since MS is on the scene, people's idea of what a window is today is a lot more sophisticated than it was in the olden days. Will that make a difference in court? Potentially. But IANAL.


      OK, I IANAL you back, but I think of more importance is whether "window[s]" was a generic term in software when Microsoft started using it as a trademark (or could be when they registered it? not sure). If it was a generic term to begin with, then even if Microsoft evolved its properties, functionality, looks, etc. it doesn't matter. For [a stupid] example, if I took an apple and injected it with "steroids", genetically re-engineered it, made them bigger, juicier, etc.; then I became a monopoly with over 90% market share, would that give me legal grounds to registering "apple" or "apple[s]" trademark to use for my business? I don't think so.

      I know that was a very stupid example, but that would be basically giving monopolies even more power to trademark common terms used in their line of business, as long as they "evolve" that product to some degree. Being a monopoly, there's a very good chance that that's already happening anyway. Take another example, could DeBeers have trademarked the word "diamond" since it was technically them who defined and evolved the meaning of a diamond in most of today's society? Again, IANAL, but I don't believe so.
    54. Re:Well... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh... Uzbekistan??

      http://www.advantour.com/uzbekistan/

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  2. The rest of the story: by shystershep · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's another article at the Reg about this, and one at Newsforge about Lindows new website, ChoicePC for taking donations to help Lindows European resellers fight this.

    --
    The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    1. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have those cheap bastards ever heard of agencies that can think up a name for you so you don't get in temptation to come up with some stupid idea and risk being sued?

      I'm really glad that they got busted.
      I've got nothing against Linux, but I really can't stand scum like that.

    2. Re:The rest of the story: by lowmagnet · · Score: 1

      I suggest Lindent, Lindix, or lindatics. (hating myself for stooping to the level of Teligent, Thrivent, etc)

      --
      Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
    3. Re:The rest of the story: by dirkx · · Score: 2, Informative
      And folks do grab your chance - put your money where your mouth is - and make that Donation (anonymous if you need to and are worried about google). 100$ is not that much - and 500x100$ = 50.000, which in Europe is quite a fortune when it comes to decent legal defence.

      Head to http://www.choicepc.com/ and get yourself that t-Shirt you cannot buy at the gap.

      Dw

    4. Re:The rest of the story: by Otter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And folks do grab your chance - put your money where your mouth is...

      I have trouble imagining _any_ political viewpoint where the most pressing use for $100 is to fund Michael Robertson's quest to prove how deeply he can infringe on a Microsoft trademark with and get away with it.

      Honestly, even if I thought favorably of Lindows and its company (I don't) and didn't think Robertson was being a twit about the name (I do) I'd still have trouble imagining funding this.

    5. Re:The rest of the story: by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Have you ever heard the phrase "There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary"? As long as Lindows is still around they are loving this exposure. Do you think we would even talk about just another Linux distribution if it weren't for these lawsuits?

    6. Re:The rest of the story: by luna69 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hmm...

      500 x $100 seems to total up to $50,000.00 rather than $50.

      Yes, I am aware of the european usage of the decimal point in place of the more proper comma. But...I couldn't help myself.

      Sue me.

      --
      No gods, no demons, and no masters. Secular Humanism!
    7. Re:The rest of the story: by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The CEO/Founder of lindows is worth 50,000,000 to 100,000,000 USD.

      Sorry, I don't donate money to people with 10's of millions in the bank.

    8. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously Lindows was thinking "No such thing as bad publicity!!", but the fact is that they off-limits from many retailers due to this trademark issue. No small time computer store wants legal trouble from Microsoft.

      By the way, I just went over to walmart.com (US) and could not find any Lindows systems for sale in the Computers section. Is this thing dead?

    9. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's unAmerican! What are you some kind of Democrat?

    10. Re:The rest of the story: by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      ...taking donations to help Lindows European resellers fight this

      Why in Bob's name would I want to donate to help decieve consumers?

      If their product was worth supporting, they wouldn't need to try to trick people into buying it.

    11. Re:The rest of the story: by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 1
      >> I have trouble imagining _any_ political viewpoint where the most pressing use for $100 is to fund Michael Robertson's quest to prove how deeply he can infringe on a Microsoft trademark with and get away with it.

      Yeah! For real! I can't believe anyone would infringe on Microsoft's infringement

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    12. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft might have a point if Windows was indeed a trademark, but it is not in most countries.

      They "defend" it with the usual legal threats and FUD, but the fact remains that windows are transparent things for retaining heat will transmitting light.

    13. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that Lindows.com doesn't make a product worth buying, and thus is a problematic company to support, but I don't think the purpose is to "see how far he can infringe Microsoft's trademark and get away with it".

      Microsoft's trademark is invalid. Everyone knows that. It just hasn't been taken to court yet to prove this. When you name your product using a term that's a generic word in common use in your industry to describe that type of product, any trademark you have is invalid. For the same reason a trademark on the word "Word" would be invalid, the trademark on the word "Windows" is invalid.

      What Lindows.com is looking for is cheap publicity. Yes, lawsuits are expensive, but having the mainstream press treat a third-rate Linux distro as if it were Microsoft's main competitor is near impossible.

      In the Linux name-recognition department, Lindows.com is probably second only to RedHat among non-techies. When Lindows.com wins the lawsuit(s), it'll surpass RedHat.

      This is all a given. It will win, and it will get publicity. Might not be enough to save the company, though.

    14. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that naming trademarks causes more headaches than it really should is somewhat easily attributed to ego, and the reasoning that people equate a name to a particular brand or product. However, it is easily taken "too far".

      How many people do you know named Steve? George? Ed? How about James? Yet, if you became successful with your name (ie, Madonna) you would also try to trademark the monicker. I remember how she fought for Madonna.org or something similar, which ended up being turned over to a hospital. This is a classic example of over-reaching, as I sincerely doubt the Madonna fanclub wouldn't understand that the two are different.

      Another example is the recent battle over the WWF acronym. We all know that when you think "WWF" you think Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant. The World Wildlife Fund never entered the minds of generations of wrestling fans, yet they won a legal battle over the letters WWF. The World Wrestling Federation is now known as the WWE. This also included giving up the domain WWF.com... not .org or any variant thereafter. Why would a non-profit ORGANIZATION want a .com? I don't know, I'm asking you. The same thing with Shelby and Ford taking people to court over the "Cobra" monicker.

      What it all comes down to is this:

      You should have the right to naming conventions that would border on infringement, but only if your product is not in direct competition with the original nameholder. Of course, this is just my not-so-humble ramblings, but I get tired of seeing big money rule the world.

    15. Re:The rest of the story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And folks do grab your chance - put your money where your mouth is - and make that Donation (anonymous if you need to and are worried about google).

      Fuck that. GPL your fucking OS, and then maybe I'll consider donating to you.

    16. Re:The rest of the story: by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Sorry, I don't donate money to people with 10's of millions in the bank."

      I don't donate to companies that intentionally waste that donation on frivilous lawsuits. Calling it Lindows was really stupid. They had every expectation they'd be sued for it. And now they're acting like the big evil company is swooping down on them. This isn't about trying to right some wrong, it's about attacking Microsoft. Sorry, but any donations I make are going towards changing the DMCA, not towards some idiot CEO picking battles he has no need to win.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    17. Re:The rest of the story: by Jonathan+Platt · · Score: 1

      Lindows is a sell out in my opinion, not as such of Linux but of the easy going nature of the people in the open source movement. Just check the prices of that stuff. Besides, let's not kid ourselves. Lindows didn't choose there name because it's a Linux based operating system, and because wINDOWS are a fundamental part of any GUI. They chose the name to get some extra publicity off the windows back.

      I'm not saying I condone MS's behavior at all, but it would be far more unreasonable if it was a glass company, as opposed to something in direct competition to Windows.

      --


      VENI, VIDI, VICI, DIXI
    18. Re:The rest of the story: by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's trademark is invalid. Everyone knows that. It just hasn't been taken to court yet to prove this.

      It HAS been taken to court and proven, in the US anyway. Now Microsoft is just trying to find some other court that will let them harass lindows.

      Microsoft is based in Washington USA. Lindows is based in California USA. The case has already been TRIED in US court, where both companies are based. Finland and Sweden are certianly free to enforce trade marks as they see fit within their own countries, but I really hope that they take serious consideration that the issue has already been properly resolved in their home juridiction.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    19. Re:The rest of the story: by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, a big evil company *is* swooping down on them. The may have intentionally antagonized it, but it's still a big evil company.

      This doesn't mean that I'm going to donate to them. Especially not via PayPal (I've heard too many vile stories...well, pieces of stories.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  3. New names for Lindows... by ericspinder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about the name Winix, or the OS formally named "Lindows",

    --
    The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    1. Re:New names for Lindows... by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Ah like the knights who previously used to say NI!.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    2. Re:New names for Lindows... by Kardamon · · Score: 5, Funny

      What about "Gates"? They could have a slogan like "Why stare through the Windows if you can walk through the Gates..."

      --
      -- Qu'est-ce que la propriété intellectuelle? It is thought control.
    3. Re:New names for Lindows... by NickFitz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Surely "The operating system formerly known as [CENSORED]".

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    4. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, they should just do the obvious and call it:

      Winbows

      Queue the second 'round of lawsuits. With an inventive list long enough, they could lead Microsoft on a dance for the rest of the decade.

      Not that I'd advocate such a thing. That would be childish and petty. No no no..

    5. Re:New names for Lindows... by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      That would be cool.
      While I hate to see anyone feed the sharks^H^H^H^H^Hlawyers, at least Lindows may score some free advertising on the matter.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    6. Re:New names for Lindows... by Tooxs · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Shades" We've got your Windows covered.

    7. Re:New names for Lindows... by ericspinder · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, that isn't a bad choice. Gateway might have an issue, but (IMO) I they would have less to complain about.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    8. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you just use ^W?

    9. Re:New names for Lindows... by bfg9000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Gates? He's not even Number One anymore! I suggest Lindows rename itself to "Ballmerix", at least they'd get the porn addict's vote. And their new slogan, of course, "developers developers give it up for me!!!!!"

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    10. Re:New names for Lindows... by Ian+Wolf · · Score: 1

      You know, I like that.

      --
      "The words of the prophets are written on the Slashdot walls."
    11. Re:New names for Lindows... by Gubbe · · Score: 1
      How about the name Winix

      I would have to say that that is still too similar. My suggestion is "Windoux."
    12. Re:New names for Lindows... by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

      ...OS formally named "Lindows"

      What the hell is it named informally?

    13. Re:New names for Lindows... by DangerousBeauty · · Score: 1
      How about

      "Insect Screen O/S" - "Opening Windows lets the bugs in. We keep the bugs out."

      Unforunately I can't figure out a good way to make it Window Screen without another lawsuit. *L*

      --
      *A Life Without Compromise*
    14. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm confused...
      Am I still allowed to use the traditional name for those holes in the side of my house (the ones with the glass in them) or must I think of a new name for them as well...?
      Portals, or something like that.

    15. Re:New names for Lindows... by Kardamon · · Score: 2, Funny

      To highlight that Gates is a free OS, we could add you wouldn't have to pay the Bill to use it...

      --
      -- Qu'est-ce que la propriété intellectuelle? It is thought control.
    16. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I propose Windouche.

      If you felt dirty for using Microsoft Windows(tm), then perhaps this will help you feel better?

    17. Re:New names for Lindows... by Brummund · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Why stare through the Windows if you can walk through 135"

    18. Re:New names for Lindows... by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough I have an old Linux T-shirt that reads "In a world without Gates who needs Windows?" My company provides memberships to the same health club (ProSports Club) that Microsoft uses for their employees in Redmond. I do get some very *interesting* looks from people.

    19. Re:New names for Lindows... by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Next version of "Lindows" would be... "Mindows", followed by "Nindows", "Oindows", "Pindows", ... There's plenty of room in that namespace...

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    20. Re:New names for Lindows... by smithmc · · Score: 1


      And then from there they can change the name to an unpronounceable symbol.

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    21. Re:New names for Lindows... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Or they could rename themselves as "Dead Sole Rock Cod Turbot Haddock White Baith the Places Fish Bream Mackerel Salmon Poached Salmon Poached Salmon In A White Wine Sauce Salmon Meunie^H`re and Helen Shapiro."

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    22. Re:New names for Lindows... by wud · · Score: 1

      What about "Gates"? They could have a slogan like "Why stare through the Windows if you can walk through the Gates..."

      I dont have anything useful to say, but HAAAAAAAAAAAA

      --
      wud
    23. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Pieceofshitdows?

    24. Re:New names for Lindows... by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      I'm confused...
      Am I still allowed to use the traditional name for those holes in the side of my house (the ones with the glass in them) or must I think of a new name for them as well...?
      Portals, or something like that.


      Every year or two, Microsoft tries to claim trademark on the use of the word "Windows" for all purposes. It's a good thing they keep getting thrown out of court, or you would need to come up with a new name for them.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    25. Re:New names for Lindows... by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      How about the name Winix

      Too similar to WineX.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    26. Re:New names for Lindows... by calethix · · Score: 1

      How about 'Brick'... er nevermind, Windows is already broke.

    27. Re:New names for Lindows... by JawFunk · · Score: 1
      If the switched to using Winix, then TransGaming.com would come after them for using their software's name (which they charge people for)to advertise. It's still feeding off another comapny's success. One of the reasons it's named Lindows is because it tries to mimick the GUI-friendly Windows while running more like Linux, and still be able to sell at Walmart.

      As it stands righ tnow, according to Microsoft 'windows is a trademark. But we'll leave it to Judge John Coughenour (handling the case) to decide if this word can even be trademarked.

      --
      [Please sign here]
    28. Re:New names for Lindows... by nfsilkey · · Score: 1

      Or 'Why use Windows when there is a door. Run Linux.' :)

    29. Re:New names for Lindows... by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1
      What about "Gates"? They could have a slogan like "Why stare through the Windows if you can walk through the Gates..."

      Let me see why stare through the windows if you can kick shit out of Gates .... yeah that seams fair :-D
      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
    30. Re:New names for Lindows... by MrKinkade · · Score: 1

      How about "Curtains"? You can use the same tagline, but it sounds a little more sinister.

    31. Re:New names for Lindows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or maybe "Windoughs"? Let 'em duke it out with Pillsbury for a while...

    32. Re:New names for Lindows... by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Linux Doors: Better left open, than closed.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  4. +5, Ironic by locknloll · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...that it's just Finland, the cradle of Linux, where this happened...

    --
    -- Power corrupts, but PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
    1. Re:+5, Ironic by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      That would be a funny coincidence. I don't see where it is contary to what people would expect (irony).

    2. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      locknloll is Alanis Morrissette, you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 'cradle' of Linux is Minix and the Sys V API's that were aped.

      Sorry.

    4. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sweden is not a part of Finland. Sweden has their own judges and not affected any way in Finland.

      Of course you can say that offical languages spoken in USA an Canada are French and English...

    5. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, This has nothing to do with Lindows as an OS but the name of the product.

      What if Microsoft's next product would be Microsoft(R) Linuz(TM)?

    6. Re:+5, Ironic by lanswitch · · Score: 2, Funny

      The cradle of Linux was standing in Santa Cruz, according to Darl McBride...

    7. Re:+5, Ironic by locknloll · · Score: 1

      No way? I actually live in Stockholm, Sweden, and travel to Finland on a regular basis. But thanks for the tip, anyway.

      On a related note: as far as I know, Linus Torvalds is a so-called "Finlandssvensk", which means that he's part of the Finish population that has Swedish as their mother tongue. Even more irony, I guess...

      --
      -- Power corrupts, but PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
    8. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The less thought you put into what you're saying, the less thought you put into what you're saying. Think about it.

    9. Re:+5, Ironic by combinatorics · · Score: 1

      Kind of like how the judges in the US are not affected any way in Finland or Sweden?

      --
      Dada ended art.
    10. Re:+5, Ironic by zzabur · · Score: 1

      From outside, Finland may seem to be an advanced and liberal society, but Finnish political and juridical system has long traditions of behaving like vassals of Big Business, Soviet Union or whatever power that looks mighty and frightening at the moment. Finland was among the most vocal advocates in EU for software patents, for example. Basically, what comes to IP issues, the laws in Finland are made in Redmond rather than in Helsinki. This kind of spineless slave mentality makes me feel truly sorry for my country.

      --
      Auferre trucidare rapere falsis nominibus imperium, atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    11. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the laws aren't made in Redmond.
      We have Nokia for that.

    12. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if Microsoft's next product would be Microsoft(R) Linuz(TM)?

      It would still suck.

    13. Re:+5, Ironic by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Since Linux != Linuz and Son != Sun, Linus wouldn't have a prayer.

    14. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see where it is contary to what people would expect (irony).

      I'd expect the "birthplace" of Linux to defend a linux-esque project. but that's just me.... a person.

    15. Re:+5, Ironic by HiThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Please consider that the native language in Finland isn't English. Windows is probably not a common noun there, and programmers, when speaking Finnish or Lapp or (what's that Swedish dialect) probably don't use the term. Now I'll grant that when they speak English they probably use the term windows to talk about a particular GUI interface...but it's not too surprising that this wouldn't carry a lot of weight in a court.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    16. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finnland has a wery corrupt justice system.

      Trust me I live here.

    17. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Finnland has a wery corrupt justice system.

      Corrupt? Please explain. I agree that the Finnish legal system doesn't always work the way I'd like to see it work, and also that there's been some well-publicized cases lately where the judges have severely offended the general public with their decisions, but corrupt, I don't think so.

      Corrupt legal system means money switching pockets in courtrooms, and I don't see that happening here.

    18. Re:+5, Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      and the Sys V API's that were aped.

      Are you referring to Posix, the government established standard to write software on top of?

    19. Re:+5, Ironic by mijok · · Score: 1

      You're quite right about that. I'm a Swedish and Finnish native speaker (grew up in Sweden, Finnish parents) - at present living in Finland and among programmers we always use the Swedish or Finnish word for window(s) when we refer to the GUI item (or the things made of glass...) but Windows (in English) only when we refer to the operating system. However, when the stuff gets more technical we only use English terminology since the translations are rarely consistent (and usually very awkward) and thus it's easier to avoid confusions that way. The case is of course obvious when speaking about code with words like "for-loop" etc.

      Ps. The language you're referring to as "Lapp" is Sami and it's spoken by the Sami population living in northern Norway, Sweden and Finland (i.e. above the polar circle...).

      --
      Karma. Moderation. Is my .sig good now?
    20. Re:+5, Ironic by zzabur · · Score: 1

      First a minor remark on languages spoken in Finland: About 95% of people living in Finland speak Finnish as their first language; around 5% speak Swedish (including Linus Torvalds). The majority of Swedish speaking people are not emmigrants from Sweden, but rather Finns who adopted Swedish language in the years of Swedish rule, when it was the only official language. Swedish spoken in Finland is quite different from the variant spoken in Sweden; also most Swedish speaking Finns speak Finnish rather well, excluding those living in Ahvenanmaa/Aland autonymous area. I think there are around 50,000 Sami speaking Lapps in Finland, which is ~1% of the total population of ~5 million. I have read (don't remember the source) that Russian has recently passed Sami as the third most popular language in Finland. In Helsinki, where I live, Russian is a langage you hear spoken every day. Also, English is teached in Finnish schools to everyone, and most people speak it quite well. One of the reasons for this is the extensive usage of subtitles (rather than dubbing) in Finnish television. Now back to the main topic. It is true that a direct translatation of the word "windows" would be something like "ikkunat" or "ikkunoita" in Finnish; some computer magazine tried ~10 years ago to coin a term "ikkunointiymparisto" for graphical desktop environment, but it didn't become popular. However, is I have pointed out, English language is much used in Finland, in particular in trademarks and product names. As most people understand English well, I don't see any reason why argument against trademark doesn't hold in Finland as well. I suppose one can't trademark Chinese characters in Finland (or in USA)? In general, there are quite strict rules, what is an acceptable trademark for a Finnish company. For example, you may not trademark a persons name, if it is not your own name. For some reason those rules are seldom applied to large foreign companies.

      --
      Auferre trucidare rapere falsis nominibus imperium, atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  5. Doesn't stop them by Cyclopedian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not sure, but I think this doesn't stop Lindows from selling it in the United States. The market for Lindows is greater in the US than outside of it, so this isn't as if the sky is falling.

    Right?

    -Cyc

    1. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. What's the point of using a name in the US if you can't use it in Europe? Think Google or think two sets of ads for Euro and US marketing campaign, or two CD covers for the two markets, etc

    2. Re:Doesn't stop them by vidstudent · · Score: 3, Informative

      Talk to Capcom about this one. They had this sweet, sweet game called, "Biohazard." Unfortunately, there was a rock band by the same name in the U.S.

      So, here in the U.S., it was called, "Resident Evil." History was made.

      --

      Nicholas Eckert
      vidstudent

    3. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -
      I'm not sure, but I think this doesn't stop Lindows from selling it in the United States. The market for Lindows is greater in the US than outside of it, so this isn't as if the sky is falling.
      -
      I actually think it will be better in countries like Turkey (mine) since the price is cool.

      Also its open to everything. You can add stuff in it.

      Posting AC as assholes from irc.xchat.org likes to down my posts

      Ilgaz

    4. Re:Doesn't stop them by Talthane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're looking at it the wrong way round. Which could Microsoft lose more from, being deprived of licences in Europe or deprived of licences in the US?

      Current population of the US = 270m-ish. Current population of Europe = 730m. And Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy.

      Factor in that the EU has shown (in the Windows Media Player case) that it's quite prepared to crack down hard on MS - in contrast to the US government - and it's no surprise that Microsoft is more concerned about European investments than American ones right now, and doing whatever it can to attack competitors' interests.

      No, the sky isn't falling, but if you think that events in Europe can't affect those in America and it can't possibly affect you what Microsoft does over here, I suggest you talk to those people who narrowly avoided having their businesses crushed by a massive trade war over steel tariffs the other week.

      Not to sound too nationalistic, but Europe is much bigger than the US - it's just more disorganised, and hamstrung by the French. ;-)

      --
      "This is why men never share their feelings; because women always remember." -Just Shoot Me.
    5. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can still sell their product and hopefully will continue to do so. They just can't leech off Microsoft's success by emulating their name so closely.

    6. Re:Doesn't stop them by t0ny · · Score: 1
      And Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy.

      ??? I havent seen this to be the case. All the hardcore pirates I have known were Eurpoean. One guy told me how you can buy pirated software at the mall in Poland.

      Factor in that the EU has shown (in the Windows Media Player case) that it's quite prepared to crack down hard on MS - in contrast to the US government - and it's no surprise that Microsoft is more concerned about European investments than American ones right now, and doing whatever it can to attack competitors' interests.

      MS isnt 'attacking' the interests of Linux. They are maintaining the same stance they have for years- they want Lindows to change their name. 85% of their name is derived from "Windows"; it doesnt take a stretch of the imagination to see MS is right about this.

      The problem is the contrarian nature of Slashdot regarding MS; Bill Gates could be trying to prevent evil aliens from taking over the planet, and they would cheer for the aliens just because they were against Gates.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    7. Re:Doesn't stop them by pantycrickets · · Score: 1, Funny

      Not to sound too nationalistic, but Europe is much bigger than the US - it's just more disorganised, and hamstrung by the French. ;-)

      Check the facts.

      The US: 3,717,900 Square Miles
      The EU: 1,249,000 Square Miles

      :)

      The EU outnumbers the population of the US by about 90 million. We have about 1/4 the population density.

    8. Re:Doesn't stop them by kzadot · · Score: 1

      EU != Europe. One of the countries they are talking about isnt even in the EU, but it is most certainly in Europe.

    9. Re:Doesn't stop them by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Current population of the US = 270m-ish. Current population of Europe = 730m

      I guess that depends on what value you use for "Europe". I just did some quick fact checking at the CIA World Factbook, and the member countries of the EU total 375.25 million people. Still more than the US, but not three times as many.

      That said, there's no doubt Europe is an economic powerhouse. Luckily for us, y'all have no military to speak of, so once we over here get our act together and come after you, there won't be anything you can do to stop it. :)

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    10. Re:Doesn't stop them by brassman · · Score: 1
      85 percent of their name is derived from "Windows"

      4 / 7 = 57 percent, not 85. You can reasonably read it as "LINux winDOWS" rather than "Linux wINDOWS."

      And I'm standing on the side of the room where they're saying the trademark is on "MICROSOFT WINDOWS," not just "WINDOWS."

      --
      "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
    11. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is the contrarian nature of Slashdot regarding MS; Bill Gates could be trying to prevent evil aliens from taking over the planet, and they would cheer for the aliens just because they were against Gates.

      What's your point ?

    12. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EU is expanding this spring. Just include Poland and you get quite bigger number.

    13. Re:Doesn't stop them by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1
      " Luckily for us, y'all have no military to speak of, so"

      Heh,heh just because you can't SEE it doesn't mean it's doesn't exist ;-)

    14. Re:Doesn't stop them by babyrat · · Score: 1

      The market for Lindows is greater in the US than outside of it

      HUH????

      ARE YOU KIDDING? Please tell me you're kidding...

      He's kidding right?

    15. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at the mall??? that's plain BS. yes, there's a lot of piracy in Poland, but if someone told you that you can buy illegal stuff IN THE MALL (I assume "a mall" is a shopping center), he just lied to you, period.

    16. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EU stands for European Union - 15 countries (25 in the future). Europe is a continent of more than 30 countries - hence the difference. now you get it?

    17. Re:Doesn't stop them by lcde · · Score: 1

      Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy

      I would say that 90% of my legally copied software is from Germany.

      --
      :%s/teh/the/g
    18. Re:Doesn't stop them by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but on the flipside, it derives at least 42% of it's name from Linux. It takes quite a stretch. IIRC, in the U.S. at least, it's not enough to make trademark infringement.

    19. Re:Doesn't stop them by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Well, let me just say this... there's a reason no one has given the smack down to Israel, and why no one felt restricted in smacking down Iraq. It's called nuclear supremacy. Europe has the bomb. Lots of 'em. So does Israel. Which is why Israel isn't under the thumb of some U.N. peacekeeping force right now (and the whole Holocaust factor, and IIRC are predominantly White)...

      Which is why North Korea, India, Pakistan, and Iran all want nukes. Because having nuclear weapons makes it politically and militarily dangerous for someone like the U.S. to come in and smack you around like a bully.

      The U.S. would have a hell of a time trying to take Europe. The French have ballistic missiles, the british have air delivered and ballistic missiles, Russia has more missiles than you can shake a stick at, and you can bet your bottom dollar they'll launch on warning if we started bombing London and Paris...

      Superpower Russia may be no longer... but I consider anyone with 6000 nuclear warheads and a big red button capable of launching them to indeed be a Super power.

    20. Re:Doesn't stop them by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I think capcom simply avoided having that battle because it wasn't worth fighting. Lindows however, is a valuable name, with lots of advertising dollars spent into it. So is "Windows". It's a battle worth fighting, particularly if it's likely, based on how current law is written and the majority of lawyers/judges interpret it, that the owner of Lindows will win.

      Because then you capitalize on all of Microsoft's advertising, as well as your own.

    21. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europe has a population of 730million eh? Where the FUCK did you get that figure from? It's more like 500mn and anyway, I guess you're referring to the EU which has a population of 450million (jan 1st 2004).

    22. Re:Doesn't stop them by Jadrano · · Score: 1

      Yes, Europe is certainly very important in the competition between Microsoft Windows and Linux, possibly more important than the US, but Lindows does not play a significant role in Europe, and I don't think there is much need for it.
      Lindows is basically only available in English, and support for languages is very important in Europe. Then, SuSE is the most widespread distribution in Europe, and the target market of Lindows - private newbie users - is one of several areas, where SuSE is quite successful.
      I also suppose that brand-recognition for Linux is relatively high in Europe, and typical private Linux users are usually people who aren't fans of MS's operating system, so the similar-sounding name is perhaps not too good for Lindows. It doesn't seem that Lindows will play an important role in Europe.

    23. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > there's a reason no one has given the smack down to Israel, and why no one felt restricted in smacking down Iraq [...] why Israel isn't under the thumb of some U.N. peacekeeping force right now (and the whole Holocaust factor, and IIRC are predominantly White)...

      Iraq is also white (both jews and arabs are semites so their much closer to each other then to europeans or americans)

    24. Re:Doesn't stop them by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      EU != Europe.

      EU is only a part of Europe not the whole of it.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    25. Re:Doesn't stop them by Zoshnell · · Score: 1
      but I consider anyone with 6000 nuclear warheads and a big red button capable of launching them to indeed be a Super power

      Stimpy: Ren, what does the button do?
      Ren: Maybe something good, or maybe something bad! I guess we'll never know, cause you're going to guard it!
      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
    26. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. And on May 1st 2004, ten new countries will join the EU. This will increase the EU population from approx 370m to 470m (see http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/arguments/in dex.htm)

      so that's a lot of people, making US pop. (approx 270m) be 57% of future EU pop.

    27. Re:Doesn't stop them by pantycrickets · · Score: 0

      EU != Europe.

      Well, in that case Mr. Technical-Pants.. You can't fairly compare Europe to the US. Since one is a CONTINENT, and one is a COUNTRY. I figured this was an oversight on the original posters part. If you are going to say Europe, then why not compare with North America? (Which has ~420 million people) And about 3 times larger in area.

    28. Re:Doesn't stop them by t0ny · · Score: 1
      6/7 = 85%

      Windows, Lindows>. Just because Lin and Win share two letters doesnt mean there isnt a match; you are just dealing in symatics. A match is a match.

      Also, Microsoft is their company trademark. Windows is their product trademark. Thus, they are two seperate trademarks; no matter which side of the room you are standing on, only the legal definition counts.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    29. Re:Doesn't stop them by t0ny · · Score: 1
      Microsoft's product Windows predated the release of Linux. Thus, your point is irrelevant, since it would involve time travel to make the product name derivative.

      I think they will have a hard time proving the existence of time travel in court, as well as Microsoft's access to it.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    30. Re:Doesn't stop them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well ... I live in Latvia and as you know - Latvia had voted to enter EU in a next year. So we are EU. The fact is - you can not only buy pirate software in malls, markets but also you can order it in internet. Interesting that in Latvia biggest pirate is government - we have there 90% pirated software.

  6. Suggested New Names by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Lindowz" .... it IS a change!

    "Windows"... why not go all the way?

    "Bill Gates is a Jerk"

    "Unix". No one would ever bother a company over anything to do with Linux

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Suggested New Names by errxn · · Score: 0

      Or how about "This OS Only LOOKS Suckass"...

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    2. Re:Suggested New Names by inteller · · Score: 1

      How about Holez? Cause that's what this supposedly secure distro is full of.

    3. Re:Suggested New Names by porter235 · · Score: 1

      LindOS

    4. Re:Suggested New Names by Quaryon · · Score: 0, Redundant

      "Unix". No one would ever bother a company over anything to do with Linux

      Well, except SCO of course..

      Q.

    5. Re:Suggested New Names by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      "Bill Gates is a Jerk"

      I like that one especially; it really gets to the heart of the matter.

      I can just see the advertising copy:

      Wal*Mart's own Budget PCs! Now with 500MHz Celeron processors, 16 megs of RAM, 2.1 gigs of hard disk space. Bill Gates is a Jerk 1.2 comes preinstalled.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    6. Re:Suggested New Names by strike2867 · · Score: 0

      See_Through_Thingy_Between_Guy_and_Stripper_in_Nud dy_Booth_(Contantly needs cleaning)_OS
      Bimbacel(see sig)
      The obvious next thing though would of course be:WindowL

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
    7. Re:Suggested New Names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you retarded?

    8. Re:Suggested New Names by strike2867 · · Score: 0

      You better not be contamining the gene pool?

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
    9. Re:Suggested New Names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I reckon they should call it "Gates".

      The slogan can be;

      Don't peer through Windows.
      Open Gates...

    10. Re:Suggested New Names by ch-chuck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Something like that has happened - Apple had an internal project code named "Sagan" - when the Carl Sagan people started threatening legal action, they changed the project name to Butt Headed Astronomer.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    11. Re:Suggested New Names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about "Proprietary Shitware?"

    12. Re:Suggested New Names by spitzak · · Score: 1

      "Butt-head monopolist"

      Seriously though, the "Lindows" name always sounded stupid to me. And now they are stuck with having to make something similar to that so people know it is the same company. Best I can think of is to call it "Lind-OS".

  7. This is a good thing. by pheared · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Lindows name is stupid anyway.

    1. Re:This is a good thing. by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 2, Insightful
      To a geek may be, not to average joe.

      Legal or not, the name was indeed choose to be phonetically similar to Windows.

      People often confuse similar sounding names, and tend to associate them together. My guess is, any average Windows user, would be much more comfortable with a suggestion such as Lindows, rather than say something like Knoppix.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    2. Re:This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree. It conveys the same feeling of quality as exemplified by Suny televisions and Pashasonic stereo systems.

    3. Re:This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not only does it sound stupid, it's designed to be antagonistic. It smacks of someone with a grudge being childish.

      For me, something doesn't sit right with a company that does this. When you look at their name, their bizarre Windows refund scheme and their attitude, it's not surprising that the company you're poking fun at comes back and bites you in the ass...

    4. Re:This is a good thing. by I+Be+Hatin' · · Score: 1
      I disagree. It conveys the same feeling of quality as exemplified by Suny televisions and Pashasonic stereo systems.

      Everyone knows those are cheap knock-offs of Sorny and Panaphonics.

      --
      I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
    5. Re:This is a good thing. by lynx_user_abroad · · Score: 1
      Legal or not, the name was indeed choose to be phonetically similar to Windows.

      So, does that give Microsoft ownership of the Lindows name? If I build my coffee shop next to your gas station to be "locationally similar", what control does that give you over my business?

      Can you prevent me from printing my car a certain color in an attempt to be "chromatically" similar to yours?

      How much other phonetic territory can Microsoft claim from having claimed the word "Windows"?

      --

      The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.

    6. Re:This is a good thing. by Ambush_Bug · · Score: 1

      yeaah, i saw a "sonet" once... pretty funny.

    7. Re:This is a good thing. by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      No where in my post did i imply it was illegal. I don't care if its legal or not, My personal view , they (lindows) should be allowed to use the name lindows, but it still doesn't change the fact that they (lindows) choose the name , purposefully to be phonetically similar to windows.

      How much other phonetic territory can Microsoft claim from having claimed the word "Windows"? Well I don't think they (M$) deserve any territory in this case , but in lots of cases companies also register (trademark) other phonetically similar terms. In that case they have a legal right to stop anyone else from using such terms.

      Microsoft should have jst trade markes [A-Z]indows, to deny anyone such oppertunity.

      Whether it would have been ethical is a diff. question, but sure as hell it would have been legal.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    8. Re:This is a good thing. by Gabrill · · Score: 1
      Lindows is perfect for the intended use. It combines Linux and Windows in a way that furthur advertisement could never match. It's Linux that runs Windows.

      Now weather Lindows infringes on Windows will probably depend on how the case against Windows as a ligitimate trademark comes out. Or did I miss the results from that?

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
    9. Re:This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as a nitpicking point, "Suny" and "Pashasonic" existed in the real world, not television.

    10. Re:This is a good thing. by I+Be+Hatin' · · Score: 1
      Just as a nitpicking point, "Suny" and "Pashasonic" existed in the real world, not television.

      Really? I couldn't find either in a Google search.

      --
      I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
    11. Re:This is a good thing. by mookie-blaylock · · Score: 1

      To a geek may be, not to average joe.

      Legal or not, the name was indeed choose to be phonetically similar to Windows.

      People often confuse similar sounding names, and tend to associate them together. My guess is, any average Windows user, would be much more comfortable with a suggestion such as Lindows, rather than say something like Knoppix.
      Here's the problem, though. It's not like that among parity products -- or products that are intended to go after the same market. After all, in the detergent aisle, I don't see Tide, Hide, Slide, and Ride brands of detergent -- everything's very different. Or in the electronics department of, say, Target, I notice Sony, Panasonic, Zenith, and Philips.

      You also say that people confuse similar sounding names -- so why do you want your product to be lost to confusion? You don't. You need to stake out some territory in the mind with a good name, not a knock-off. "Lindows" is the territory of "Panasoanic" stereos and "Folex" watches -- cheap knock-offs that are only fooling the owner (and probably not very well).

      Lindows is too much like Killustrator -- the kind of shabby, lame-jokey thought that people give to naming their software (if any). Here's a hint for those who want Linux to succeed on the desktop for joe sixpack or grandma: Drop the idiotic names for software. Otherwise it'll just be perceived as Windows for those who can't afford Windows.

      I know the hardcore geeks who don't want Linux on the desktop don't care, so you guys, keep naming your stuff with recursive acronyms and stuff. ;)

      --
      I am not Herbert.
    12. Re:This is a good thing. by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      Problem is you can't call a for-sale package simply "Linux". You could say that it is built on Linux, uses the Linux kernel, is a Linux-based OS, etc. But you'd run into a trademark issue by calling it simply "Linux".

    13. Re:This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you expect to? This stuff was from the 70s.

  8. See, See! It's NOT just stupid Americans! by LazloToth · · Score: 3, Insightful


    'Nuff said.

    --


    It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
    1. Re:See, See! It's NOT just stupid Americans! by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      No, but the rest of us weren't surprised that the Swedes were stupid ...

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    2. Re:See, See! It's NOT just stupid Americans! by LazloToth · · Score: 1


      Oh, my - - and I thought I was a rabble rouser . . . .

      --


      It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
  9. Suckage. by eddy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While I think it sucks, I believe the end outcome might be good. This pisses people off, so maybe one or two will try linux just in spite of MS and if they don't at least they'll hear about an alternative.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Suckage. by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Your probably right, Lindows has gotten a very bad name in the Linux community when it was introduced.
      Since it's introduction Lindows has made some great changes and has turned out to be a fairly decent Debian/KDE release. Install apt-get and don't use "Click n' Run"

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    2. Re:Suckage. by grub · · Score: 1


      This pisses people off, so maybe one or two will try linux just in spite of MS and if they don't at least they'll hear about an alternative.

      Unfortunately you're speaking in SlashLand, not Real World. Ma and Pa Kettle will likely never hear of Lindows, even with whatever little news coverage this generates. The only way to get open source in the real world is to promote it yourself, if you depend on news reports to do it for you then open source has already lost.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    3. Re:Suckage. by eddy · · Score: 1

      I think you're wrong. This is news in IDG papers and magazines over here. These are very widely distributed and read, even by people who only "use" a computer and isn't in 'the biz' per se.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    4. Re:Suckage. by grub · · Score: 2, Informative


      I hope you're right, but when I speak about open source to non-techies the first question is usually "Can it run Office?" Then I have to go into the OpenOffice sales pitch. It's an uphill battle, the key (imho) is convincing them that they're only using Windows as a shell for Office.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    5. Re:Suckage. by eddy · · Score: 1

      I can't say I really care whether or not person A use FS/OSS instead of MS.

      I'm mostly concerned about my personal freedom and what my taxes are used for, both concerns for which the existance of Lindows is pretty much totally insignificant.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
  10. Wind... by Apreche · · Score: 3, Funny

    What does this mean for Windex?

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:Wind... by MisterMook · · Score: 1

      It possibly means that the Windows brand is out in Finland, since Windex was around for a lot longer than Bill Gates has had pubes IIRC.

    2. Re:Wind... by khendron · · Score: 1

      Glass cleaner? What are you talking about? A Windex is a brand of wind direction indicator for sailboats.

      --
      Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.
    3. Re:Wind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case Finns are pretty dumb, because there's normally not any confusion between household cleaning products and computer software.

    4. Re:Wind... by LittleGuy · · Score: 1

      What does this mean for Windex?

      They can market the OS under that name in Greece -- "Can handle any program!"

      --
      Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
    5. Re:Wind... by smallfeet · · Score: 1
      Gates has pubes?

    6. Re:Wind... by ericspinder · · Score: 1

      From what I understand it, since both companies are in the same industry there is a better chance for confusion, and thus the injunction. For example I could open a resturant called "Apple Delight", but If I started selling computers I better get a new name. Another example Micheal Dell is not the only person with the last name "Dell" but he will be the only computer manufacturer with the Dell name featured, thus no manufacturer named "Delli" or "Dell2". I am really surprised that it took microsoft that long to get the legal actions going.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    7. Re:Wind... by TheDredd · · Score: 1

      What about XWindows? Sounds more infringing then Lindows and is also the same industry

    8. Re:Wind... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has already sued the makers of Windex for causing confusion and exploiting the goodwill of the Microsoft Windows Shutdown feature, which as you know ALSO goes through and cleans all the windows... by closing them...

    9. Re:Wind... by vasqzr · · Score: 1


      The "Windows" in "XWindows" refers to the GUI element, not the brand name.

    10. Re:Wind... by GTRacer · · Score: 1
      Sure! He bought 'em from Scott Tenorman for just ten dollars!

      GTRacer
      - Sweeet

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    11. Re:Wind... by TheDredd · · Score: 1

      not the brand name

      So this would mean I couldn't release a package named BS Office? that would also be a brand name violation

    12. Re:Wind... by AntonyBartlett · · Score: 1
      For example I could open a resturant called "Apple Delight", but If I started selling computers I better get a new name.

      No, actually I think you'll find that it's if you went into the computer business calling yourself "Apple", but then started selling music, that'd you'd be in trouble - Beatles' label sues Apple - again

    13. Re:Wind... by nicodaemos · · Score: 1

      ... not the only person with the last name "Dell" but he will be the only computer manufacturer with the Dell name featured, thus no manufacturer named "Delli" or "Dell2".

      Understandably noone else could use the name "Dell" for a computer company, for that would be a name collision. But the connection to say that "Delli" and "Dell2" are then unusable is tenuous. If the names are not an exact match then how different must they be? Is it measured by number of characters, phenomes or special substrings?

      What about "Diller", "Dille" or "Dill". At what point do you say something is okay versus not?

      I think this whole thing is a crock. I happen to like "Apple Computer", but if you want to make a computer company and call it "Apple Delight Computer", you should be able to do so as long as you never try to use the shortened form of it.

    14. Re:Wind... by ericspinder · · Score: 1
      What about XWindows? Sounds more infringing then Lindows and is also the same industry
      Well according to this page it is always called xwindow, (notice no 's' at the end), but it is often referered to in the 'plural' by people who don't know better (sorry, not a burn on you, I wouldn't have known better if I didn't just look it up) . Also xwindow is not an Operating System, it has more to do with communications between two systems, so saying that they are in the same industry is not quite accurate.

      Maybe they just need to call it the Lindow Operating System, and look the other way when people add the 's'.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    15. Re:Wind... by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but...

      It means that Windows can't take over Comdex.

      Windex and Windows are famous, but there is a question in US trademark law whether Windows is really an allowable trademark. The judge in the US case has already voiced skepticism about this point (one of the real reasons why Microsoft lost the motion for a preliminary injunction in the US).

      I imagine that the court in this case is concerned that there is an intention ot confuse the Windows trademark here. But... If they call it the Lindow System, is that safe? Is it infringing on the trademarks of Microsoft? The X Consortium?

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    16. Re:Wind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that you will find that this all stems from an agreement between Apple Records and Apple. Contract dispute.

    17. Re:Wind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main reason the docs say "X-Windows" is off-limits is because Microsoft trademarked the term "Windows" before X11 was released, and X.org wanted to cover their asses.

      (That hasn't really stopped people from calling it X-Windows, except for Linux kiddies who read the manuals.)

      Don't forget that Microsoft was once a bigtime X11 developer, contributing to Motif and so on. They would have never worked on X11 if there was any question about the trademarks.

    18. Re:Wind... by kalel666 · · Score: 1

      He thought he did, then he pissed out of it.

      --
      I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
    19. Re:Wind... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      It's also a glass cleaner in the states.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    20. Re:Wind... by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Actually cable theft is trespassing...

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    21. Re:Wind... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Well not much since Windex was around before Microsoft. Lindows was not.

    22. Re:Wind... by moltar77 · · Score: 1

      In light of this post, I suggest Lindows try changing their name to Windux. If Windex can get away with it, surely we can!

    23. Re:Wind... by cryptographrix · · Score: 1

      Windex existed first.

  11. Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Listen+Up · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So, now when copyright/trademark a name for product, you also copyright/trademark every word that 'sounds like' the name or is a 'synonym' of the name? WTF is that?

    1. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by jsav40 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sheesh.... Before you know it someone will patent point & click online shopping.... ;)

    2. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by shystershep · · Score: 4, Interesting
      That's the way trademark law works -- it doesn't just prohibit exact copies, but also any mark that's close enough to cause "confusion." And with a famous mark like Windows, there's a dilution argument which basically prevents anything that makes the famous mark look bad or cause negative connotations in people's minds.

      Either way, though, I think Windows' case is pretty shaky. The underlying basis for trademark law is to prevent a company from confusing consumers and taking advantage of a competitor's goodwill. Unfortunately, the courts keep expanding it to ridiculous levels so that now a trademark is protected as intellectual property, instead of just to prevent unfair competition.

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    3. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by kefoo · · Score: 1

      So, now when copyright/trademark a name for product, you also copyright/trademark every word that 'sounds like' the name or is a 'synonym' of the name? WTF is that?

      It's called "The World According to a Large Rich Company". Welcome to hell.

      I'm still hopeful that when the case actually comes to trial it will be decided in Lindows' favor because Microsoft has yet to find a single person who was confused by the Lindows name, and that's a big part of trademark law (at least in the US... I don't know about the other countries).

    4. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If "Lindows" was a Microsoft product, would you feel the same way about Linus Torvolds' trademark?

    5. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Chris_Jefferson · · Score: 1

      Lets all be honest here. Clearly lindows is called so to make it appear to be linux+windows. Thats what everyone things when they see it, and that was the plan from the start.

      Now we've all accepted that, clearly they are trying to leapfrog onto Microsoft's name and it is in my opinion sufficently close people could get confused (and think it is "another windows", which it isn't)...

      --
      Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
    6. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by term8or · · Score: 1

      IANAL, YMMV, I-Am-English-And-Can-Only-Talk-About-English-Law-A s-A-Layman warnings:

      In England, you (a)wouldn't be able to copyright a name, and (b) wouldn't be able to trade mark a phrase that was sufficiently close to another trade mark to mislead.

      The use of a Registered Trade Mark is to protect your investment in a brand name. If Lindows is close enough to Windows for someone to mistake the two - or to think that Microsoft is endorsing the product - then it would be illegal to use it under trade mark law. Even if these conditions aren't met, the use of a trade name might (and probably would in this case) be prevented by the common law offence of "passing off".

      --



      "As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig. :) " - AC
    7. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by MrDingusMcGee · · Score: 1

      I hate to be the voice of reason, but "+4, Insightful" for this?

      It's not as if Microsoft is going after Tom's Windows and Siding in Tuscaloosa, or Japan's Kansai Window Business (which actually offers a "Ideustry Innovation System, IIS"). They are going after a company who is blatantly using MS's Windows name recognition to sell their shitty version of "Linux for the masses/dumbasses".

      Now, I hate MS as much as the next geek, and I'm all for getting home users (who are ready) to try out Linux...but this is exactly what Lindows should have expected.

      In other news, I hear Lindows(tm)(c)(r)(sm)(wtf) started selling PCs in China under the name "Rinux". You can't even tell the difference... "Oh sank you, we run Rinux!!"

      --
      My Sig is Sauer.
    8. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by pesc · · Score: 1

      So, now when copyright/trademark a name for product, you also copyright/trademark every word that 'sounds like' the name or is a 'synonym' of the name?

      Don't mix copyright with trademark, they are two different things.

      With trademarks, the answer is Yes. The judges go beyond doing strcmp(). When you apply for a trademark you do it in a specific category. Thats why we have both Apple (the computer company) and Apple (the british record company). And you probably can't get a computer trademark called "Appel". How far apart the names must be are for judges to judge. Also, when you get a trademark, you have to defend it; and sue infringers. Otherwise the trademark loses value and the term might become generic and free for all to use. So Microsoft has to protect its trademarks if they want to keep them.

      --

      )9TSS
    9. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also about how likely it is to be associated, and the purpose.

      That an OS maker can't make a new one and name it after two of the other important OS:es is good since the purpose of the name was clearly chosen with the purpose of getting publicity and free merchandising.

    10. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by rot26 · · Score: 1

      Winux? Ok with me. Go for it, Bill.

      --



      To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
    11. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by GnrlFajita · · Score: 1

      YMMV? That's a new one one me. "Your mileage may vary"? (Acronymfinder)

      --
      When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.
      Mark Twain
    12. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The questions Lindows is posing not really is Lindows too close to Windows, but should MS be allowed to trademark a common everyday word, one used to describe not only their product, but all similar products. MS shouldn't have been allowed to trademark the word Windows, fullstop. Imagine if Ford trademarked the word Car and starting suing other manufacturers.

      For an example of trademarks and common words, Hoover still have a trademark on their name, even thought the word is now so common it has passed into the dictionary as a description for vacuum cleaner. The accepted wisdom is that if Hoover tried to go to court over anybody infringing their trademark they would probably loose it, so every lives within the status quo.

      MS would do well to do the same as loosing the Windows trademark would be far more damaging than anything Lindows.com could do.

    13. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by garcia · · Score: 1

      oh fucking horseshit. No one is confused between Lindows and Windows. This is the "digital age". Everyone knows that "Windows" is "Windows" and it is different from *a* window or *windows*. They also know that Lindows is not Windows and absolutely no one would be confused.

      Let's face it, there is no arguing that Lindows is trying to look as close to Windows as possible... There's also no arguing that Windows shouldn't have been fucking owned by MS in the first place.

      If the governments are going to go so far as to block Lindows, they better fucking block MS from calling it Windows as well.

      If someone is confused between Lindows and Windows then they are certainly confused between Windows and windows.

      Just my worthless .02,

    14. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by scrytch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > So, now when copyright/trademark a name for product, you also copyright/trademark every word that 'sounds like' the name or is a 'synonym' of the name? WTF is that?

      When there's the potential for confusion, such when it's an operating system with a name that's pronounced and spelled almost identically with a desktop that does its damndest to look exactly like XP all the way down to the rolling green grassy hill wallpaper, then hell yes there's a case for dilution.

      You hypocrites would be jumping all over Microsoft if they came out with anything that looked like Gnome or sounded like Linux. I think Microsoft has shown remarkable restraint.

      This rant brought to you by the <strong> tag.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    15. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They also know that Lindows is not Windows and absolutely no one would be confused.

      Maybe you should get out of your ivory tower sometime and join the real world. Do you really think that billy joe bob buying a computer at Walmart is going to notice the difference between Lindows and Windows? Do you think that even the 16 yr old sales clerk knows the difference?

      I am also curious why Microsoft shouldn't have been allowed to trademark Windows as it related to operating systems? Trademarking common words is quite acceptable to you, I assume, when those words are Apple, Sun, or Oracle?

    16. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      One alternative would be to embrace the idea of calling an OS "windows". This would make the name common place and could eliminate Microsoft's trademark. All we have to do is get everyone to subsitute "Windows" for "OS"... and since that will not happen I vote for "Bill Gates is a Jerk", not because it's true, but because it catchy.

    17. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      Thank you. After scrolling down halfway though the threads, I finally find a series of posts by people who can actually think for theirself instead of spewing out the usual microsoft propeganda found on slashdot.

      Lindows is a similar product that is made to sound and act like windows. The backlash would be huge if Microsoft's new UI for Longhorn was called Nome and looked exactly like Gnome. The slashdot/linux community accuses microsoft all the time of not being inovative and ripping off other operating system's features, but it's ok for a linux distro to do so.

      I am no microsoft fan but I try to be objective. Your post deserves some mod points.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    18. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap! That might be the stupidest thing I have ever heard. If that were possible then Band Aid, Kleenex, and Vasoline would have already lost their trademarks. You can't lose your trademark AFTER the fact by it becoming common place - only before you register it. Did you even think your post through before writing it?

    19. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have only have to prove that someone has been confused to collect damages. To uphold your trademark you just have to prove that it could be confusing. It would pretty hard to find anybody outside of slashdot who has even heard of Lindows and we all are pretty clear on the distinction.

      I would also note that Microsoft is just a little tiny ant when it comes to global business. They aren't even in the top ten in just the US. Only in the world of slashdot are the biggest and baddest.

    20. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      Your argument seems to be based on the fact that no one can confuse the two. So if windows was a entriely different, smaller, lesser known, but well established company and it was feasible that windows and lindows could be confused would it still be OK? The same rules need to apply to all companies no matter how large they are or how much you personally like them.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    21. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by overunderunderdone · · Score: 1

      So, now when copyright/trademark a name for product, you also copyright/trademark every word that 'sounds like' the name or is a 'synonym' of the name? WTF is that?

      Yes, and it has always been that way. You can't have a name that people will confuse with another trademark, or one that "dilutes" the trademark. Lindows is a pretty clear cut case - the products are identical, the trademark in dispute is the exact same name except for one letter, the Windows trademark is strongly identifiable and the intent of the "lindows" name is pretty clearly designed to trade off of the "windows" name. Naming a competing product so similiarly to "windows" was just plain stupidity (and sounds stupid to boot)

      Lindows is not bothering to argue that "Lindows" isn't infringing on Windows trademark (an open and shut case) but that Windows(TM) is INVALID since "windows" was (and is) a generic computer term.

      IF windows trademark is upheld then Lindows(TM) doesn't have a leg to stand on. If it is deemed invalid then you could just go whole hog and name your product "Windows" yourself, so we could see "RedHat(TM) Windows" and "IBM(TM) Windows" etc. Such products really would create confusion in the marketplace. For that reason I think even if the courts agree that the Windows trademark shouldn't have been granted they may decide that in fairness to M$ and to consumers it is too late to go back and undo it.

      Whatever the court decides this isn't really a case of a tiny little company is just innocently minding it's own business. They CHOSE a name that they had to know would provoke a lawsuit and their only defense is one that if successful would totally screw M$'s marketing - millions if not billions of dollars over more than a decade down the drain, or even used against them as competitors rush to use the "windows" name and get sales from people that think they're buying MS windows. Lindows is not playing defense - they are playing aggresive offense.

    22. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      You can only be a troll but here it goes:

      How is windows used to describe all similar products? I typically refer to them as operating systems. Most trademarks are common words. There is nothing wrong with that as long as they apply to a specific purpose.

      Where is hoover in the dictionary? The only listings I got was for people. What accepted wisdow are you talking about? Accepted in your mind I would guess. I personally never refer to a vacuum cleaner as a hoover. Now band-aid is a better example but they still hold their trademark. There are dozens of others that have become common words. How silly it would be that by becoming popular you would lose (notice the spelling please) your trademark.

      I can't go on. I am not sure why I even bothered in the first place.

    23. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by garcia · · Score: 1

      Do you really think that billy joe bob buying a computer at Walmart is going to notice the difference between Lindows and Windows? Do you think that even the 16 yr old sales clerk knows the difference?

      yes.

      I am also curious why Microsoft shouldn't have been allowed to trademark Windows as it related to operating systems?

      Because you can't do that to common words.

    24. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by phorm · · Score: 1

      It depends on if the names are close enough to create confusion. Being that Lindows is somewhat similar to windows in layout this would apply.

      In comparison, if somebody started a burger chain called "WacDonalds" or "MicDonolds," you get bet they'd be up to their ears in greasy-burger-lawyers in no time, and they would lose.

    25. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by term8or · · Score: 1

      "but should MS be allowed to trademark a common everyday word, one used to describe not only their product, but all similar products."

      Certainly. If a word is used to describe a generic type of product it could not be registered.

      At the time it was registered, "Windows" was capable of distinguising a specific product (an operating system) from others in the market. I haven't personally seen any evidence that Windows has become a generic trade name for operating systems. When people refer to it, they refer to a particular operating system. So, the trade mark would seem (IMHO) to be valid.

      --



      "As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig. :) " - AC
    26. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the fact that you say yes just proves that you are lost in the "slashdot" world. Would you like me to do a sampling of the 50 non-IT folks on my floor as to what the difference between Lindows and Windows is?

      And yes you can trademark common words. See the 600 other posts mentioning all of the other companies that have trademarks on common words. There is a whole thread with Ford which is a common English word.

    27. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Shalda · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's one thing you left out - how generic the term is. In the case of Windows, the term "window" is pretty generic. And though technically, Microsoft Windows predates X-Windows by about a year, they didn't try to trademark it until much later, leaving them with absolutely no case. Lindows arguably being Linux and X-Windows has about as solid of a case as you could ask for. At least in the USA. But then again, the courts can be somewhat mental at times.

    28. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yes you can trademark common words.

      They are but they shouldn't be. We are well aware of the problems and inconsistencies in the processes involved here.

      Would you like me to do a sampling of the 50 non-IT folks on my floor as to what the difference between Lindows and Windows is?

      I don't work in the IT world. I just did a sampling of 12 people I work with:

      "Do you know what Lindows is?" -- All answered no.
      "Do you know what Windows is?" -- All answered yes.
      "If someone showed you that Lindows ran on a PC just like Windows would that confuse you?" -- All answered no.

      Get real moron.

    29. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Holi · · Score: 1

      You ever here of a company called Apple?

      Think before you speak. I think most Trademarks are common words (what the hell is a common word anyway, how is it different from an uncommon word).

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    30. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Yes but "Ford" the trademark has nothing to do with methods of getting across rivers, if a company who's product was a method of crossing rivers by making them shallow enough to walk or ride across then that would be unfair to other companies selling the same product since they would then be unable to capitalise on the fact that a ford is a word in general usage to indicate a method of crossing a river in the same way which Ford would be doing.

      Since the term windows has been a general term referring to GUI's or GUI based operating systems long before Microsoft released their Windows operating system it gives them an unfair advantage by associating their operating system, "Windows" with a generally accepted term used to refer to a particular type of GUI or GUI based operating system.

      As an example when I was going my Computer Science GCSE back in the 1980's we learnt about WIMP environments which were GUI programs or Applications. WIMP stands for Windows, Icons, Menus and Pointers which form the basis of all GUI's. The term Windows in this acronym does not refer to Microsofts product also called "Windows" but people could be confused into thinking this kind of design or methodology refers specifically to an operating system produced by Microsoft - which it doesn't.

    31. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      We'd better get some sort of web-based clickable keyboard out there, before it's patented.

    32. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You asked the wrong question. Ask them what the difference is between lindows and windows. If you get one person to answer that correctly I will eat my hat.

      I am a semi-literate Joe Bob and I go to Walmart and see a PC for $400 and a PC for $300. I look at the list of things in the computer and they are the same except one says Windows and one says Lindows. Not knowing what the difference is but assuming that they are similar I buy the cheaper one. I then get home and try to install my hunting game and it doesn't work.

      Now do you understand or are you one of those semi-literate Joe Bobs.

    33. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When in the 80's? Windows dates back to 1983. I am a judge. Prove to me definitively that windows was used before Microsoft made Windows 1.0 in 1983 and that it didn't become a common term after the fact like Kleenex. Don't give me hearsay, anecdotes, or "I remembers". I am not saying that you are wrong but this is law here. Even if 10,000 people knew the term windows beforehand it doesn't matter. We are talking on a national level here.

    34. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by mcc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The argument here is that Microsoft created a trademark that they do not have a right to defend.

      Microsoft is essentially trying to legislate in the courts here. They purposefully chose to name their products after a wide range of generic names for product types they did not invent. They did this to try to enhance the perception their product is the only one. "Word" is "The Word Processor". "Windows" is "The Window Manager". "Office" is the only Office software there is. This is totally within their rights to do something like this. However, they have no right to take what is basically meant, under any sane copyright law, to be public property-- a common, predefined word like "Windows"-- sit on it for ten years, and then come crying to the courts that they have squatters rights when someone walks on the grass.

      I'll throw my support behind Microsoft on this issue when and only when the Lindows corp. changes their name to "Licrosoft". Until then, I am supporting Lindows not because I want Lindows to get to use the name, but because I want Microsoft to not be able to get away with this reverse-copyright-dilution thing they have been trying to do to the english language for years and years.

      MS "getting its copyright diluted" is just the natural consequence for MS of choosing to name their product a pre-diluted, undefendable word. A similar natural consequence is that if you go look at the Mac section of CompUSA, you will see a product named "Hancom Office" in a box that looks just about identical to MSOffice's and with the word "Hancom" in just leeeetle tiny letters in the corner...

      Now, of course, I don't know what finnish and swedish law are. But I don't see any good justification for them being different.

      You hypocrites would be jumping all over Microsoft if they came out with anything that looked like Gnome or sounded like Linux. I think Microsoft has shown remarkable restraint.

      First off, if you ask me, Gnome and KDE BOTH look too much like MSWindows already, and that's their fault, not MS's.

      Second off, Linus purposefully avoided registering a trademark on "Linux" for very many years. The only reason he owns one now is.. well, read the part under the "linux trademark" header on this page.

      Lastly off, "sounds like Linux" is also a totally undefendable trademark. If MS chose to release "Winux" it would be totally within their rights to do so, because "inux" has become a common name for UNIX workalikes. Since "Linux" itself was largely inspired by a competing product called "Minux", I am pretty sure any hypothetical attempt by Linus to sue a product that rhymed with Linux would be laughed out of court.

    35. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Electrum · · Score: 1

      And though technically, Microsoft Windows predates X-Windows by about a year

      It's called the X Window System, not X-Windows.

    36. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am semi-literate Joe Bob. I want a nice watch, so I go down to my local market to look for one. I see two watches, a schmolex, and a rolex. The former cheaper than the latter. I know nothing about watches, but I'd still buy the rolex because I've heard the name used before. Ta-dah!

    37. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/YMMV

    38. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      It's too bad you posted anonymously because you might have learned something about trademarks otherwise. You can in fact lose a trademark. The article Losing Trademark Rights by Saleem Erakat explains how this can occour.

      I was specifically referring to generecide which essentially means you can lose your trademark if your trademark becomes the generic description for the class of products. Xerox for example, launched a major add campaign during the early 80s (I think I got that era right) pushing people to call a photocopy a copy and not a xerox for the sole purpose of protecting their copyright. The article I cited above indicates that Kleenex, your example, has in fact lost its trademark... but I haven't verified that w/ a third party.

      You were most likely thinking of patent law, in which prior art comes to bear on the validity of the patent. Or you have an incomplete understanding of trademark law. In either case, you're an ass for thinking you knew more than you did.

    39. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just register "operative system" as a trademark, let all prviders you like use it for free, but those you do not like? whohaa, $100 pr copy...

  12. Damn... and I thought by Advocadus+Diaboli · · Score: 2, Funny

    that at least Sweden is neutral! :-)

    1. Re:Damn... and I thought by sparkyman · · Score: 1

      Uh, don't you mean Switzerland? :)

    2. Re:Damn... and I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats Switzerland

    3. Re:Damn... and I thought by trynis · · Score: 1

      Both are actually neutral.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    4. Re:Damn... and I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah....where's the "-1, Wrong" moderation when I need it?

    5. Re:Damn... and I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -
      Both are actually neutral.
      -

      And you are swedish? no both aren't neutral...

      Ilgaz

    6. Re:Damn... and I thought by trynis · · Score: 1

      And you are swedish?

      Yes.

      no both aren't neutral...

      I suppose that depends on what definition you use. Sweden is neutral in the sense that we are not part of any military alliance, and it was that definition I used. We are however not afraid to critizise and take side in different situations, so in that sense we are not neutral.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    7. Re:Damn... and I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US, Sweden was considered neutral because they were a member of NATO ("Good Guys") or the Warsaw Pact ("Bad Guys").

    8. Re:Damn... and I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean, they were not part of NATO neither Warsaw pact? they're just "Guys" - without any adjective :)

  13. What I don't understand..... by gstatton · · Score: 1

    is why does M$ really have to go after them? it's not like they are really hurting for money. Unfortunatly there will always be this nitch market for Windows OS.....and really no matter how Pun-y, Lindows shouldn't have to be forced to change it's name. It's not as if due to pure miss-association that Microsoft is going to go belly up do to an upstarting quzi-competitor to have this PUN-y name......It sucks, but then again, we all live in a world where anything can happen....oh well....

    --
    http://www.whateversclever.net
    1. Re:What I don't understand..... by JWW · · Score: 1

      Microsoft uses any means to destroy any competetor, no matter how small.

      Paranoia of loosing their monopoly drives every action Microsoft takes.

    2. Re:What I don't understand..... by Ickster · · Score: 1

      While I also find the legal attack irritating, I think the reason for it may be that if M$ ignores 'Lindows' because it isn't a money threat, it erodes their ability in court (IANAL) to fight off others who use the same kind of naming scheme to evoke Windows in order to market their product. It seems petty (and it may be) from a company the size of Microsoft, but it's not *just* vendictive. There's an actual reason behind it.

      --
      --- Usually, those that believe in absolutes are ignorant, fools, or both.
    3. Re:What I don't understand..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Microsoft has to go after them because if Microsoft doesn't defent it's trademarks it looses it's trademarks. Note Intel having to change from x86 to Pentium moniker to prevent all the other x86 chip makers from calling thier chips the same thing.

      What I find Ironic is that when MSFT first sued Lindows over using the Lindows name, the majority of /. IIRC was saying how it was an open and shut case and couldn't understand how a Judge could rule against Microsoft. Lindoes sounds like Windows, they are both compeating in the same market, and could be easily confused; everything that trademarks are suppose to protect against. Now when it happens, and someone rules against Lindos, everyone crise Lindows is being oppressed.

    4. Re:What I don't understand..... by Xentax · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's one very simple reason Microsoft *has* to go after anything that is arguably a trademark violation: Unlike copyrights and patents, trademarks (and trade secrets) MUST be defended to hold any force. Trademark Violator B will win a trademark infringement case if it can show that Trademark Violator A (or especially A, C, D, and their 5000 friends) were NOT asked to cease and desist.

      Or, for the short vesion: Ask Xerox and Kleenex why protecting trademarks is important, even when it involves the little guy.

      Disclaimer: I am not (yet) taking a position on whether Lindows is or should be considered a trademark violation. That comes next:

      Frankly, I'm confused as to how "Windows" can be trademarked at all. "Microsoft Windows" is one thing. "Microsoft Lindows" would be an obvious violation, right? Like "Rolexx". But "Windows", as a common English word, shouldn't be able to be trademarked IMHO. I think it's a bit more of a stretch to say "Lindows" violates a trademark on "Microsoft Windows". I think this is one of those gray areas -- the similarity is obvious. The big issue is *consumer confusion*. I think one can make the case that "Lindows" is obviously meant to be associated with Windows, and since it IS in fact from a competitor, that it could thus fall under the spirit of a trademark violation.

      Imagine trying to start a Mac clone company that made "Orange" computers (insert obvious joke here). Obviously not the same trademark, but that doesn't mean that there's no chance an average consumer might be misled, either...

      Xentax

      --
      You shouldn't verb words.
    5. Re:What I don't understand..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > he majority of /. IIRC was saying how it was an open and shut case and couldn't understand how a Judge could rule against Microsoft

      The counter argument is that "Windows" really isn't a trademarkable term because it's generic computer jargon. They got away with it because it was 1983 -- If someone introduced a product called "Icons", they would never be able to trademark it in 2003.

    6. Re:What I don't understand..... by overunderunderdone · · Score: 1

      But "Windows", as a common English word, shouldn't be able to be trademarked IMHO.

      It is perfectly fine to trademark an existing or even common word as long as it is not something in common use in your sphere of activity. You could not trademark an Apple orchard "Apple" but you CAN trademark a computer company or a recording studio by that name.

      Lindows is in fact arguing that the "windows" trademark is invalid because "windows" is a common computer term. I'm inclined to agree but think that the court may decide that the horse is out of the barn now with the Windows(TM) name and that it would be unfair to M$ and to consumers to invalidate it now and have "IBM(TM) Windows", "RedHat(TM) Windows" etc. popping up in the marketplace.

  14. how about by bman08 · · Score: 1

    lindeezy? Lindiddley?

    1. Re:how about by Chewie · · Score: 1

      Hell, why not go all the way? Just buy Snoop away from AOL.

      "Lindizzle keeps it cracka-lackin' for shizzle. B. Gates can sizzle my dizzle."

      --
      49 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 6F 6F 20 6D 75 63 68 20 66 72 65 65 20 74 69 6D 65 2E
    2. Re:how about by I+Be+Hatin' · · Score: 1
      "Lindizzle keeps it cracka-lackin' for shizzle. B. Gates can sizzle my dizzle."

      Aw, fo' rizzeal.

      But seriously, that'd make a cool commercial for Lindows. You could even have a whole series (similar to the Apple Switch series), like a guy speaking in mock Swedish (chef), and a guy typing in 1337-5933k. I'd buy it if they had such a commercial...

      --
      I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
  15. Easy by An+Anonymous+Hero · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just change the name to Winux!

    1. Re:Easy by IdJit · · Score: 1

      or Winizzle...or Linizzle...

    2. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      already exists many winuxes.

    3. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Whine-ux?

  16. Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonder if the same could happen to "Linux"...

  17. New name... by Polo+monkey · · Score: 0

    Winux seems an obvious name, even sounds like "Windows sucks" if you say it fast.

  18. Wrong impression by dew-genen-ny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lindows as a name gives the wrong impression about where linux wants to be anyway.

    They should concentrate on marketing their product as a decent OS and not a cheap and inferior copy of windows.

    --
    tom-george.comBecause geeks rate higher t
    1. Re:Wrong impression by evilquaker · · Score: 4, Funny
      Lindows as a name gives the wrong impression about where linux wants to be anyway.

      They should concentrate on marketing their product as a decent OS and not a cheap and inferior copy of windows.

      How did the goals of Michael Robertson's Lindows become the same as those of Linus Torvalds' Linux? As far as I can tell, a "cheap and inferior copy of Windows" is exactly what Lindows wants to be... it's kind of like the Simpsons episode where Homer's looking for a TV at an outlet mall: "I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox and Sorny."

      --
      To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
    2. Re:Wrong impression by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      What's funny here is that Magnavox TVs really were often referred to as "Magnetbox" in the past. They were of such low image quality (still are) that people often joked that they were full of magnets to make the tube distort on purpose.

    3. Re:Wrong impression by FrostedWheat · · Score: 1

      I'm of to play my Pretendo Gamecube on my 22" fony TV...

    4. Re:Wrong impression by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Lindows as a name gives the wrong impression about where linux wants to be anyway.

      So does Lindows as a product, so the name suits it perfectly.

    5. Re:Wrong impression by Tokerat · · Score: 1


      ...wouldn't that be Pretendo Gamelube?

      ...on your Smellivision?

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    6. Re:Wrong impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LindowsOS is not cheap, it's $49.95 on their website. Not bad for an OS that is supposed to install in minutes, and not ask you a ton of questions like SuSE or Debian. I doubt that they are trying to sell LindowsOS as an inferior copy of windows, so they really do need to dump the Lindows name and come up with something new.

    7. Re:Wrong impression by jargoone · · Score: 1

      And attitude like that is precisely what will keep Linux from the desktop. Some people want it to be easy, people like you will slam something like Lindows that makes it easy.

    8. Re:Wrong impression by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      And attitude like that is precisely what will keep Linux from the desktop.

      No, attitude like that is precisely what will keep proprietary crap like Lindows off the desktop.

      Some people want it to be easy, people like you will slam something like Lindows that makes it easy.

      There's nothing wrong with easy. Hell, I even want it to be easy. But that's why I use Windows. When I want proprietary insecure crap I go straight to the source - Microsoft.

  19. i sorta agree by GillBates0 · · Score: 1

    lindows did sound a bit dumb. i propose Winux, sounds better and conveys the same idea.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:i sorta agree by ScottSpeaks! · · Score: 5, Funny
      lindows did sound a bit dumb. i propose Winux, sounds better and conveys the same idea.

      Thewe's one pwobwem howevew, and that's that "Winux" sounds wike its the opewating system that Ewmew Fudd's hackew bwothew uses.

    2. Re:i sorta agree by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      I would slap you if I wasn't paraplegic.

      Winux doesn't sound close enough to 'windows' for people to make the subconscious connection.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:i sorta agree by eclectro · · Score: 1


      Except that everybody would have to go around callling it Gnu/Winux.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  20. New name by jhines · · Score: 1

    glass_thing_in_wall.

    Let MS chew on that.

    1. Re:New name by eblum · · Score: 1

      Actually the windows are the openings on the wall, not the glass thing on the window. Windows is related to the word wind (they let the wind come in) Is spanish is the same: Ventana (window) comes from viento (wind). other related words: Vents, ventilation, ventose, ventosity.

    2. Re:New name by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      What are the legality of clever plays on words?

      If it was called "Doors", would that be infringing?
      How about if it was called "Shutters"?

      How about "Macrohard?"

    3. Re:New name by br0ck · · Score: 1

      So.. Holeinthewall OS? Not bad.

  21. Name changes are easy. by maximum_high · · Score: 0

    Witness the birth of ...

    WINUX.

  22. More FUD from M$ by F34nor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Such a stupid decision. Windows is a universal computing term that they adopted, I'd have more sympthy if Xerox Park sued. And there is no reasonable cause to assume that a consumer could mistake Windows for Lindows. It's a pretty clear case I'm very suprised that a judge supported this pile of steaming horse crap.

    1. Re:More FUD from M$ by CottonEyedJoe · · Score: 1

      Its PARC (Palo Alto Reseach Center). I dont know what kind of claim Xerox would have. They were compensated for their contribution to Apple in Apple stock. But that only covers Apple. I suppose they long ago decided not to pursue others with similar GUI's.

    2. Re:More FUD from M$ by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      Probably not, but maybe Xerox Palo Alto Research Center could sue this "Xerox Park" you mentioned...

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:More FUD from M$ by nberardi · · Score: 1

      Actually Consumer Reports took people of varying ages that have never used any computer before. They gave them money and sent them into a Wal-Mart that stocked both and told them to buy a computer. When they came out they asked them did you get Microsoft Windows on your PC. 18% of them said yes and they actually walked out with a Lindows PC.

      So saying that you could not mistake them is not true. Maybe you would never mistake them because you are in the know. But what about everybody else?

    4. Re:More FUD from M$ by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      Interesting - I was not aware that machines were sold in the Walmart storefronts with Lindows preinstalled - I thought it was only sold online.

      In any case, the name "Lindows" was very likely not the source of confusion for these consumers, but rather the very idea that a computer would *not* come with Microsoft Windows preinstalled. How many people walked out with Mandrake or Lycoris and thought hey had bought Windows?

      I'd bet money that they didn't even know the brand of the computer itself - the average consumer would call a Dell a "Windows computer". I'd even gamble that these consumers could have walked out with a Mac and *still* call it a "Windows computer".

    5. Re:More FUD from M$ by F34nor · · Score: 1

      I bet you can get 18% of Americans to eat a turd too. The bottom of the bell curve is a scarey place esp. if you take into account the kind of self selection for dumb people going to Wal-Mart.

    6. Re:More FUD from M$ by nberardi · · Score: 1

      Some super wal-marts actually have them in stock. I haven't found any in my local wal-marts but they are out there according to consumer reports. I am not douting that, but I was just refuting the point that "no body would get Windows and Lindows mixed up". There are people out there.

  23. didnt know? by jeffy124 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    i read an article on this earlier (dont remember if it was the one linked)

    a spokesperson for Lindows says that the company was unaware of the suits filed by microsoft in Finland and Sweden. This means Lindows didnt have opportunity to defend themselves. IANAL, and certainly not one overseas, but who's job is it to inform a defendant of a lawsuit? The court? The plaintiff (MS in ths case)? or (remember this isnt the US) does MS simply have to make their argument for preliminary injunction without the judge being presented counter arguments?

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    1. Re:didnt know? by Scarblac · · Score: 4, Informative

      Recently there was something similar in the news (I thought it was on Slashdot, but I can't find it right now).

      Lindows has no presence in the Netherlands. However, there was one small PC salesman from a village in a rural area that was going to sell them.

      He got an official letter from Microsoft, explaining that since Lindows had no presence and he was the only one selling, they were going to sue him over the trademark issue. The Lindows top man heard of this, and announced he would go to the Netherlands immediately to find out what was going on. The small salesman was rather overwhelmed by all the attention.

      But it now seems like MS may have been doing this all over Europe, and it's gone mostly unnoticed by Lindows.

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
    2. Re:didnt know? by Dusabre · · Score: 2, Informative
      In many jurisdictions you can get a temporary/preliminary injunction immediately after filing a suit and an injunction motion. The judge reviews the motions and if he finds it acceptable, rules. The defendant then gets sent the injunction and suit. The injunction can usually be appealed. The grounds for the granting of an injunction are usually more stringent than those for obtaining a favourable end result (probability of success has to be shown as well as a pressing and immediate need to stop the activity to be banned).

      It may not sound fair to have an injunction granted without being able to defend but:


      a) immediate injunctions are meant to apply to emergency cases where the delay caused by a reply and a hearing would be inappropriate;


      b) the burden of evidence to get an injunction is usually more than that needed to win an end case.

    3. Re:didnt know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I live in Sweden and has never seen anyone selling a Lindows computer. According to the Lindows website there are no resellers here in Sweden. Since Lindows does not exist here, why the f*ck did they sue here? This is not the US, so please, do not misuse our legal system in this way.

    4. Re:didnt know? by edrugtrader · · Score: 1

      the plaintiff must serve the defendant, and have that on record, before anything else can happen.

      --
      MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    5. Re:didnt know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the US, yes, and usually it's by way of certified mail receipt or other certified-delivery method. But the guy was talking about two other countries.

  24. Not surprising - just different philosophies by TekPolitik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In countries with WASPish legal systems, trademark laws only tend to protect against "similar" marks if they have the potential to create confusion. In continental Europe, they tend to protect where the newer mark attempts to capitalise on the goodwill of the earlier mark, even though there may be no prospect of confusion. Different underlying philosophies, different laws, different results.

    1. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      ... trademark laws only tend to protect against "similar" marks if they have the potential to create confusion. In continental Europe, they tend to protect where the newer mark attempts to capitalise on the goodwill of the earlier mark,...

      Since when does Microsoft have a trademark on "Windows"? IIRC, they have "Microsoft Windows" and perhaps "MS Windows", but the term "Windows" was already in generic use for over a decade before they even attempted to get a trademark in any country.

      So, how is it attempting to capitialize on goodwill to use a generic term that aplies to both products equally well?

      -- MarkusQ

    2. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1
      In continental Europe, they tend to protect where the newer mark attempts to capitalise on the goodwill of the earlier mark, even though there may be no prospect of confusion.

      Aah. But in this case I don't think it's really the "goodwill" of Windows that they were trying to cash in on.

      Windows crashes are so bad that it's one of the few aspects of computer stuff that I don't have to explain to non-techs.

      OK, I guess that maybe they were making it sound identifiably like it was a graphical interface - as to most non-Techs "Windows" is the graphical part of a computer.
      But that's the problem. If you called a Linux distro LinGUI or WIMP Linux, then the most of the people who would recognise it as meaning it's graphical will already be technically minded. The only way to try and market something at the "Average User" is to make it "A Linux that looks and Feels Like Windows"

      Maybe it wasn't the best name to use. But I still think that MS's reaction is a little bit petty. Not many people are honestly going to be fooled by it.

      Tiggs
      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    3. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by zerblat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Microsoft has registered Windows as a trademark in Sweden, and there's also several registered EU trademarks for Windows: 000079681, 000327890, 001691963 (you can do a trademark search here).

      --
      Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
    4. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Any idea what classes 9 & 16 are? It would seem logical (I know, it's always risky trying to use logic when dealing with governments) for them to be restricted in some way (e.g., some contries will allow a mark in a specific typeface). I suppose they could have granted a mark on a widely used term of art, but I would hope that they didn't.

      Also, if you go up a level and search for Windows it also turns up several with no registrant. Any idea what that means?

      My Swedish is very rusty, coming mostly from listening to a co-worker's elderly relatives complaining (I infer) about their bodies, reading poorly translated man pages and math papers, second guessing the fish, and watching the muppet show. Did I say rusty? How about "virtually noexistent"?

      -- MarkusQ

    5. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by zerblat · · Score: 1
      Sweden, and the EU use the Nice classification system for trademarks. Class 9 is a pretty broad class, which amoung other things seems to cover all kinds of scientific instruments, electric devices, computers and software. Class 16 is related to "Paper, cardboard and goods made from these materials" (boxed software?).

      According to the FAQ:

      [...]signs which may be registered as a trade mark include the following:
      • word marks including letters, numbers or combination of letters, numbers and words;
      • figurative marks, whether or not including words;
      • figurative marks in colour;
      • colours or combinations of colours;
      • three-dimensional marks;
      • sound marks;

      So you can register a logo using a specific typeface as a figurative mark. Of course, if you register a word mark instead, you get the rights to all graphical representations of the word(s).

      --
      Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
    6. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by Bas_Wijnen · · Score: 1

      the term "Windows" was already in generic use for over a decade before they even attempted to get a trademark in any country.

      Not in Sweden or Finland.

      So, how is it attempting to capitialize on goodwill to use a generic term that aplies to both products equally well?

      Lindows is quite clearly not named after the english word for glass-filled holes in walls, and not even after the rectangular shapes on a computer monitor, but after a software product made by Microsoft. It is totally obvious, also from their marketing, that they mean "this product combines Linux and Windows."

    7. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by priich · · Score: 1

      The reason it's incomplete is that

      A) it's the "lite" edition of the service you're using
      B)The swedish national patent registry is not fully integrated with the EU wide OHIM until next year. In the mean time you are referred to http://www.oami.eu.int/en/default.htm

      on oami you can search for windows in the "find a community trademark" editbox and get full information of definition, countries applied to, nice codes, registrator, number etc etc.

      Now to the nice classifications you asked for with relevance to the trademark windows (9, 16 etc)

      " Nice classification: 9
      List of goods and services: Computers; computer software programs; computer components; computer peripherals; holograms.

      Nice classification: 16
      List of goods and services: Printed publications, magazines, newspapers, newsletters, users' guides, user manuals, and books relating to computers, computer software programs, computer components, and computer peripherals.

      Nice classification: 35
      List of goods and services: Organisation, preparation, and presentation of trade fairs, trade shows, and expositions including, without limitation, the display and advertising of computers, computer software, and other computer related goods."

      (given the tokens and session expiration time etc, i can't give a direct link, but just search for windows on the mainpage and you'll see what i mean.)

      The Nice classification 70 countries as partys of the treaty and is currently being used in 71 countries.
      To get a relatively detailed overview of the 8th edition of the Nice classification please goto wipo's page at http://www.wipo.org/classifications/fulltext/nice8 /enmain.htm

    8. Re:Not surprising - just different philosophies by Megaslow · · Score: 1

      I can't fathom why <a href="http://oami.eu.int/search/trademark/la/EN_T<nobr>M<wbr></wbr></nobr> _Detail.cfm?ID=000306399&CFID=5804729&CFTOKEN=653<nobr>5<wbr></wbr></nobr> 9777">this</a> didn't get accepted!

  25. Good by wobblie · · Score: 0, Insightful

    "Lindows" is about cheesiest, stupidest thing i've ever heard. Plus, they suck.

  26. In Other News... by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news, Ford has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Explorer", as in Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer. Ford cites the 1990 introduction of the Explorer as evidence that they had the name first.

    The many reliability and safety problems with Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer cause confusion among Ford Explorer customers who are themselves accustomed to these traits, a Ford spokesman said Friday.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    1. Re:In Other News... by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 4, Informative

      In other news, Ford has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Explorer", as in Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer. Ford cites the 1990 introduction of the Explorer as evidence that they had the name first.

      In Germany, Microsoft has allegedly licensed the Explorer trademark from a relatively unknown software company. At some time, this software company was rigorously protecting its trademark against those who offered or recommended software such as "FTP Explorer".

    2. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't agree with the decision but clearly you can see the difference between an Operating System and a car. It is a lot harder to tell the difference between one operating system and another especially when one is specifically designed to mimic the other. It is pretty obvious that Lindows intentionally named their product for just this sort of attention. It is not all that clever or catchy of a name by itself.

    3. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Microsoft were a car company then fair enough.... but they are not are they.

      Windows is an OS; Lindows is an OS... now THEY are a bit more similar products arn't they

    4. Re:In Other News... by jhol · · Score: 1
      As funny as this might be, the analogies are pretty far fetched.
      In other news, Ford has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Explorer"[...]
      Ford is not a software company and their "Explorer" is a car, that's pretty remote from a web browser. However, Lindows is a competitor to the software Windows and that's a completely different story. Say you started a company called LApple that made computers similar to Apple's computers, don't you think Apple would have sent a couple of lawyers on a mission to sue for all they're worth?
    5. Re:In Other News... by bensgroi · · Score: 0

      And in still other news, Chevrolet is filing suit against new auto maker "Levrolet"... I mean, come on people. For a community that prides itself on free software, why is /. up in arms about Lindows, a company that is trying to make money off of a slight derivative of the Windows name? Smells like s double standard to me...

      --
      You'll like being a dude!
    6. Re:In Other News... by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      I mean, come on people. For a community that prides itself on free software, why is /. up in arms about Lindows, a company that is trying to make money off of a slight derivative of the Windows name?

      More upsetting is the comments from people who don't realize my post was a joke.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    7. Re:In Other News... by bensgroi · · Score: 0

      Got the joke. Sorry, /. form jokes are only funny the first 100 times anyway. I was simply applying the automotive example you started in a more realistic way.

      --
      You'll like being a dude!
    8. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      As funny as this might be, the analogies are pretty far fetched.

      Except, of course, that Microsoft is attempting to trademark a common word. Windows is not trademarkable, while Microsoft Windows is. Is this a new direction of embrace and extend?

      Now, be honest. Do you make a xerox copy, or do you use a Xerox (tm) machine to make a photocopy?

    9. Re:In Other News... by (trb001) · · Score: 1

      While I don't typically defend MS, your analogy isn't accurate. Ford and MS are in completely different fields, offering completely different products. There's no chance for a customer mix up, therefore there's no valid complaint. On the other hand, MS and Lindows have competing products, and the name Lindows (MS argues) could be confusing when someone goes out to buy software. Take it from someone who did software distribution for a large university, and has a computer illiterate family...it can/will happen.

      This doesn't mean Microsoft isn't a huge cock, just that they have a legitimate complaint.

      --trb

    10. Re:In Other News... by danheskett · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have never made a "xerox" before, and when people use that I word incorrectly I correct them.

      However, "xerox", like "band-aid" was deemed to have become part of the American lexicon, used to refer to products of a genre rather than a brand. People using Mac OS X or Linux don't call their OS "Windows" like MS customers do. That's the defining test.

      Windows is context of computer software is not a generic term. It has been made specific. Even if it is not a valid trademark for purposes of genericity, it is clear that Lindows was and is attempting to capitialize on the name similiarity.

    11. Re:In Other News... by RealProgrammer · · Score: 1
      However, Lindows is a competitor to the software Windows and that's a completely different story. Say you started a company called LApple ...

      No, it's more like: say you had a product named "Fjord", an amphibious retrofit for Ford SUV's. The word "ford" in English predates the company by that name, and means to cross a small body of water. You're doing your best not to infringe on their name by changing it slightly.

      The word "window" in English actually predates Microsoft's product. It's use WRT computer software does, as well. In fact, The X Window System was introduced in 1984, at about the same time as Microsoft's Windows product, and the two names were not interesting even then. What else would you call a product that put windows on the screen? "Boxes"? "Widgeted Rectangles"?

      Microsoft is abusing the court system to squash a competitor. "Lindows" rhymes with "Windows". So what?

      Maybe they should change the name to "Lindoze", since the "Windoze" spelling is more familiar to some of us anyway.

      --
      sigs, as if you care.
    12. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry. You're wrong (and not insightful). It is quite within their ability to trademark a common word. After all - Ford is a common word. So is Apple and Dell. Microsoft's actual trademark is for "Windows" and is serial number 74090419 for: "computer programs and manuals sold as a unit; namely, graphical operating environment programs for microcomputers."

      They also own about 9 other active trademarks all on the word Windows relating to other areas.

    13. Re:In Other News... by mikkom · · Score: 1
      Windows is not trademarkable

      That was exactly what I thought until I did a trademark search for Windows on finnish patent and trademark offices web service. It seems that Microsoft has been granted a trademark for windows at least here in finland.

      I have no idea if finnish trademarks are EU-wide

    14. Re:In Other News... by MartianC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm just plain against trademarks like this, nobody should be able to trademark a dictionary word, or any widely used short phrase (or at least the trademark should define very clear contexts of use). Whose language do they think it is anyway, you can't (or rather it seems they can...) claim bits of it. Very annoying.. If these corporate nazis were only prevented from hunting down and suing people for the most pathetic and derivative of reasons the world would be a better place.

    15. Re:In Other News... by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I do see the distinction you, and the law make on this. But on the other hand, I also maintain that a person would have to be either very gullible, or very stupid to have any more likelihood of mistaking the two explorers and windows/lindows. I'm by no means an expert on watches, but if someone offered to sell me a Bolex watch I don't think I'd have much of a problem figuring out what was wrong with the situation.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    16. Re:In Other News... by cball2k · · Score: 1

      "L" ------------ "W"

      hmmmm, nope, they look nothing alike, so if a moron thinks they are the same, he isnt smart enough to use a computer running either....

      --
      karma, hah...
    17. Re:In Other News... by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Uh.... a Window is one component of the GUI. How can you trademark something that's generic across almost any GUI, even one that's been in use by your competitors longer than you've been using your own?

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    18. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I first heard about the Explorer, I heard that it crashes a lot. So I got a Chevy instead.

    19. Re:In Other News... by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 4, Funny
      >>> So is Apple and Dell.

      Dell? Like "Farmer in the Dell"? Dell is common? Wow.... I guess my slashdot eduMacation wasn't as good as I thought...

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    20. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dell: a secluded hollow or small valley usually covered with trees or turf.

      Are we saying that it is ok to trademark words that you don't know? That would seem to open up a world of options.

    21. Re:In Other News... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      But in Finland, does the word "Windows" mean the same as it does to English speaking people?

      Have they trademarked the Finnish translation of the word Windows, or the English arrangemnt of letters with no actual finnish meaning.

      In much the same way that "bonseur" means hello in french, to a nieve English speaking person it is merely gobbldigook and would be considered trademarkable?

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    22. Re:In Other News... by mengel · · Score: 3, Informative
      Except that Microsoft doesn't have a trademark on "Windows", only on "Microsoft Windows". Too many other pre-existing things (i.e. the "X Window System") have trademarks involving the word "Window".

      So if the package was called "Licrosoft Windows" or "Microshaft Windows", I think they'd have a case.

      But not for "Lindows".

      --
      - "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
    23. Re:In Other News... by unclethursday · · Score: 5, Informative
      It is pretty obvious that Lindows intentionally named their product for just this sort of attention.

      You may be right, but Lindows is using a tactic in their US court case that may work. May.

      They're saying that "Windows" is a generic computing term, especially in GUIs (which it is). You are not supposed to be allowed to trademark generic terms.

      If that part works, then Microsoft will lose their trademark on "Windows" by itself. They could still have thier trademark on the phrase "Microsoft Windows", but they would no longer be allowed to have the word "Windows" itself trademarked, like it is now.

      They're also going after the fact that Microsoft has failed to try and protect their trademark in the past, and that the only reason they are doing so now is because the Lindows.com "LindowsOS" is a competitor. (Trademark laws state you can and will lose your trademark if it is not actively defended.)

      So far, it seems US courts seem to be agreeing with Lindows.com on the issue.

    24. Re:In Other News... by babyrat · · Score: 1

      yeah but the two operating systems aren't named the same thing - one is "Microsoft Windows" and the other is "LindowsOS". "Microsoft Windows" is generally referred to as 'Windows 2000' or 'Windows XP' further clarifying the difference.

      So you can't name an operating system 'Windows' because that already exists (fair enough), but now you can't name an operating system called something that rhymes with windows?

    25. Re:In Other News... by terrymr · · Score: 1

      Common words can only be trademarked where they are not descriptive. ie Apple Computers has nothing to do with fruit. Apple Corp. is a record company and not a fruit company.

      Windows is not a valid trademark because it is purely descriptive.

    26. Re:In Other News... by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 3, Funny
      No, I'm not saying it's okay to trademark words you don't know. I just thought it was about time to toss in a joke.

      Wasn't Dell the Guy's last name? Could he sue all the other members of his family for trademark infringement? Of course, he parents probably have prior art....

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    27. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      First of all, do you have any support for that statement or did you make it up?

      Second of all, what does Windows describe exactly? When I think of a window I think of an opening in a wall that I can look out not an operating system.

    28. Re:In Other News... by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 1

      I'm just plain against trademarks like this, nobody should be able to trademark a dictionary word

      Of course, and there are rules to prevent that in Germany. Unfortunately, "explorer" wasn't a word you could find in German dictionaries when the trademark was filed.

    29. Re:In Other News... by clontzman · · Score: 1, Interesting

      What about Sun? What about Apple? What about Oracle?

      The ability to trademark common words, under narrow conditions (e.g., you could still make a cleaning product called Windows), is pretty integral to the ability to market just about anything.

      I mean, let's be honest: they named their operating system product "Lindows" to cause confusion with "Windows" (or, more specifically, to suggest "Windows crossed with Linux") -- otherwise, Lindows is a pretty stupid name.

      If Microsoft made a product called Winux, the same argument would apply.

    30. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > Except that Microsoft doesn't have a trademark on "Windows", only on "Microsoft Windows". Too many other pre-existing things (i.e. the "X Window System") have trademarks involving the word "Window".

      That's true in the US, and indeed why injunctions against Lindows failed, but they own the "Windows" trademark as it relates to computer operating systems in Finland and Sweden, and likely in the Netherlands as well.

    31. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The oposite holds for us in Sweden, as "Windows" is an english word and therefor NOT a generic term, and as follows, Microsoft's claim is valid.

      I'm all for it. And I am a swede, though I am anti-Linux too. I am also anti-Windows if it helps :=)

    32. Re:In Other News... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I do see the distinction you, and the law make on this. But on the other hand, I also maintain that a person would have to be either very gullible, or very stupid to have any more likelihood of mistaking the two explorers and windows/lindows.

      Gullible or stupid? That's exactly the type of person Lindows is marketing to.

    33. Re:In Other News... by Quino · · Score: 1

      how would this work? If MS loses its trademark on the word Windows (which I also agree makes sense, given the history of "windowing enviroments" -- it's way too generic a word even within computing and they were far from first with it), would they immediate lose decisions made elsewhere in the world?

      Or does MS (and every other multinational) have copyrights in every country they operate, and would have to lost its trademark on a per-country basis?

    34. Re:In Other News... by lxs · · Score: 1

      Do you make a xerox copy, or do you use a Xerox (tm) machine to make a photocopy?

      Of course the name Xerox comes from Xerography (greek for "dry-writing" as it was the first process to use toner, or dry ink) which is the technical term for the original photocopy process. (the quality was terrible, mostly grey on white, and big black surfaces tuned out white with a grey edge, but text worked fine) so, "making a xerox" is equivalent to "taking a photo".

    35. Re:In Other News... by PSL · · Score: 1

      In other news Andersen Windows has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Windows", and in Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 2003, etc. Andersen eites the historical introduction of the Window as evidence that they had the name first.

      --

      "Times may change, but standards must remain the same." - George Carlin.
    36. Re:In Other News... by DrNibbler · · Score: 1

      Didn't the Pilot Pen corporation manage to jet the name of the Pilot changed on similar grounds? Or, funnier the WWF (Wrestling) vs WWF (World Wildlife Fund)... I'm sure people went to wrestling events expecting there to be pandas.

      --
      Sean.OutaHere()
    37. Re:In Other News... by LamerX · · Score: 5, Funny

      Be vewy vewy qwiet. I'm pwogwamming Winux. Eheheheheh.

    38. Re:In Other News... by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 0
      Wait, by this logic there would be no such thing as generic terms unless the term is defined in every single language.

      OTOH, the opposing logic means all generic terms defined in any language are generic terms in all languages

      Once again, globalism is illogical...

    39. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're saying that "Windows" is a generic computing term, especially in GUIs (which it is). You are not supposed to be allowed to trademark generic terms.

      They should have just gone ahead and called their OS Windows, then.

    40. Re:In Other News... by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      have become part of the American lexicon

      Near ubiquity has arguably moved Microsoft's products into the popular lexicon more rapidly than the brand names for other products.

      Brand protection is important in a competitive marketplace to help distinguish products.

      Most computer users think of "Word", "Outlook" and "Explorer" as basic ingredients of their computer. If pressed, they might remember the "MS" prefix that seems to prepend those application names. Many people are only vaguely aware of "Windows", considering it along the same lines as the hardware it's always bundled with, something dreary and essential like a utility. If you asked them what competing brand applications existed for each of Word, Explorer, Outlook, they'd have a hard time. Some of them might well come up with fictitious competitors like "Apple Word", "Netscape Explorer", prefixing a company name to something they regard as basic functionality. Only a small minority of people use carefully couched terms like "word processing" "WWW HTML browser" or "mail user agent". Arguably fewer people understand the correct generic terminology than the terminology based on Microsoft's branding.

      The speed with which Microsoft gets its products into overwhelmingly dominant market positions is IMHO reason to speed the transition of those names into a less protection. New product names like .NET, etc. deserve strong protection so consumers aren't misled; misspelled plays on old products names like Lindows will only cause potential buyers to think someone is trying foist upon them a cheaper and shoddier Windows wannabee.

      In some sense, existence of ersatz Windows elevates the brand value of Windows, as any consumers disappointed with Lindows will be sure to tell people to make sure and get the real thing.

      OTOH, if Lindows quality is acceptable...then there could be a problem, just as if my Lercedes automobile line were to be reasonably well-built instead of like a Yugo.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    41. Re:In Other News... by smegball · · Score: 0

      In much the same way that "bonseur" means hello in french, to a nieve English speaking person
      I think you mean "bonjour", not bonseur and it is "naive", not nieve...

    42. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a per country thing. But then after any one country decides, there may be treaties that apply. A treaty between countries could have an effect whereby a decision in one country may affect another country. But the fallback position is that each country decides on its own these issues. Then, later, treaties and other inter-country agreements may be made to apply (and it is quite unclear how they would apply). Btw, this is solely a trademark issue. Copyright does not apply to the name of products or the titles of creative works.

    43. Re:In Other News... by Jonathan+Platt · · Score: 1

      "In other news, Ford has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Explorer", as in Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer. Ford cites the 1990 introduction of the Explorer as evidence that they had the name first.

      The many reliability and safety problems with Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer cause confusion among Ford Explorer customers who are themselves accustomed to these traits, a Ford spokesman said Friday."

      I'm woundering if any one sends these posts to MS to show them how ridiculous they are being. Or also some of the SCO related topics for that mater aswell.

      --


      VENI, VIDI, VICI, DIXI
    44. Re:In Other News... by Quino · · Score: 1

      Apparently, "windows" to decribe a "computer windowing enviroment" was a generic term in computing long before Microsoft came about.

      During the first fight with Lindows here in the states, a lot of factoids came up, including how Microsoft was first advertising its own MS Windows. It came with descriptions such as "windows is a computer term describing the desktop enviroment used in operating systems, such as MS Windows" -- all paraprhased from my crappy memory but that was the gist of it.

      "Windows" was already a generic industry term that Microsoft was nowhere near first in using to describe their OS, so the validity of their trademark is certainly questionable.

      I'm not a hardened veteran here, but I do know (Ok, I just googled it) that MIT's X-Window system came out in 1984 -- When did Microsoft first have a GUI or something they could hang the already well-known computer buzzword "windows" on?

    45. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not possible. It is a generic term, and as such unable to be used as the name of the product. This is why Microsoft cannot call their OS just Windows either.

    46. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      The first version of Windows was announced in 1983 (which obviously predates X-Windows). You say it was apparently a generic term but noone seems to be able to provide any evidence. I also hardly think that window describes an operating system. I see nothing here that reminds me of a window. To me a window is something I can look through. Why not call everything frames or boxes or pages. You have to ask yourself whether Windows really is all that generic or if after 20 years it just seems that way.

      I should also point out that I provide a reference to a part of trademark law that says that after 5 years of operating under that name the name becomes distinctive. I don't think you are going to invalidate Windows as a trademark and the whole case (both in the US and Finland) will come down to whether it is confusing or not and that will be decided by a jury in the US in March.

    47. Re:In Other News... by angle_slam · · Score: 1

      It is country by country. But the results in one country can greatly affect an international company. For example, the World Wrestling Federation lost a trademark battle with the World Wildlife Fund. It was in Europe only, but they were forced to change everything to WWE because they export stuff to countries where they were effected.

    48. Re:In Other News... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      pahhhhhh u spelling/grammar monster :P

      i'm full of a cold, and besides, do you correct people when they make mistakes when talking on the phone?

      Everybody makes mistakes - we are of course only human :)

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    49. Re:In Other News... by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that the only reason they [MS] are doing so now is because the Lindows.com "LindowsOS" is a competitor.

      Well of course. MS isn't going to sue Pella over the use of "windows" in their product names. "Lindows" is marketed as a replacement for Windows (the product website is peppered with references to Windows), the UI looks like Windows (fairly generic to be sure, but some things came from MS, such as the "Start" button in the lower left hand corner), and certainly when the name "Lindows" was coined it wasn't with the generic "windows" usage in mind.

      Lindows is clearly trafficking on the Windows product name and not the generic term - their whole business model is built on replacing Windows. I think the court ruled correctly in this instance.

    50. Re:In Other News... by cgenman · · Score: 2, Informative

      I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but a cursory search of uspto.gov shows multiple trademarks registered for "Windows" by Microsoft.

    51. Re:In Other News... by frission · · Score: 1

      is that true? That you lose the trademark of a generic term. what about things that become generic, like google ("i'm googling for x") or Xerox ("can you xerox this for me?") or Jell-o ("want some jello?")

    52. Re:In Other News... by mcc · · Score: 1

      As I remember, What about Sun? What about Apple? What about Oracle?

      These are not in any way relevant. If you will look, Sun, Apple and Oracle do not actually sell suns, apples, or oracles (unless you wish to argue that a relational database has shamanistic properties, which would be extremely interesting but would be a whole different argument).

      You can name a music company, or a computer, "Apple" and that's an okay use of trademark. But you can't name a line of apples "Apple" or a line of apple pie "Apple" and then expect to defend this when someone else uses the term "Apple" to sell apples. Likewise, you can't name a window-based OS "Windows". Personally, I think Redhat would be able to put "Redhat Windows" in the stores and sell it and get away with it if they felt like it.

      If Microsoft made a product called Winux, the same argument would apply.

      And Microsoft would be able to keep its trademark on Winux for the same reason Lindows gets to keep their trademark in America. "Linux" itself, if you'll notice, was largely inspired by a similar product called "Minux". If Winux is a violation of Linux's trademark, then Linux is a violation of Minux's trademark...

    53. Re:In Other News... by mojoNYC · · Score: 1

      well then, i can't wait for the day that M$ sues the W3C for infringing on its '.NET' trademark...

    54. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Lindows claim is correct in USA, but Microsoft's claim is correct in Sweden.

      This is right, because generic terms are different in different countries, but also, the laws are very much different (thank god for that, can't stand the USA laws).

    55. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lindows is clearly trafficking on the Windows product name and not the generic term - their whole business model is built on replacing Windows. I think the court ruled correctly in this instance.

      When I see the word "Lindows" the first thing I think about is "Linux" not "Windows." It looks more like they are trying to replace Linux.

    56. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying that I can use Apple as the name of my computer company, cause apple is generic? You obviously miss (hide) a point somewhere.

    57. Re:In Other News... by gsfprez · · Score: 1

      regarding Apple.

      a. Its "Apple Computer, Inc." - not Apple. They don't have a trademark on the word "apple".

      b. "Macintosh" (what they used to call their computers) WAS unique... the fruit is the McIntosh apple.... it was purposefully spelled "Macintosh" for many reasons... - the obvious play on the non-trademarked familiar item (McIntosh Apple, "Americas favorite apple"), Mac is a friendly word all on its own

      (fwiw: it doesn't appear that their computers are even called "Macintoshes" properly any more.

      There are but a tiny handful of reference to "Power Macintosh G5" at apple.com (google turns up a lot of false positives...that is to say, google for "Power Macintosh G5" - then go to the pages found and do a text search for "Power Macintosh G5". I'm finding most of the google hits are false... weird). From all appearances, the new machines are officially called "Power Mac G5" and the handful of references to "Power Macintosh G5" seem to be typos.

      Someone correct me if i'm wrong, please.)

      It IS silly that Microsoft gets to trademark the word "windows". Its a common word - to follow that logic, i could trademark "telephones" and screw the whole planet form using that word without bowing before me.

      "Microsoft Windows" should be the only reasonable trademark they should be allowed to get...

      i say "should" because IANAL.

      --
      guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
    58. Re:In Other News... by dq5+studios · · Score: 1

      No, that is brand identification. Where the brand name becomes the generic term (ie Band-aid instead of Adhesive Bandage). Trademark Dilution is where others start using it and you don't defend it (re Universal v. Nintendo).

    59. Re:In Other News... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      I was responding to this comment -- "I'm just plain against trademarks like this, nobody should be able to trademark a dictionary word" -- which is why I brought up Oracle, Apple and Sun (and Tide and Dial and any of the other dictionary words that are trademarked reasonable).

      The dangerous thing is that if the Windows trademark is overturned (and it should be upheld, IMHO), it opens up a huge can of worms because of the number of products with "generic" names (Illustrator comes immediately to mind).

    60. Re:In Other News... by mcc · · Score: 1

      Sorry. I got confused by the slashdot comment breakout and misunderstood the thrust of what you were trying to say.

    61. Re:In Other News... by xingix · · Score: 1

      Actually, Universal never owned the King Kong trademark to begin with. It was public domain.

      --

      Confucious says: Man who runs behind car gets exhausted.

      // jeku.com

    62. Re:In Other News... by xingix · · Score: 1

      I believe it has to do with the 'wares' of the trademark. Here in Canada when you trademark a name, you have to state the wares. For example if you register McDonald's, the wares would be 'restaurant, fastfood, etc.'. If somebody else register's McDonald's as a shoe shining shop, it's ok. His wares wouldn't match the McDonald's fast food company. I remember our company was getting sued by Telus because we had mybc.ca and they owned a trademark on mybc.com! It was too bad for them because our site had nothing to do with the wares stated in their trademark case!

      --

      Confucious says: Man who runs behind car gets exhausted.

      // jeku.com

    63. Re:In Other News... by Schnapple · · Score: 1
      In other news, Ford has recently demanded that Microsoft stop using the name "Explorer", as in Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer. Ford cites the 1990 introduction of the Explorer as evidence that they had the name first.
      A valid comparison - if Microsoft made cars (and no, that's not the intro to a joke). If Microsoft made a car called the Lexplorer (or if Lexus did) yes they'd get the pants sued off of them. If Lindows changed their name to Led Hat, then Red Hat would sue them. You make a product and name it one letter different from the competitor you want to emulate and yeah, you're asking for it.

      Besides, I think most would agree that Lindows is a stupid name whose point is no longer valid (Lindows is moving away from the Windows compatibility claim) and they should rename it in order to survive. Now they'll look like they renamed it because they were sued.

    64. Re:In Other News... by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1
      It is pretty obvious that Lindows intentionally named their product for just this sort of attention.

      You may be right, but Lindows is using a tactic in their US court case that may work. May.

      They're saying that "Windows" is a generic computing term, especially in GUIs (which it is). You are not supposed to be allowed to trademark generic terms.

      If that part works, then Microsoft will lose their trademark on "Windows" by itself. They could still have thier trademark on the phrase "Microsoft Windows", but they would no longer be allowed to have the word "Windows" itself trademarked, like it is now.

      They're also going after the fact that Microsoft has failed to try and protect their trademark in the past, and that the only reason they are doing so now is because the Lindows.com "LindowsOS" is a competitor. (Trademark laws state you can and will lose your trademark if it is not actively defended.)

      So far, it seems US courts seem to be agreeing with Lindows.com on the issue.

      Yep and it'll be a total travesty if M$ doesn't loose, this whole tactic of theirs, of stealing words out of common usage windows, word, excel, ... is immoral, and when the law wanders to far from what is right, the society it claims to serve is in trouble. Hopefully the judge in this case will do what is right but. Still it should be automatic, no misappropriating parts of the language proper, nor the technical jargon of your industry. It gives you an unfair advantage over your competitors, and makes total Shiite out of the language.
      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
    65. Re:In Other News... by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      Isn't .NET a domain type like .com? I have to agree that many people associated the shortened name of the product (i.e. MS Word vs Word) rather than the full name. Does that make it right that a company can trademark a common word? In the case of "windows", the word is synonymous to a GUI environment.

      Does Microsoft trademark "Microsoft Mouse" or "Mouse"?

    66. Re:In Other News... by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Informative

      but they already lost a civil court battle regarding that, vs the windows for dummies books...as I recall. The term windows was determined to have become to diluted and an industry standard term. M$ Windows of course is still theirs but as far as I know it is a dead horse in the US.

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    67. Re:In Other News... by smed · · Score: 1

      holy fscking crap! that is so funny!
      I'd mod you higher, but it looks like you're already there.
      Aint it the truth though?

    68. Re:In Other News... by Quino · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, but it's not made up:

      "It is undisputed that several other companies had developed interfaces with an overlapping windows feature prior to the release of Windows 1.0 in 1985."

      and

      "The USPTO's February 17, 1993 Final Action stated that 'the term Windows is widely used, both by the public, consumers, and the relevant industry, to name a class of goods or a type of software, that is, a genus of goods, referred to as windows programs, or windowing software."

      Those are taken from a Judge's order, BTW.

      read more here:

      Yeah, I know, ideally they should be independent links, but at least you know it's not just my opinion.

      Besides, what's the likelihood that MS actually came up with something new on their own? (Even if it's just a name!) :P

      The real issue that issuing that trademark was a mistake in the first place -- too bad that MS didn't come up with something original and probably wasted money advertising and building a brand name they don't have strong claims to (or really, probably *any*).

      It's still to be decided in the US, but it's certainly not just my opinion and not that impossible that MS loses the term "windows".

    69. Re:In Other News... by smegball · · Score: 0

      yeah I wouldn't have corrected nieve, but I would've asked for an explanation for bonseur 'cuz it is a word that doesn't exist (if it doesn't exist, then is it a word at all, or just a jumble of letters?) and is pronounced differently...

      whatever. blah...(yes I started it, the nit-picker I am)

    70. Re:In Other News... by monkeydo · · Score: 1

      Neither Red Hat nor Microsoft sell windows. They both sell operating systems. If Microsoft was trying to trademark "Operating System" you might have a point.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
    71. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he is not wrong (but he probably did not know it). When was the trademark registered? "window" as in X and MacOS as a technical term in GUIs both predate the 1985 release of Microsoft Windows so it is a common term in the field that they are selling the product (or at least that could be argued). At the time Apple, Commodore, and Wang registered trademarks those terms were not common vernacular in the area of computers.

      As far as the law is concerned, it is as if any common terms are "implictly trademarked" (I am taking quite a bit of license here), but it is a good analogy for when one is trying to test if a term is trademarkable.

      At the time Apple trademarked apple, was apple a common term in the area of computers. Most would say no.

      At the time Windows was trademarked, was the term window a common term in the area of GUIs and computer shells? Many that are old enough to know the history would probably say yes.

    72. Re:In Other News... by mn2346 · · Score: 1

      No it does not.

      I believe the court in Finland based it's decision on this fact. Microsoft has trademark for Windows -> almost automatic prevention to sell under that or very similar name.

      Not that this has prevented the sale of Lindows. I just bought one perfectly legal copy from Lindows.com.

      BTW. The court ruling was made couple of weeks ago and was not (yet) notified to Lindows. MS naturally knew.

    73. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I miss the days when I first started developing and thought of most users as not stupid. After a while of dealing with user problems you start to develop a hatred of them, it's almost inescapable.

      I finally started writing scientific packages because the average user in this environment had a bit more intelligence.

    74. Re:In Other News... by antiMStroll · · Score: 1

      It's pretty obvious they chose the term Lindows to suggest "as easy to use as Windows" and not to trick ...who?..ESL students? into buying a computer pre-installed from Best Buy.

    75. Re:In Other News... by Hack'n'Slash · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to point out that there are obviously a lot of gullible people out there as indicated by the continued success of spammers. This group of people make up the majority of Microsoft's customers, and they should be concerned that someone is offering an OS catered as an alternative to Windows, as evident by the name of Lindows. I'm not saying I'm all for Microsoft going after Lindows for the name, but I can understand why.
      (I don't intend the comment about Microsoft users to be flamebait. I actually like some Microsoft products, so I would be lumping myself in there as well.) :)

    76. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      a) - Did you even look - Apple has several trademarks on just the word Apple - 74660120, 74527910, 73201697, and 73120444.

      b) I made no comment on Macintosh so I am not sure why you brought it up. Apple does have 3 trademarks on just the word Macintosh and several on Mac (including .Mac).

      There are two links I recommend. TESS which allows you to search trademarks and Basic facts about trademarks. Trademarking telephone would be fine as long as it is for a specific purpose (and not selling telephones obviously since American Telephone & Telegraph would have a fit). You can also not sell travel or insurance since there is already a trademark for Telephone issued to a travel agency in Wisconsin (78201645) that also sells insurance (78201637).

      I hope that clears thing up and I hope I don't sound condescending. Trademarks are very confusing and I am just trying to make it a little easier.

    77. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Microsoft Windows actually predates X Window by one year (1983 vs 1984). Lisa was out before then but did anybody actually buy it?

      It also is not just a matter of whether the industry remembers it being a common term but whether it can be proved in a court of law.

    78. Re:In Other News... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Germany, Microsoft has allegedly licensed the Explorer trademark from a relatively unknown software company.

      Not just Germany. In the US, there was a web company founded in around 1995 or so called "Internet Explorer". They completely owned that trademark. Microsoft bought them out just to get it.

    79. Re:In Other News... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft was trying to trademark "Operating System"

      Microsoft Disk Operating System(TM)

    80. Re:In Other News... by ak_hepcat · · Score: 1

      Hey, I might actually wear a watch if it was manufactured by Bollocks.

      Eh, nevermind...

      --
      Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
    81. Re:In Other News... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Apparently, "windows" to decribe a "computer windowing enviroment" was a generic term in computing long before Microsoft came about.

      Absolutely not. "windows" was used as a plural word to describe parts of graphical environments. Never to refer to the environment has a whole.

      Piror to Microsoft coming along, nobody said "Run windows and then launch the editor". People said "Open two new windows", but those are entirely different usages.

    82. Re:In Other News... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      which obviously predates X-Windows

      It's easy to predate X-Windows, since X-Windows doesn't exist yet.

      There is a project called the "X Window System", but they never called it "windows". They never put an S on the end of the word. "Window" != "Windows"

      After the popularity of Microsoft(tm) Windows(r) grew, some people started using "X-Windows" to mean the "X Window System".

    83. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is pretty ridiculous...

    84. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      This isn't specific to you but I am going to make one more post to clear up all of my threads and you happen to be the latest one. Here is my complete analysis:

      Trademarks server two purposes - to protect a company's "Brand Image" and to protect customers from confusing product selection.

      First, I want to state that it is not at issue whether a company can use a dictionary word for a trademark. That is allowable under the law and you are not going to reverse that anytime soon. There are thousands of companies that use common terms as their name and I have listed out many in other posts. I am not debating the theoretical "rightness" of this.

      In 1983 when Microsoft announced Windows 1.0 it appears (but is difficult to prove legally) that a window represented an area of information with a graphical interface*.

      The patent that I could find (74090419) that related specifically to the OS was dated August 20, 1990. There are others but that is the one at issue. The question is whether Microsoft should be allowed to trademark a term that was supposedly industry standard at the time.

      Title 15 Section 1052 (e) states that no trademark shall be issue " when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant is merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of them." That is the issue here. Is Windows a description of what an operating system is? It would at least seem that it is part of an operatin g system.

      However, the law was amended to specify that a "...mark which would be unregistrable by reason of 2(e) of the Act" can be registered if it "is said to have become distinctive of applicant's goods by reason of substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce thereof by applicant for the five years before the date on which the claim of distinctiveness is made." In 1990 when the trademark was issued was the term Windows distinctive to Microsoft's product when referring to operating systems? I am not sure how anybody could argue against that. Based on that amendment it would seem that USPTO was right to grant Microsoft its trademark.

      Why did the lawyers not bring that up? Why did the judge say that Microsoft took a risk by trademarking the term? Well he is right. They did take a risk but it paid off. The trademark was issued and based on what I said above it is valid. Notice that the judge never said that Microsoft's trademark was not valid. He only said that Lindows is taking the same risk that Microsoft did. By preventing an injunction he did not rule against Microsoft trademark but allowed Lindows to continue using the name until the case went to trial in March of next year.

      Having established that I think Microsoft will keep its trademark - what will happen in this case. This gets back to the two purposes of trademarks. Is the name so similar as to be deceptive to potential buyers? On this site it is easy for everybody to say no but having experienced first hand the average user I can tell you that I am not sure. I can't tell you how many times I have asked people what version of Office they have and they say 98. Now Office 98 did exist but only for the Mac. They confused Office with Windows and those two terms aren't even similar. If I am an average person going into a store and seeing a computer that is cheap and quickly glancing at what it has would I catch the distinction of Windows vs Lindows? Would I know to look for the distinctive Window symbol?

      This is a tough case. It is hard for me to say because I know the difference. I would never confused the two but when I can see someone like my mother buying her first computer and not really knowing even what Windows is saying to herself "Was it Windows or Lindows?" and then asking a 16 yr old snotty clerk who wouldn't know the difference. The good thing is that it is up to 1 jury of average people who will get to hear all of

    85. Re:In Other News... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Spend half an hour doing research and typing things up and then forget to close a freaking tag. Typical. Of course, I could use the excuse that I really should be doing work now.

    86. Re:In Other News... by KefabiMe · · Score: 1

      How do you know Lindows is playing of Microsoft Windows? Remember X-Windows? That had been around much before Microsoft had anything windows based.

      What of instead of Lindows they called it X-Lindows, as it being based of *nix software? Would Microsoft then still have a case in your opinion?

    87. Re:In Other News... by rking · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that I can use Apple as the name of my computer company, cause apple is generic?

      No. He's saying something more like if you use Apple as the name of your brand of fruit then don't expect the courts to recognise you as having a trademark on that word in relation to fruit sales. At least, not in English speaking countries.

      Selling a windowing OS under the name "Windows" isn't quite as bad, but it isn't far off either. The US courts don't seem to have been impressed by Microsoft's intial claims, but that doesn't mean they can't be convinced.

      It isn't just that there's some context in which the word is generic (like apples) but that that context is the same as, or extremely close to, the one in which you want to claim your trademark applies.

    88. Re:In Other News... by klasikahl · · Score: 1

      That's actually interesting... There was a lawsuit that the company who makes Beretta handguns filed against Ford for naming a car "Beretta." The case was dismissed on account of the products being in two totally different fields.... Although the two fields of products are commonly used together to perform drive-bys.

    89. Re:In Other News... by Quino · · Score: 1

      I know the feeling regarding preview (and work -- it's sort of barren around here with most senior people having the vacation days to not show up until after New Year's... it's hard to find the motivation to do work -heh-)

      No one is going to accuse you of being an MS Shill -- you're making a good case and make sense.

      OK, I can agree with the general sentiment that you made, but it's my understanding that MS did take a risk, and it's only recently been challenged -- so it's still not clear that it "paid off" or if indeed, it was "wasted money" on the part of MS (which I understand is another strike agains MS -- 3rd party vendors have been using parts of the name "windows" -- winamp, etc. etc. -- for a long time and only now MS is defending its trademarked word). That's sort of an aside, but it supposedly does hurt MS in the courtroom.

      BTW, the "official" reason (and one that makes sense to me) for the name wasn't just to tick off MS, it was because Lindows was going to have a super version of Wine that would allow you to run Windows programs within Lindows. Robertson backed off on that claim after a while, and then that "feature" was dropped (IMHO because it proved harder than what Robertson and company thought)

      For what it's worth, as part of their defense Lindows also conducted surveys and there was no confusion in the general public: they saw Lindows and did *not* think it had anything to do with MS or a product of MS -- which I think is the only real way that MS might be hurt by the name Lindows (which is, after re-reading, one of the points you were making, is it confusing and deceptive?).

      I think MS would only have a case if this was clearly confusing, like the Sonny tapes a friend bought in the flea market ("how come these sound so shitty? It's a Sony!?" -- we had to point out they weren't). The fonts looked just like what Sony uses, if it wasn't for that extra 'n' ...

      So, I'm not sure. It seems at least that MS didn't coin the word in a vacuum, maybe they added a letter and came up with something not *literally* the same as everyone else. But I do think it's disingenous, because even at the time, MS chose that word because of its existing value and known meaning in computing. It was never original as a word, or a concept, nor in what it described. I would only grant MS some leeway if they had, indeed, introduced to the world the concept and name it thus; instead of picking a common name that would, because of common knowledge, imply the meaning of MS Windows (it's like other windowing enviroments you've seen!)

      I'm not sure if it's germane that Windows has *now* become closely branded to MS* -- I think the question boils down to: should it have been granted in the first place, and will anyone spend money on Lindows thinking it is a Microsoft Windows product.

      After reading your points, I'm no longer so sure that MS should definitely lose the term Windows, but I'm still unconvinced that Lindows is in any way hurting the Microsoft brand.

      Granted, I wouldn't put cash down myself on a bet until I saw an independent survey asking people if they associated Microsoft in any way with Lindows (and that's the final test I can think of). Otherwise, couldn't Lindows be named after the X-Windowing enviroment, which is does use, BTW? Seriously, you could claim that Lindows and Microsoft took their names from the common roots of windowing eviroments from a while ago ... (I wish I could find the link to the MS manual that described Windows as a "generic industry term")

      *I've heard the argument that MS spent so much money, they should own it. I don't like this argument; it's not up to the government to make sure investments by private businesses pay off.

      PS

      I just realized that I'm arguing as to what makes sense and sounds "fair" to me -- well, and I'm parroting off whatever legal arguments I read before. I have a feeling that "common sense" may not mean as much as the little details around the actual law (IANAL after all!)

    90. Re:In Other News... by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, "Lindows" does describe the product very well. It's Linux with as close as possible to a Windows look and feel. Lindows doesn't use the name simply to try and be a knock-off Windows, it uses the name to explain what their intent is.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    91. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Winux. You know, Microsoft would better use the talents of their staff coming up with some form of Linux for their next new product. I have XP, on a P4 HT, with 1 GB of ram, and am disappointed in it. Didn't know what the BSOD was as I was (still am) a fan of Windows 98. In less than a month, I have been BSOD'd to death by XP. Can't imagine that Microsoft has put so much into an OS that cannot in any way be as reliable as my Redhat 7.1 (on that now) setup. Or Slackware, or Debian.
      So, it's time that Microsoft put out a nice Linux product. Perhaps they have one under secret development. Other OS companies use Linux to base their product on, look at LindowsOS 4.0 which is
      based on Debian.
      I know, "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". Well, Microsoft's latest upgrade to XP has been put out to many thousands of Beta Testers, which looks somewhat like a "bazaar", except the Beta guys don't get the source.
      If I had the same stability as Linux in my XP setup, then I would be a lot happier having paid $2,300 to Dell for a big machine with XP preloaded.

    92. Re:In Other News... by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

      Micosoft's official position as of a few years ago was to insist that when you refered to the OS it was always Microsoft Windows and never just Windows. Vendors of software whose manuals misused the term and only used Windows were chastised by MS with a note from marketing or legal IIRC. They also preferred the usage Microsoft Windows operating system or Microsoft Windows. This may be useful in civil cases at least in the US if MS pushes Lindows to court for infringment in the US jurisdiction.

      --
      - Tjp

      I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

    93. Re:In Other News... by LittleBigLui · · Score: 1
      nobody should be able to trademark a dictionary word


      Last time i checked, "Explorer" wasn't in my german dictionary.
      --
      Free as in mason.
    94. Re:In Other News... by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 1

      What of instead of Lindows they called it X-Lindows, as it being based of *nix software? Would Microsoft then still have a case in your opinion?

      No.

    95. Re:In Other News... by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      That's what I meant by "globalism is illogical"--what good is a software name that only works in the USA?

    96. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try our Apple apple pie, now made with Apple apples!

    97. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beat the dead horse!!!

    98. Re:In Other News... by Narchie+Troll · · Score: 1

      Follow me to the gay bathhouse.

    99. Re:In Other News... by Narchie+Troll · · Score: 1

      Windows was not originally an operating system.

      It was a windowing system. The word "window" for the things that Windows was designed to draw on the screen predates Windows.

      Windows is software that draws windows. Of course, Word is software that writes words.

    100. Re:In Other News... by mikkom · · Score: 1

      I think the court ruling was preliminary, ie the real verdict is yet to come.

    101. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Last time i checked, "Explorer" wasn't in my german dictionary.
      I'm surprised. The Germans have a habit of 'exploring' neighboring countries on a regular basis.
    102. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember X-Windows?

      No... there's no such thing as X-Windows. ITYM X Window System. HTH. HAND.

    103. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have XP, on a P4 HT, with 1 GB of ram

      Wowza, u're leet i wanna have u're children !!

  27. But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by pesc · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live in Sweden, and I'm not aware that Lindows is available for sale here. I don't think the general public (outside of Slashdot) knows anything about it. So if they would like to market it here, just give it a new name first. No big deal.

    And seriously, I kind of agree with the judges. "Lindows" is a bit too close to "Windows". They should try to build their own name by themselves.

    --

    )9TSS
    1. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lindows point is, that "Windows" is a generic term anyway. Even in the computer world were "Windows" known before "MS Windows". I think MS should lose the Trademark "Word" as well, it's plain stupid (or ingenious, if you can make the judges protect it).

    2. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by pesc · · Score: 1

      Lindows point is, that "Windows" is a generic term anyway

      No, in Sweden (Swedish) it is not.

      --

      )9TSS
    3. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by ioErr · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it is any longer, but Lindows has been for sale in Sweden.

    4. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Lindows WAS sold here in Sweden at geekonline.se (probably other stores aswell), but they stopped after threats from Microsoft's lawyers.

      I do agree though, also because it's misleading customers into thinking they'll be able to run their Windows programs on it, which was their original intent that it would.
      I also don't particularly like that they trash-talk other Linux distros as not being "user friendly" enough, and lying about them not having the "features" of Lindows. Just check out their "information" on Linux distros here, on a site they've sponsored.

    5. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And seriously, I kind of agree with the judges. "Lindows" is a bit too close to "Windows". They should try to build their own name by themselves.

      So, if I represented, oh, say, Anderson Windows I could go to Sweden and file suit against Microsoft and have their use of Windows struck down and you'd be OK with it?

      Let's face it, Microsoft should try to build their own name by themselves, and not leverage off the good name of Anderson WIndows.

    6. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by zenyu · · Score: 1

      Lindows point is, that "Windows" is a generic term anyway

      No, in Sweden (Swedish) it is not.


      So if they ever start selling Lindows in Sweden they can call it the Swedish name for windows... Sheesh, I don't like Lindows for a number of reasons but it isn't right to sue someone without their knowledge, how is this legal for Microsoft to do? And how did Microsoft get a trademark when X Windows was already being sold in Sweden by a number of UNIX vendors? Did X Windows somehow get diluted when the X consurtium allowed Microsoft to market "Microsoft Windows"? Would they have better off suing and losing against Microsoft way back when so that Microsoft couldn't do this to them now (Lindows = Linux + X Windows)?

      Also when did Microsoft get a trademark in Sweden? They couldn't get one for years in the USA...it wasn't until they got a "pro-business" government that they got it here, since there were pre-existing competing products with the same name and it's been a generic term for Windowing systems since the 1950's amoung English speakers. I believe the inventor Ivan Sutherland is still alive even, shouldn't his company (Evans Sutherland, former graphics giant, now a military industrial complex supplier) get first bids on the trademark a la how the US courts gave Linus the Linux trademark after someone else registered it?

    7. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by pesc · · Score: 3, Informative

      So if they ever start selling Lindows in Sweden they can call it the Swedish name for windows

      No, fonster (Swedish for "Windows") would be generic in Sweden. But I guess I could trademark fonster in the US.

      And how did Microsoft get a trademark when X Windows was already being sold in Sweden by a number of UNIX vendors?

      I don't know. Maybe X Windows wasn't trademarked in Sweden/Europe. Or the trademark holders failed to protect their trademark.

      Also when did Microsoft get a trademark in Sweden?
      1992 I guess.

      You can check the web page for patent och registreringsverket which handles trademarks. Search here (javascript required). The search page is in Swedish.
      "Lydelse" = Trademark text.
      "Sok" = Search
      "Aterstall" = Clear

      Also note that a trademark is registered in classes. I couldn't find a list over what the class numbers mean though.

      --

      )9TSS
    8. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an asinine comment. Anderson Windows and Microsoft Windows are completely seperate products with no hope of ever being confused. Lindows and MS Windows are both PC OSs.

    9. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by zenyu · · Score: 1

      You can check the web page for patent och registreringsverket which handles trademarks.

      It looks like it's a set of EU trademarks not a Swedish one, it was probably granted on the basis of the US trademark and assuming Lindows wins in the US by invalidating the "Windows" trademark, it will be vacated on an EU wide basis. It seems to be registered to three entities each having a different part of the "class". Notably there isn't even a company name or address registered for any of the "Windows" trademarks.

      And how did Microsoft get a trademark when X Windows was already being sold in Sweden by a number of UNIX vendors?

      I don't know. Maybe X Windows wasn't trademarked in Sweden/Europe. Or the trademark holders failed to protect their trademark.


      But you don't need to register a trademark to have one, you just have to use it. Registering just lets you sue someone else for using it assuming they didn't own it before you did, and puts others on notice that you already took that name. For instance, a long time ago I started a company called Bungee Software making DOS shareware, but I never registered the trademark so I don't have much standing to sue the game maker with that name. They probably didn't even know I existed, and I didn't know they existed early enough to get them to change their name. It's a PITA because, practically, I have to come up with a new name and a new logo to avoid confusion, even though I could legally continue to use the name since I was first to use it for software.

    10. Re:But is Lindows on sale in Sweden? by Mirar · · Score: 1

      Well, you would get the same problem trademarking the name "fonster" here as trademarking "windows" in English-speaking countries, I guess?

      "Windows" is a foreign word (English is not an official language of Sweden, however good we are at English ;) ), so it's no problem trademarking, same as any incomprehensible word in for instance Hindi or Japanese.

      I find the decision logical, since the name very much rides on the old trademark, and competing in the same business. However I wish for Lindows' success, it was a poor choice of name. Isn't the whole idea of registered trademarks to protect such use?

      It would be very much like making a car brand called "Obel", "Lolkswagen" or "BM".

      (Hey, who steals the dots over the o in "fonster"?)

  28. Invalidate WINDOWS first. by Burlynerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They need to focus on invalidating the trademark word "Windows" first, then Lindows wouldn't be infringing on anything. Microsoft should never have been able to trademark such a ubiquitous term.

    BN

    1. Re:Invalidate WINDOWS first. by kefoo · · Score: 1

      That's (at least part of) the reason the US judge refused Microsoft's request for an injunction, saying he doubted the validity of many of Microsoft's trademarks such as "Windows" and "Office".

    2. Re:Invalidate WINDOWS first. by trynis · · Score: 1

      It might be a ubiquitous term in english, but it certainly is not in finnish or swedish. This is problably the most important reason for the US-judge to come to a different conclusion than the finnish and swedish judges. This is a fair ruling IMHO.

      --
      This is not a sig.
  29. Alternative names. by eblum · · Score: 0, Redundant

    What about using "holes in the walls"

  30. Darlsux by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now about the lawsuit-proof name "Darlsux" ?

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Darlsux by evilquaker · · Score: 1
      Now about the lawsuit-proof name "Darlsux" ?

      That would be a very bad name. You see, "Darlsux" is a contraction of "Darl's Unix" (Darl'sU'x, and drop the apostrophes), which implies that Darl owns whatever makes up "DarlsUx", which of course is Linux. So by changing their name to "DarlsUx", Lindows would be bolstering SCO's claim to owning Linux (at least in the delusions of Darl & Kevin).

      --
      To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
    2. Re:Darlsux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Alan Cox took over Linux, it could be called Coxux.

    3. Re:Darlsux by bobdinkel · · Score: 1

      Lawsuit-proof? I don't think anything is lawsuit-proof where Darl McBride is involved.

      --
      A publicly traded company exists solely to make profits for shareholders.
    4. Re:Darlsux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Darlix.

  31. good... by night_flyer · · Score: 1

    the name is obviously using "windows" as a catalist to get recognition, which unfortunatly a lot of linux applications seem to do.

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
  32. it's just a name! by m0rphin3 · · Score: 1

    For you zealots out there, this isn't about Microsoft stifling Linux. It's just ONE distribution!
    And for heaven's sake, the name is way too similar.

    What if this was about Microsoft marketing Lie-nux or your SO coming home with Pepzi or Mountain Due? You'd be pissed off ..

    --
    for great justice
    1. Re:it's just a name! by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What if this was about Microsoft marketing Lie-nux or your SO coming home with Pepzi or Mountain Due? You'd be pissed off ..

      Nope. Sorry. I have far more important things in life to worry about than corporate squabbles over names. Also, I tend to date women who are smart enough to not be fooled by a similar sounding product name.

      --
      --- Ban humanity.
  33. Quite Correct by racer7890 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This ruling is quite correct. I am no Microsoft fan but the Lindows name was clearly intended to play off the Windows name. It is my theory that Lindows purposefully chose this name to get the publicity it is getting now. Other attacks at Microsoft (such as the Lindows offer for Californian residents based on the anti-trust settlement) play into this.

    1. Re:Quite Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Totally agree. Nice to see that some slashdot-people still has some perspective. Seems rarer and rarer these days,,,

    2. Re:Quite Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it Microsoft Windows to which you refer? I'm confused because I'm looking out my office windows while using my X windows system running on the Lindows OS.

      Windows windows's window windows.

    3. Re:Quite Correct by racer7890 · · Score: 1

      Are you honestly saying that you didn't know I was referring to Microsoft Windows?

    4. Re:Quite Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, They would have better served the open source community by making there own name and it would have saved them alot of money in the process that could have been used to better there OS.

    5. Re:Quite Correct by aug24 · · Score: 1

      Double balls and bollocks mate, Windows is a generic computing term going back ten years before Microsoft wrote 'Executive Manager' (which became Windows). They shouldn't have been allowed to trademark it, and anyway they've let it become diluted due to allowing the marketing of millions of programs called WinXXX.

      Right at the start, they were turned down for the trademark request twice, then got given it unexpectedly on the third attempt. The truth of how that happened will come out in the Windows vs Lindows lawsuit (coming to groklaw in 2004, most likely!).

      J.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    6. Re:Quite Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep there are waaay too many right-wing MS supporting assholes here now.

  34. How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twinx ? :)

    The Windows Interchangeable Unix.. or.. wait a second..

  35. I'm happy by SL33Z3 · · Score: 1

    I'm happy to see the arms of the empire stretch farther than America now. I develop strictly for the Windows platform right now. I hate silly competition getting in the way of my freedom to innovate.

    --
    SL33ZE - Artificial Intelligence is No Match For Natural Stupidity -
  36. Well it serves Lindows right! by Kris+Thalamus · · Score: 0

    We all know that they should have initially done what any self-respecting programmer would have done- given the software a name with a recursive acronym.

  37. MR's goal's been achieved tough... by lennart78 · · Score: 1

    Lindows has got a lot of publicity because of its name. And in this case, the saying is totally valid: Any publicity is good publicity.
    Lindows has been given a lot of free media coverage, not because it's a good product (It might be, I haven't used it, but that's not the issue here), but because MS was not amused by its choice of name, and fought against it. (And anybody who gets any heat from MS runs to /. to get attention and support from the open source / Anti-MS community.)

  38. No this is not :) by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 1

    athough I always thought you are right. I'm with them.

    Lindows.com, please kick billy's ass!

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
    #
  39. comprehensible? by colinleroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that Microsoft has a hard time winning this in the US may be due to the fact that in this english-speaking country, "windows" is a common word meaning "openable thing made out of glass". In Finland and Sweden, this is not the case. Maybe this explains this injunction?

    --
    blah
    1. Re:comprehensible? by nempo · · Score: 1

      If you didn't know we do speak both swedish AND english here in sweden...well, most of us do anyway.

      --
      --- No, english is not my mother tongue.
    2. Re:comprehensible? by The_great_orgazmo · · Score: 1

      As far as i know they teach english in sweden too, so i don't see how your point can be valid. Also, if i were to start an IT company named "Appel", (which means apple in dutch) and i start selling x86 pc's with stylish casings, I'm pretty sure i'll receive a call from one of Steve Job's minions faster than i can say TRADEMARK. I don't see how lindows vs windows is any different.

    3. Re:comprehensible? by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Informative
      I am an American who spent about a year in Finland. I would say, that yes, most Finns and Swedes know enough English to know what 'window' means. There is no cognate (false or otherwise ) in either language (Fenster (or something like that) in Swedish, ikkuna in Finnish).

      So, if the courts are going strictly on the populace's native language(s) and usage, then yes, windows is a unique, trademarkable word (if their legal system is like ours). Certainly Finns and Swedes know that window is a common English word, but I don't think that would fit the court's standard for a common word in either country. It is, in fact, foreign.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    4. Re:comprehensible? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      I believe it's 'vindu' (sounds like windo) in Norwegian. I always thought that the difference Fenster-Vindu in swedish-norwegian gave some hints that norwegian is closer related to anglo-saxon.
      They also have words like 'lunsj' (sounds like lunch, means snack or lunch I think)
      Maybe a native norwegian can give more insight into this.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    5. Re:comprehensible? by One+Louder · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Microsoft is probably going to lose the case in the Untited States - the word "windows" is a generic term commonly used in computer science and Microsoft should never have been granted the trademark.

      In non-English-speaking countries, the term is no longer generic - it becomes "fanciful", and therefore protectable, and Microsoft might win in those countries, though given the scrutiny they're under in the EU, this is not a given. Lindows.com isn't big enough to sell the same product under too different names, and will have to change.

      Therefore, even though Microsoft will lose the battle in the US, they're likely to win the war overall.

      What I think Robertson will do is what he did in the MP3.com situation - fight until the very end just to keep the company in the news, then concede in a flurry of press releases just before it could actually result in a big payout to Microsoft.

      Microsoft is hinting that they'll ask for damages - this is, of course, absurd. It will be impossible to show any loss of sales of Microsoft's product in any of those countries, since it's unlikely Lindows.com has sold more than a couple of dozen units there, and you could interview *every one* of those customers to find out if they were confused.

    6. Re:comprehensible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, the english word "windows" originates from nordic languages through the viking invasion of the british islands. In swedish the word still exists: "vindoga" which litteraly means eye of the wind. It is a sailing term in todays swedish.

    7. Re:comprehensible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i migth have mised something but i think it will be extremly hard for a consumer here in sweden to buy lindows of mistake since the resselers i have seen so far dosent even sale windows. they sale bsd and linux and you only find lindows under the linux section.

    8. Re:comprehensible? by lawpoop · · Score: 1
      Dictonary.com says that 'window' is derived from Middle English : [Middle English, from Old Norse vindauga : vindr, air, wind; ...]

      There is no such language as 'Anglo-Saxon' -- it is a combination of the names of the two ethnic groups that made of the dominant majority of England, namely the Angles and the Saxons.

      This map of the indo-european language family tree should give you a better idea of how the languages are related.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    9. Re:comprehensible? by mijok · · Score: 1

      In Swedish it's "fonster" with two dots over the o but slashdot won't allow me two write that letter and lunch is written "lunch" in Swedish and means the same thing. In Norway, however, there are two official languages, which are quite similar though (one of them, bokmal, is a heritage from the Danish era and the other, nynorsk, meaning "new-norwegian" is made up from different dialects when some norwegians wanted their "own" language instead of the Danish heritage) and IIRC the word for window is "vindu" in at least one of them. FYI: I grew up in Sweden (a total of 15 years), spent one year in Norway and now live in Finland...

      --
      Karma. Moderation. Is my .sig good now?
    10. Re:comprehensible? by catbutt · · Score: 1

      But the relations of languages is much more complex than indicated by that graphic. The graphic does show old english, and it shows old saxon....but there was a lot of intermixing and combining of those languages as peoples intermixed, which is not indicated in the graphic.

      The graphic shows a tree that branches but never rejoins, which is usually appropriate for biology (to show speciation), but not as accurate for languages.

    11. Re:comprehensible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you are posting on slashdot and the fact that your post gets 4 insightful points shows that MS is likely to win this in the US.

      Where did you see and how did you conclude that MS is having a hard time winning this in the US? Cause you didn't hear a verdict yet? The court is going on. With the same logic, IBM is having a hard time against SCO? Is this the way you are going to save open source?

    12. Re:comprehensible? by colinleroy · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is not what i meant - I'm french and i can speak english too. But english isn't an official language in Sweden, is it ? I meant native speak, of course.

      --
      blah
  40. sweeden stops lindows too by dassdraugen · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sweeden probits sale of lindows until the case between MS and Lindows is seateled. They allso threats with a 3 mill fine if sales are not halted until then. Norwegian article: http://www.itavisen.no/art/1302516.html

  41. ObPython by LittleGuy · · Score: 1

    Its new name will be "Raymond Luxury-Yachtnix", but it will be pronounced "WinThroat-Warbler Mangrove".

    --
    Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
  42. Pink Floyd by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    I was thinking of the time when Roger Waters quit Pink Floyd. Then he sued to try to prevent the band from still using the name Pink Floyd.

    At one time, the band considered changing their name to "Roger Waters is an A**hole"

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Pink Floyd by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 1

      To prevent from being sued for slander they should of dropped the last name, so they would be Roger Is An Asshole(RIAA)

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  43. Letter differences frustrating by shuz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the most frustrating problem of all these Lindows name court battles, is the single letter difference between Lindows and Windows. Now most of us here realize that Lindows is Linux and Windows put together. Though I would imagine trying to convince a nontechnical or techy judge to see this is quite a struggle. I am not a lawyer but it would make sense of many court battles won over single letter name differences. This is probably why Microsoft won in these two courts. Though some kind of law should be set determining or setting regulations on how a business combining two other business may name themselves.

    --
    There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
    1. Re:Letter differences frustrating by Anita+Coney · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just doesn't matter. If I sold a hammer and called it a Hammer, then tried to sue Sears for infringing my common-law trademark for selling hammers, I'd lose.

      Both the words hammer and windows are mere descriptions and cannot be enforced as trademarks. That's why Microsoft lost in its attempt to obtain an injunction in the US.

      I have no idea why they are winning in Europe. It appears they have different standards. Maybe I should start selling my Hammer there!

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    2. Re:Letter differences frustrating by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > Now most of us here realize that Lindows is Linux and Windows put together

      You just made the trademark dilution case. Unless you're talking about the name alone, it most certainly is not Linux+Windows. Windows is not included with Lindows, and it's hardly compatible for applications such as games, and frankly most other things. Someone could pick up a Lindows machine, try to run something Wine doesn't support well, and form the opinion that it's Windows that's malfunctioning.

      To respondents: your clever rejoinders about the quality of Windows won't be funny or original. Don't bother.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  44. I've got a good name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why Win- and Lin-?

    Why not -Dows and -Ux?

    Dowsux! D'oh, sux!

  45. bummer by andih8u · · Score: 1

    But I don't think Lindows has all that much of a brand awareness with consumers anyway. Its not like the huddled masses are going to be picking up their $150 Wal-Mart PC and be distraught that it has "$name-OS" on it as opposed to "Lindows."

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
  46. How about X Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why doesn't the owner of X Windows sue Microsoft for misappropriating their name?

    1. Re:How about X Windows? by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is called the X11 Windowing System, not X Windows.

      They get kinda uptight about being called "X Windows". :)

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    2. Re:How about X Windows? by Turmio · · Score: 1

      For 1000th time and this time repeat after me loudly: There is no such thing as X Windows. You probably refer to X Window System, aka. X Version 11, X11 or just plain X as described in X(7) manual page of XFree86. Thank you for learning, don't make this mistake again.

    3. Re:How about X Windows? by julie-h · · Score: 1

      Good idea. I think someone should give IBM a call. I bet they don't mind spending a few millions on a lawsuite=) Really, "Microsoft Windows" is the most rip up of "X Window System" as it can be!

    4. Re:How about X Windows? by ricochet81 · · Score: 0

      So, you know, all these stupid lawsuits/patents like amazons shopping cart, one click(fine) or that stupid on about the X10 pop-unders. Why dont holders of language licenses, (which i believe are mostly universities? that developed languages based with government funding) take away the rights of some certain people, like Jeff Bezos' amazon.com to use their language. Same goes for Sun and their Java lang.

      I wish I could underself my stand -Me (is this prior art?)

      --
      Error: Id10t detected
    5. Re:How about X Windows? by mgg4 · · Score: 1

      It is called the X11 Windowing System...

      Actually, until just a few minutes ago, I thought it was called "X". It just happens to be in version 11 (anyone else out there remember version 10? Remember all the joys that were to be had when X11 first came out?). My recollection was that the name should be "X", or "X11", but never "X Windows".

      However, a quick check at the web site www.x.org shows that they call it "the X Window System":

      X.Org is the worldwide consortium empowered with the stewardship and collaborative development of the X Window System technology and standards.

      Now I'm confused.

      --
      -- This space for rent.
  47. Microsoft doesn't have copyright of Windows! by julie-h · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How can Microsoft win this case, when they don't have copyright for the everyday word "Windows" or for that matter "Word"?

    From what I know was microsoft forced to change "Windows" -> "Microsoft Windows" and "Word" -> "Microsoft Word".

    Lindows cloned the word "Windows" not "Microsoft Windows".

    1. Re:Microsoft doesn't have copyright of Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Window" isn't a Swedish word, so that argument is pretty much moot over here.

    2. Re:Microsoft doesn't have copyright of Windows! by Pofy · · Score: 1

      Copyright? You meant to say trademark, right? I have seen several posts in this thread treat trademark and copyright more or less as the same when in fact it is VERY different things.

    3. Re:Microsoft doesn't have copyright of Windows! by spitzak · · Score: 1

      By your logic Lindows should be able to call their produce "Windows". I don't think that is true in the least. You might be able to make a new airplane and call it "Windows", but not an operating system.

      The "Lindows" name is an obvious ploy on the "Windows" name. Microsoft thinks it is too similar, and I do too. The only stupid and wrong thing Microsoft is doing is drawing attention to this competitor with this lawsuit, why they don't just ignore it is a mystery to me.

  48. Unable to use any name like 'Windows' by L-s-L69 · · Score: 1

    Double Glazing salesmen are in serious trouble!

  49. Re:Gah! by grub · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Not only is it a name, it's a generic word found in any dictionary. If they were to try using the name "L-OS/X" or "L-AIX" I could see where there would be a problem.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  50. Stupid by C_Kode · · Score: 1

    This is just plain stupid.

  51. Ok Than by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe geeks hate it but I really see future in Lindows company.

    I actually liked the stuff they make as an Apple owner

    If they are -selling- it and making money over it, time to hire a PR/advertising company and find a name. Like Easy Linux but OF COURSE paying some price to GNU and Linux itself.

    Posted anonymous since 2-4 freaks here has fun downing my score.

  52. I still think "windows" is a generic term... by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 3, Informative

    I still want to know how the word "Windows" can be trademarked. Especially when Microsoft's own CEO refers to windowing systems in a very generic way.

    Comments from Deposition of William H. Gates...
    "Virtually every application has the ability to put multiple things on the screen that you'd call windowing. ...that goes back even before the '60s."
    "The idea of splitting a screen up so you have one thing in one place and something in another place I think has been referred to windowing, certainly in the '60s that was called windowing."

    1. Re:I still think "windows" is a generic term... by Flambergius · · Score: 1

      Koska suomenkieliset sanat "ikkuna" ja "ikkunointijarjestelma" eivat ole sopivia tavaramerkkeja, kun taas englanninkielinen sana "Windows" on on aivan hyva tavaramerkki.

      That's how.

      --Flam

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
    2. Re:I still think "windows" is a generic term... by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 1

      Point taken.

  53. Winux? by jellings · · Score: 1

    just a thought . . .

  54. Just Lindows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not go after Bindows, or some of the other *indows clones ?

  55. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by mumblestheclown · · Score: 4, Informative
    How does the parent's lack of understanding of the most basic aspects of trademark law qualfy as "insightful?"

    Inappropriate use of trademarks occurs when rational people might confuse the infringer's X (product, action) with something put out by the trademarkholder. In practice, this often amounts to that the infringer must be in the same or similar line of business. In practice part 2, there may be infringement even if you're in another line of business if a reasonable person could conclude that you chose that trademarked name in order to play off on existing fame/notoriety/image of the trademarkholder.

    Therefore:

    • Windows / Windex - no infringement. Different name, different business.
    • Windows / Lindows - very very similar name could legitimately cause confusion (at least according to this court ruling). same line of buisiness. infringement.
    • Apple Computers / Apple Juice - Apple owns the trademark apple as it pertains to computers. Apple vendors everywhere unaffected.
    • Mercedes (automobiles) vs you making Mercedes Perfume without using the mercedes car symbol. undecided... i tend to think that this would be infringement, since mercedes is a well known luxury brand, automobile or not.
    • Microsoft / Microsoft porn magazine for women who like small men. Probably infringement, as a reasonable person would conclude that name probably wouldn't have been chosen were it not for the existence of the famous company.

  56. Windex by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

    What does this mean for Windex?

    Windex is the best way that I know to clean off windows!

    It means they should offer Lindows to use their name! Create brand awareness for their fine glass cleaners among the computer geek community!

    It's a perfect, untapped market - think of all those grimy chocolate fingerprints on your monitor!

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  57. Okay, allright... by telstar · · Score: 1

    How about LYNDOWS!? LYNDOZE? LINDOEZ? L1ND0Z3?
    I won't even get started with the high-ascii possibilities.

    1. Re:Okay, allright... by Thrymm · · Score: 0, Troll

      Microsoft needs some Cheese with their Wine!

  58. That's trademark, not copyright. by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You don't copyright a brand name, you trademark it. And yes, Microsoft has a trademark on "Windows".

    1. Re:That's trademark, not copyright. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft has a trademark on "Microsoft Windows" not on "Windows." You cannot trademark a common word, but you can trademark a descriptive phrase containing a common word, or modifications/contractions on a common word or words. For example, "Microsoft Windows," "MSWindows, "WindowsPLUS," and so on can be trademarked. However, the single word by itself cannot be trademarked.

      If they do have a trademark on "Windows" by itself, it was issued in error...

    2. Re:That's trademark, not copyright. by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 1

      Microsort lists "Windows" (as well as "Microsoft Windows", "Windows NT" etc) as one of their trademarks. Mistake or not, there it is.

    3. Re:That's trademark, not copyright. by julie-h · · Score: 1

      Yes, and from that I can't see how Lindows can loose such a case based on an everyday word. Ups I wrote an trademarked word. Ups I wrote the word again. Ups I ...

  59. Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by EmagGeek · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't care... I won't use Lindows, nor will I recommend that anyone else use Lindows. Lindows is in bed with SCO, so therefore they can rot in hell for all I care.

    1. Re:Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never mind that, they nicked their website tabs off Apple. Bastards!

    2. Re:Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by One+Louder · · Score: 3, Informative

      You'll note that that press release talks about an agreement with SCO that dates back to 2001, long before the current situation with SCO and IBM and threats to Linux. Many companies had relationships wth them from that era - it doesn't at all mean they're party to the current behavior of SCO.

    3. Re:Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      If they're not taking punitive action against SCO for what they're currently doing, then they're a party to it.

    4. Re:Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by One+Louder · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What do you want them to do? SCO hasn't threatened them at all, and they've got their hands full with another, substantially larger, company suing them all across the planet. To do anything about SCO at this point is a waste of time, particularly since they have no case and IBM has the situation well in hand.

      Besides - what "punitive action" are *you* taking, or are you "in bed" with them too?

    5. Re:Lindows in bed with SCO anyway by MouseR · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read that page you link to:
      Lindows.com is not a party to the legal disagreement between SCO, IBM and other technology companies. Until more facts are presented, Lindows.com will not take a position as to the validity of the claims presented by either side.
      Their agreement predates SCO (made during Caldera days), and they don't take position on SCO's claims until it's resolved.

  60. Lindows should retaliate by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    MS lost their attempt to do this in the USA very badly. Indeed, the judge was even musing if they deserved trademark protection for the name "Windows" at ALL.

    Lindows could file suit to attack their "Windows" trademark in the US, and offer to drop it only if MS agrees to quit these nusiance suits.

    Since both are US companies, I also don't see why Lindows couldn't file an unfair competition suit against Microsoft in the US, along with claims they are violating thier anti-trust settlement.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
    1. Re:Lindows should retaliate by mishehu · · Score: 1

      I can forsee it... they will continue suing Lindows in every third world country that they can if and when they lose in Finland, Sweden, and NL (what I read is this is only a preliminary injuction, and not a closed case)... Next stop - Micronesia!

      Not that I really care about lindows much, but that's because I'm an old fashioned slackware user...

    2. Re:Lindows should retaliate by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

      " can forsee it... they will continue suing Lindows in every third world country that they can if and when they lose in Finland, Sweden, and NL (what I read is this is only a preliminary injuction, and not a closed case)... Next stop - Micronesia!"

      And the only way Lindows can stop this is by suing MS in the United States.

      Since MS has already lost their trademark fight here, I think that US courts will take a dim view of what they are doing elsewhere. Yes, what MS does outside the USA technically isn't in their jurisdiction, but MS is a US company. As is Lindows. And MS is bound by the terms of the antitrust settlement.

      Lindows is attempting to compete with them on the x86 desktop, where MS has been judged to have a monopoly. Microsoft is attempting to hinder that competition using bogus trademark claims that thanks to their earlier loss, have no standing in the US.

      --
      Corporatism != Free Market
    3. Re:Lindows should retaliate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I also don't see why Lindows couldn't file an unfair competition suit against Microsoft in the US"

      So you support laws that SCO is going to use to screw Linux? I'll laugh when SCO wins and you say the result was unfair.

  61. Sweden/Finland To World... by wsmith00 · · Score: 1

    We can't be had, but we sure can be bought...

  62. MS actually has a valid complaint by netwiz · · Score: 0, Redundant

    First, Lindows _does_ compete directly against MS's premiere software product, the OS. And it really does have a name that's easily confused w/ Windows. That's how trademark law works. Second, Ford suing MS, or MS suing SC Johnson would be dumb, since they're not in the same market. MS doesn't sell SUV's, and SC Johnson doesn't sell computers or software.

    Honestly, I've been waiting for this to happen somewhere, and I'm surprised that it happenned first overseas, given that I'd expect the US has more case history for this kind of thing.

    1. Re:MS actually has a valid complaint by 4r0g · · Score: 1
      MS doesn't sell SUV's, and SC Johnson doesn't sell computers or software.
      Let's see. Windows is big, bulky, shiny on top, hard to manouver int tight spots, crashes hard, consumes a lot of resources.

      Yup, to me it sounds just like an SUV for an OS.

      --
      - 4r0g
    2. Re:MS actually has a valid complaint by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      Lindows.com's argument is that "Windows" is a generic term used in computer science to refer to the feature of the GUI being broken into rectanglar areas, and this usage predates Microsoft's usage, and is therefore not protectable. In the United States, the judge on the case has stated that he thinks the Lindows.com case has merit, which is why he denied Microsoft's attempt to get a preliminary judgement.

      This happened overseas first because the generic use of "windows" does not extend to other languages.

    3. Re:MS actually has a valid complaint by magic · · Score: 1
      Excellent point-- In a language where "windows" is not already a word, it looks like a unique trade name. In the US, "windows" is generic. In France, "windows" is not generic at all.


      Thanks, this is the most informative post on the article.


      -m

  63. Oh well there are plenty of other options by Vaystrem · · Score: 1

    Exterior Oriented Viewholes
    Skylight
    Doors
    French Doors (cause they have *indows in them)
    Not Not Lindows
    Gates

  64. Seems like meaningless publicity to me by Garwulf · · Score: 1

    Well, having followed a bit of the Lindows/Microsoft case, this reminds me a bit of SCO.

    Microsoft has tried on numerious occasions to get an injunction like this in the United States, and been turned down every time. So, they've gone and gotten the injunctions from Scandanavia (where english is not a first language).

    But, since Lindows is based out of the United States, as is Microsoft, there is absolutely no way to enforce this on the main battlefield, unless you're distributing in Scandanavia, in which case they'd have to change the name for the units sold in Scandanavia.

    But, it makes for great publicity...

    --
    Robert B. Marks
    Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
  65. HAHAHAHA by Koldark · · Score: 1

    So... if you can't win in the US. You go to other countries and sue them there. Interesting strategy...

    --
    Mike http://thenextgenerationofradio.com
  66. coming soon Slashdash.org by night_flyer · · Score: 1

    awww quit your whining, its only a name, right?

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
    1. Re:coming soon Slashdash.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on the dashcode, running on a Lindows box, no doubt.

  67. Memories of the Carl Sagan vs. Apple suit by Anonymous+Meoward · · Score: 1

    Lindows should change its name in Sweden and Finland to "BHS" (for "Butt-head Scandinavians").

    --
    --- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
  68. There's a reason for this.. by bensgroi · · Score: 0

    Come on people, this isn't FUD. This was Lindows simply cashing in on the Windows name. The entire reason they chose that name is because it's only one letter away from the MS variant. This isn't about MS "FUD," this is about Lindows trying to water down MS's trademark. And before people start bitching about "Windows" being such a common word, remember that no one complains about Sun...

    --
    You'll like being a dude!
  69. an analogy by Savatte · · Score: 1

    If I started up a burger franchise called Licdonalds, despite the differences in name and products, it would be an obvious attempt to cash in on the name recgonition of McDonalds.

  70. what's next for the evil empire? by bstil · · Score: 1

    Will MS try to prevent every database company from using 'SQL' because they have 'SQL Server'?

    1. Re:what's next for the evil empire? by Thrymm · · Score: 1

      The New York Yankees are the Evil Empire if you listen to the masses in Beantown!

  71. The New World War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the past, large corporations used price fixing, trusts, and other illegal means to kill their competition and to own their industries. Laws were put in place to prevent these abuses and to attempt to level the playing field. Today's large corporations have adapted to legal restraint by using the law against their comptetitors. This is a classic example. Patent abuse would fall into this category.

    No longer will the Microsofts of the world merely lock out their comptetitors with "barrier to entry" abuses-- they will attack them with the laws. They own the law now, they no longer fear it. When laws no longer suit them or threaten their empires, they use the legislators they bought in the last election to change them. This week's soft money ban victory in the US Supreme Court will not change this-- they will find new ways to buy the government.

    We allowed it to happen. We allowed it to happen when you were too lazy to go to the polls and vote against people you knew were going to do this to us. My congressional district is a prime example: it re-elected Tom Delay, (to my utter shame and disgust). This man and those like him have been selling us out to the corporations for decades.

    The new world war will be fought in the board rooms and courts by those who are really in power: large corporations. Until we stand up against them, it will never change.

  72. IIRC by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    Microsoft sought a similar injunction here and LOST.

    If you can't win, try again, but choose your court carefully...

    This makes it harder for them to establish brand name presence in Europe. But they could change the name a bit for their European customers (Lindows as a name is marketing gold, and they would be a fool not to use it everywhere they can).

    Maybe something like D Lindow System. (D for Desktop, Lindow to edge around the injunction and head for higher ground). What? Is Microsoft going to sue the X Consortium next?
    What? Isn't Lindow a bog in Cheshire, England?

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  73. Right by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    This is an injunction anyway. NOT a final verdict. MS tried the same in the US and failed. Sweden ruled differently. So now in sweden until the final verdict lindows may not to blatantly use the name lindows.

    Most shocking thing about this story is the crap reporting.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  74. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  75. Windows can not be a trademark by acz · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is horse crap, the windows word is common language and thus can't be copyrighted. Lindows on the other hand is an original name and a legitimate trademark.

    Some lawyer paste some trademark law in a reply please?

  76. Instant Poll by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

    Your preferred new name for LindowsOS would be:

    1. Winux

    Don't complain about the lack of choices, this is Slashdot, not a democracy.

    Comments:

    Your poll sux! I want to call it Lindux!

    I flame your troll and raise you five goats

    WARNING! GOAT LINK IN PREVIOUS COMMENT!

    Oh like the zillionth metatroll today!

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  77. Longhorn by big-giant-head · · Score: 5, Funny

    In another court action today, the US District Court in Austin handed down an injunction against MS for using the code name longhorn, requested by the University of Texas. The school nickname is the longhorns and the schools mascot is a drugged neutered bull named Bevo, who wanders aimlessly about and craps all day.

    UT Students were getting confused since both MS longhorn and Bevo's BM are both Stinking piles of crap. Further more UT football players, trained to lay down and play dead at the site of BEVO (witness the Arkansas and OU games) were now getting confused and doing the same thing in their computer lab. This has resulted in half the team being ineligilble for the Poulan-weedeater-holiday-trailmix bowl.

    UT coach Mack "Roscoe P. Coltrane" brown had the following statement:

    "IIII Know ol Bill Gates really did'nt mean any harm to us, but since the wind kept shifting directions the players were confused which crap there were smelling longhorn crap, Bevo crap or my crap". "I really thought we could keep them focused on thier school work, as soon as that Windows Start up screen came on, there they went, locked up, feel straight over, with that same glassy eyed look they get in the cotton bowl every year."

    --

    So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
    1. Re:Longhorn by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Longhorn Steakhouse is also suing microsoft over the hijacking of their name... Longhorn Steakhouse is afraid people will stop eating there, thinking they'll just be served yet another piece of CRAP product by Microsoft...

    2. Re:Longhorn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumn Agee.

      Mack "Roscoe P. Coltrane" Brown

  78. LNDWS? by Teddy+Beartuzzi · · Score: 1
    Where was that story about dropping letters again? About how you could drop x% of the letters and still get the meaning?

    How many letters have to match before you violate their copyright?

  79. MS Insecure in brand recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they really think people can't tell the difference between a "W" and an "L" ? Shame on MS for calling us all stupid.

    One would think, MS would be a bit more secure, in it's brand recognition after all these years.

  80. Court said "maybe", not "you're right" to MS by Sumbody · · Score: 2, Informative

    From the article:
    "In response to what is a clear and obvious infringement on our trademark, Microsoft has taken action in select international territories to curtail infringing or misleading behavior on the part of Lindows.com," Drake said.
    Now this came from a partisan Microsoft sales slime, not the courts. All the courts have apparently ruled is there exists the possiblity of trademark infringement and confusion in the marketplace. As such, the safest thing to do is protect the revenue stream of the complaintant until the issue is resolved - hence a temporary injunction.

    I loathe MS as much as the next geek, but really MS has won nothing here. Move along please.
  81. Protection against blatant clones by photonic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although in hate Microsoft like the rest of you, I do believe they have a point: Lindows is an obvious reference to the similar product Windows.

    Take a for example a look at the products of Sanex, and the blatant clone Sanicur (same sounding name, same colour scheme).

    I would guess that Sanex would be more than happy to sue the other company into oblivion, but they are apparently not able to do so.

    --
    karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
    1. Re:Protection against blatant clones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But isn't that just playing off of 'sanitation'. When you're in the same line of business, you base your names of the same root.

      (never used either product of course.)

    2. Re:Protection against blatant clones by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1
      Although in hate Microsoft like the rest of you, I do believe they have a point: Lindows is an obvious reference to the similar product Windows.

      Take a for example a look at the products of Sanex, and the blatant clone Sanicur (same sounding name, same colour scheme).

      I would guess that Sanex would be more than happy to sue the other company into oblivion, but they are apparently not able to do so.

      All true enough, Lindows is a Troll, but that doesn't change the fact that M$ has no right to the word windows, morally, if they do in law then shame on the Law.
      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
  82. The answer..... by vwjeff · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    who's job is it to inform a defendant of a lawsuit?

    Simple, the RIAA. They may tell you or they may not. I surrender to my RIAA overlords. Off topic but couldn't resist.

  83. Obligatory Simpsons quite by cgenman · · Score: 0

    Ow! My bones are so brittle. But I always drink plenty of.... Malk?

  84. Possible solution. by AmoebafromSweden · · Score: 0

    Well, if the Lindows name is too hot, why dont they change it to Lindow. Ms can't possibly sue that since they havent done anything about X window.

    1. Re:Possible solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is it with the moderators. How do they moderate? Ah well this will get busted in meta moderation.

  85. Drop the name? That's not all! by bfg9000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lindows was also ordered to stop crashing so bloody much, as that is obviously another attempt to copy the winning Microsoft formula.

    Said a Microsoft spokesman, "Stealing our good name is one thing, but stealing our functionality is clearly another. Our regular crashes are part of the "Microsoft Advantage"(TM), and our astronomically flukey market share is evidence enough that the people want lots of crashes, and we aim to deliver. We give the people what they want. If Lindows starts copying our patented "Crash-n-Burn Technology(TM)", we are liable to lose marketshare, and that is completely unacceptable and is punishable by immediate and lethal MS military action. We WILL defend ourselves against encroachments on our instability monopoly. Word. Oh, yeah, if those Apple guys are listening, I hear they had a security hole or two last week. Better watch it Steve, I don't remember you licensing insecurity from us...."

    Apple quickly backed off by patching their security holes as ordered by Microsoft, in what was an obvious attempt to pacify Microsoft's legal department and rectify what Apple still claims was an "accident".

    --

    I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    1. Re:Drop the name? That's not all! by raindog2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Parent deserves to be +5 Funny, but in all seriousness, I just bought someone one of those laptops with Lindows preloaded. Just in the hour or so I spent configuring the network, changing desktop settings, etc. using their modified KDE control center, the X server must have crashed 6 times, and once, the machine locked up hard and when it came back it never made it into X at all (there turned out to be a problem with their cups startup script that only manifested after the net was configured.) It took me back to 1994 when Linux was still a toy....

      I recognize the place for distributions like Lindows (enough to spend money on it and even buy a lifetime CNR subscription at choicepc.com), but Robertson and the gang have very plainly taken the "ease of use over stability" route, and it's not a joke.

    2. Re:Drop the name? That's not all! by eclectro · · Score: 1


      How dare you criticize Windows troll!!! I'm running Windows 98 right now and I have had an uptime of a couple of hours!!

      You should realize Windows is a wonderful syste^D^D^D^D^D^D^D NO CARRIER

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  86. Trademarking "Windows" by Ygorl · · Score: 1

    McDonalds holds a trademark on the term "big breakfast". People shouldn't be so surprised that Microsoft has "Windows". Sort of lame and ridiculous, if you ask me, but that's how the sticks fall here.

  87. Some name suggestions by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1, Funny

    How about...

    1.) Licrosoft OS
    2.) Lolaris
    3.) LIX
    4.) LIRIX
    6.) LPUX
    7.) LOS
    8.) Lovell

  88. Lacintosh by News+for+nerds · · Score: 1

    Lindows was virtually dead since it abandoned its original goal to support Windows binaries via WINE, and its current incarnation with the same name is just another average Linux distribution with stupid marketing name, minus enterprise support. This type of desktop Linux business is already doomed.

    If they shoose to stick desktop market they should rather move to Lacintosh OS, something that combines powers of Linux and Darwin.

  89. Magnetbox by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I know a genuine Sorny when I see one.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:Magnetbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooooooh! Here's a genuine Magnetbox!

  90. How about \/\/indows.... by The+Slashdolt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How about changing the name to \/\/indows?(note, that's backslash, forward slash, backslash, forward slash)

    --
    mp3's are only for those with bad memories
    1. Re:How about \/\/indows.... by pi_rules · · Score: 1

      +5? That's +5? Holy crap, the mod points rode in with the shortbus today.

    2. Re:How about \/\/indows.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking something more like UUindows

      (That's a double-"U" at the beginning...)

    3. Re:How about \/\/indows.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about ... Fuck You Suck My Dick

  91. in China... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    they call it Rindows

    (which sounds more like Windows, incidentally)

  92. Butt-Head Astronomer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Carl Sagan sued Apple after learning that they used 'Sagan' as the internal codename for one of the first PowerMacs. Apple responded by changing the codename to Butt-Head Astronomer, or BHA for short, at which point Sagan sued Apple again and lost.

  93. You must be retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What? How does one "contamine" a gene pool?

    1. Re:You must be retarded by strike2867 · · Score: 1

      to contaminate a gene pool: the breeding of insane individuals. Who ask dumb questions like are you retarded? when they do not know or understand the references made by the parent quote.

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
  94. Never mind that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about winos the world over?

    When you're collective name has 'Win' and 'OS' in it, what else is there to do but drink yourself into oblivion?

  95. Screw Finland.and Sweden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's call it Lindows everywhere, except in Finland and Sweden we'll call it Fuck You!

  96. Donate money to help!!! by t0ny · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Just to help this case and assure the party in the right succeeds, Im going to suggest to my boss that we buy three more Windows servers.

    Lindows.com Chief Executive Officer Michael Robertson in a statement issued in response to the Swedish injunction, lashed out against Microsoft's legal pursuit of his company, accusing Microsoft of using lawsuits "as a battering ram to smash Linux."

    Anyone who says that the name "Lindows" doesnt violate the trademark of "Windows" is a real hypocrite. If MS came out with a program called Winix, you guys would be going apeshit.

    Even funnier is this Robertson idiot making this case out to be some kind of assult on Linux, rather than an attempt to get him to rename product.

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    1. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I doubt anyone would care about something called Winix, but you're missing the point anyway. Believe it or not (and regarless of what Robertson claims) this is not really a Linux vs Microsoft fight.

      The problem with "Windows" as a trademark is that it's a generic term. Microsoft should not have an exclusive rights to the word "Windows". Even in software "Windows" is a generic term used in every graphical operating system. That was the basis of the (so far successful) defense in the US.

      Now, if Robertson was trying to sell something named "MSLindows", then I think Microsoft would have a claim that I would understand/defend/support.

    2. Re:Donate money to help!!! by t0ny · · Score: 1
      I dont see that Im missing the point; I think you are missing the specific point which is central to the issue (and trademark law).

      They arent saying Linux or Lindows cannot use the term "Window". They are saying they cannot use a derivate of the name "Windows" in THE NAME OF THEIR OPERATING SYSTEM.

      Name of OS - "Windows"

      Name of other OS - "Lindows"

      Similarities? 85% match; 6 of 7 characters are the same.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    3. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Anyone who says that the name "Lindows" doesnt violate the trademark of "Windows" is a real hypocrite.

      Microsoft do not have the "Windows" trademark. It's overly generic in the computer field; when Microsoft Windows was created, the X Window System and other windowing systems were already in widespread use and the term so diluted as to be untrademarkable.

      The trademark they do have is "Microsoft Windows". If Lindows were going around calling themselves "Licrosoft Lindows", then perhaps I would agree with you. They aren't doing this though. What's next - will Microsoft sue anybody referring to X Windows?

    4. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But when combined with how their system runs, it is clearly ment to be confusing. They're not branding themselves as Linux that works like windows. They're branding themselves as low-end windows. Which they are not.

    5. Re:Donate money to help!!! by ScottKin · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Once you understand that the only true goal of Michael Robertson and his "Lindows" product is a vain attempt to dilute the "Windows" brand-name, to subvert MS-Windows in the marketplace and try to fool customers into thinking that it (Lindows) actually *is* a different version or form of Windows to get a supposed increase in Linux desktop share.

      A pox on Michael Robertson and "Lindows": may you blow your entire "fortune" in litigation and whither-away into oblivion.

      ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    6. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      You're still missing the point. What I am saying is that I am questioning any trademark that MS may or may not have in the US for the word "Windows" on the basis that it's a generic term (both in "real life" and in computer talk). The fact that the trademark owner is Microsoft is irrelevant - this should not be a MS vs Linux holy war (eventhough Robertson would like it to make it one).

      You shouldn't be able to trademark words in the dictionary (which is why companies like Google for example object when words like "Googling" make appearances in dictionaries as it did recently).

      Now as someone pointed out in another post, in other countries (where the word "windows" is not in that language's vocabulary) I think MS is in the right.

    7. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't be able to trademark words in the dictionary

      Do you realize how many companies names are words in the dictionary? I don't have exact numbers but it is safe to assume that a vast majority of trademarks in the US are plain English words. Do you want every company to be named Xyrtwes? Trademarks are specific to a particular use. That is why one company can be Sun and make computers and another can make dishwashing detergent. I'll tell you what. Why don't you protest any company that has a dictionary word as part of their name or one of their products.

    8. Re:Donate money to help!!! by zeeboy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Tony, you are an *idiot*.

      Just thought I'd let you know that.
      Lindows does not violate the trademark of Windows. Do your research. If you knew anything about trademark law then you would not make such bold assumptions. Whether this fight is to squash Linux does not matter. Enjoy your Windows servers you idiot.

    9. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Informative
      Yes, but the word "Sun" doesn't have a common meaning in the context of computers or in the context of dishwashers. The only common meaning of Sun is the big firey globe in the sky.


      The problem with "Windows" is not the common meaning, a hole in your wall with glass over it. The problem is that prior to "Windows" the GUI OS environment, there were lots of other GUI OS environments that featured "windows". The word "windows" has a specific common meaning in the context of computer operating systems that predates the trademarked OS made by Microsoft.


      Nonetheless, if I were going to pick a point to attack Microsoft on, this would probably be the last point on my list - I don't find trademark law to be too offensive, and I think strong trademark law is important to business in general. And in all honesty, Microsoft aren't twits about their trademark name most of the time - Michael Robertson is trying to see how far he can push the beast here before it tries to snap his neck.

    10. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, Coca Cola is suing Pepsi Cola for the rights to the word "Cola", even though both products are cola. I'd have to side with Lindows on this issue, Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly (pardon the pun) on the word Windows.

    11. Re:Donate money to help!!! by dzelenka · · Score: 1

      IIRC you are quite incorrect. Microsoft tried to trademark "Windows" and was turned down. The name of their operating system is "Microsoft Windows". That's why their case failed in this country. There may be other standards in those two European countries.

      --
      Bah!
    12. Re:Donate money to help!!! by STrinity · · Score: 1

      Name of OS - "Windows"

      Name of other OS - "Lindows"

      Similarities? 85% match; 6 of 7 characters are the same.


      Well really it's only a 57% match because two of the characters are purely coincidental from the combining of "linux" and "windows". When you get down to arguing how many letters of a common word two products' names share, there's something weak about the case.

      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    13. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      It is a good argument but it is pretty hard to prove one way or the other. Proving in a court of law that "windows" was common lingo before 1983 (when it was first used in commerce according to the trademark - even though the trademark wasn't awarded until 1990) is a difficult task. To say that anything before that was mainstream (when computers weren't even mainstream) is a tough argument to make.

    14. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not that hard to make up a trademark that does roll off the tongue and does not exist in the dictionary (yet): Google, Accenture, Verizon, Netscape, etc etc. But if you're unable to do that, that's fine you can combine a dictionary word with something else: PalmOS, PocketPC, T-Mobile - even MS-Windows is OK.

      But like another poster did a must better job at explaining than me, "Windows" is an especially bad offender considering that the word has a meaning in the computer industry, and that meaning predates MS-Windows. In fact, that has been the basis of Lindows' defense in the US. That defense has been successful so far in the various injunction hearings they've had on the case.

    15. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 2, Insightful
      >> Anyone who says that the name "Lindows" doesnt violate the trademark of "Windows" is a real hypocrite. If MS came out with a program called Winix, you guys would be going apeshit.

      Uh? Hello? Minix, Linux. Let's think about this for just a second.... Hmmm.... Linux was made to be like minix, which coincidentally rhymes. Hmmmm... No, I think I'd be the hypocrite if I got mad at Lindows when I use an OS whose name ryhmes with what it was modeled after.

      (Long Live Linux!)

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    16. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      No one seems to be able to prove to me that the term is older than 1983 (when the first Windows came to be). Even if it was it was hardly "mainstream" because most Americans had no clue about computers at all at that point.

      You picked a few names that sounded ok but that is hardly as easy as it sounds. And whether you like it or not that is the way trademarks work. Even if you can get congress to change it you still would have to grandfather in existing names.

    17. Re:Donate money to help!!! by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Uh... "Google" appears in the dictionary.

      You absolutely should be able to trademark words in a dictionary for specific uses. I mean, almost every product people use has a trademarked dictionary word: Tide, Dial, Yahoo.... the list is endless. Does everything have to be named something absurd to be trademarked? I mean, do you really want to buy Tydro detergent instead of Tide? The supermarket shelf would look like the ad pages of Wired circa 1999 -- not pretty.

    18. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      Computer may not have been mainstream before 1983, but for those that had a computer before 1983 the word "windows" already had a meaning. That's really all that has to be shown. I have no idea how hard it would be to prove in a court of law (I guess we'll find out) but that doesn't really negates the merit of the argument...

    19. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      I would also point out that Microsoft has lost the first couple of rounds of the Lindows case in the US but in March it will go to trial in front of a jury.

    20. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      I understand that once a jury is involved it's basically impossible to predict the outcome. But the fact that a judge (who is presumably trained at the law, and presumably impartial) found the argument and testimonies as convincing as he did, I think, is pretty significant validation (moral, if not legal). Let me put it this way, MS did not get even close to winning an injunction in the US.

    21. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Whether MIcrosoft was right or wrong in 1983 really doesn't matter anymore. According to section 2.4.1 - Proof of distinctiveness

      "...the mark is said to have become distinctive of applicant's goods by reason of substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce thereof by applicant for the five years before the date on which the claim of distinctiveness is made."

      Since the trademark was issued in 1991 and Windows had existed since 1983 and since no one has seriously challenged Microsoft in that time it has now become distinctive. The judge used his opinion to block the injunction but his decision is his own. Either way, this case will not invalidate Microsofts trademark on Windows. Windows has become a distinctive mark of Microsoft.

    22. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Think about what you said. Judges are no more impartial than you or I. There is no such thing as an impartial human being - that is why decisions are called opinions. Also, based on my experience, judges are also hardly the most intelligent people in the world.

      An injunction is hardly a win or loss for either side really because the lawyers don't pull out all the stops.

    23. Re:Donate money to help!!! by chicagoan · · Score: 1

      It's not that hard to make up a trademark that does roll off the tongue and does not exist in the dictionary (yet): Google, Accenture, Verizon, Netscape, etc etc. Actually the word google has been around for a long time in the mathmatics community. You can even ask google themselves. I favor the ever less popular googleplex which is a google google's

    24. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, 'google' may be debated as a word that already exists. While the correct spelling is 'googol', which is 10 raised to the 100th power, Douglas Adams did spell it as 'google' in The Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy:

      '"And are you not," said Fook, leaning anxiously foward, "a greater analyst than the Googleplex* Star Thinker in the Seventh Galaxy of Light and'...

      *Googolplex is defined as 10 raised to the googolth power.

    25. Re:Donate money to help!!! by rinoid · · Score: 1

      Lindows can't even design an original web site -- do you think they are able to change their name??

      How long have they had the Apple web site rip-off? I know you can't trade mark a design as such but geeze -- some originality please!

    26. Re:Donate money to help!!! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I doubt anyone would care about something called Winix,"

      If it came out by Microsoft, you bet your ass everybody here would care. "Microsoft is trying to destroy Linux's name!

      "The problem with "Windows" as a trademark is that it's a generic term."

      So is Sun, Oracle, Apple... Etc.

      "Even in software "Windows" is a generic term used in every graphical operating system. That was the basis of the (so far successful) defense in the US."

      Palm is a generic term relating to palmtop computers. Going after them next?

      "Now, if Robertson was trying to sell something named "MSLindows", then I think Microsoft would have a claim that I would understand/defend/support."

      Let's just get to the point here. You hate Microsoft, and you see this as an opportunity to punish them. That is why everybody here has their panties in a bunch about this topic. This isn't about trying to wrestle some trademark free. It's a nice noble rationalization, but gee, it didn't happen until Linux found itself in trouble over it. Which is interesting btw, because anybody with an ounce of common sense would not have named a Linux distro "Lindows". This was intentional, and its wasting your time and donation money to fight this. All for what... to get Microsoft to lose their trademark? Yeah, nasty blow to Microsoft, too bad they already burned the brand into everybody's brains.

      Go put this energy into fighting the DMCA. Stop wasting your time trying to give Microsoft a black eye.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    27. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Unregistered · · Score: 1

      isn't a google 10^100?

    28. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wah... Wah.... they are hurting poor little Stevie Jobs. Booh hoo.

    29. Re:Donate money to help!!! by esarjeant · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is the real danger of this case. If Microsoft could somehow prove that they had exclusive rights to the term "Windows" as it relates to computer operating systems with graphical displays, then there would be widespread reprocussions.

      The X Window System would have to become the X Window(tm)-capable System. When describing an actual window onscreen in a textbook, you would be required to state something to the effect "The computer Window(tm)". We wouldn't have Window Managers, we would have Window(tm)-like Managers.

      This is a totally frivolous case, MS has already lost out on the trademark for Word and they are seeking to protected an even more generic computing term.

      The problem isn't Microsoft, the problem is that if they win this case they will have precident on the Windows trademark and will then be able to chase after anyone else (commercial and otherwise) who might be using that term. I think there is enough prior here that MS doesn't have a case, but we'll see how it plays out in court.

      --

      Eric Sarjeant
      eric[@]sarjeant.com

    30. Re:Donate money to help!!! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Yah. And when Apple gets sued again by the Beatles, I'm on Apple's side, not the side of Apple Records. Common nouns should be allowable as trademarks, but the limitations should be *extremely* tight. With *very* heavy penalties for improper litigation.

      And to me it seems that Lindows(tm?) is a perfectly reasonable name, even with MS having a trademark on Windows. That should only prohibit an exact duplicate which was ALSO an OS (as opposed, e.g., to a window manager). Similarly "Apple Computers(tm)" should have no case against "Aple Computer Hardware". And certainly not against "Apply Computers" or "Dapple Computers" or ...

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    31. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      I know you can't trade mark a design as such but geeze

      Designs can be patented though. For example, Apple has a patent on a high-resolution icon of a wireframe wastepaper basket in the corner of a screen.

    32. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Both Minix and Linux were named to resemble Unix... which is fine, because they are philosophical descendants of Unix and technically highly related.

      Lindows, OTOH, is not descended from or related to Windows in any way. The only similarity is that they both target the same group of potential customers, and the Lindows company is clearly banking on confusion with the Windows trademark.

    33. Re:Donate money to help!!! by jpoulos · · Score: 1

      I see it the exact opposite way. If Microsoft is claiming that they've owned the term "windows" since 1983, then they've allowed it to slip unchallenged into the public lexicon for 20 years. "windows" is a general term that even my grandmother knows when I'm helping her send email. If I say to her "what do you see at the top of the window", she knows right away what I'm talking about. If I say "are you running Windows on that machine", she doesn't necessarily get it.

    34. Re:Donate money to help!!! by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      I put a summary of my ideas in another thread here. I am just trying to consolidate threads so I don't repeat myself (plus I put a good amount research into instead of doing work so I hope somebody will read it).

    35. Re:Donate money to help!!! by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Linus UNIX = LINUX

      Just rearrange the letters.

      PS Both Minix and Linux ar UNIX clones.

      PPS Now - how popular would it have been had it been called LUNIX ?

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    36. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      No, that's a "googol".

    37. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      That's perhaps why I put the word "supposedly" twice in the same sentence (although I certainly don't think it's as bad as you hinted). However, I still think that this decision/opinion is a pretty clear indication (the outcome being uncertain) that this case is not as clear cut in terms of the MS owning of a valid trademark as you seem to think. if it was even half as certain as you're thinking MS would have won the injunction and we would not hear about Lindows anymore.

      I remember reading about the arguments put forth at the time and (although IANAL) I found them convincing. A judge (who is a lawyer) did too. It's hard to ignore, and I don't think MS will.

    38. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      I don't hate Microsoft (nor do I particularly like Linux), and the point I was going after in my original post is that this is only a MS vs Linux if you make it, which is what YOU (and Robertson) are doing, not me. Regardless of the motivations of Robertson, he has a case.

      Some people actually care about issues such the DMCA, silly patents, ridiculous trademarks, etc. on their merit.

    39. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      Dictionary.com has an entry for Google as a proper noun (talking about Google the search engine of course). Webster doesn't. You're probably thinking about Googol.

    40. Re:Donate money to help!!! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      " Regardless of the motivations of Robertson, he has a case."

      I respectfully disagree. Microsoft didn't register a common term, they registerred a term that is distinct in a particular context. They can't sue me for making a Windows Candy bar.

      Worse, this is not the first time this has happened, not even close. This case is not unique. Microsoft's loss would mean a LOT of commpanies out there (maybe even some you like) would be negatively affected.

      Im not convinced Lindows has any case. Nor do they have any reason to act like being sued was unfair or surprising. I seriously doubt a judge is even going to take this seriously, especially considering the injunction went through.

      This is the wrong battle to fight. I might have some sympathy for them if they had called it Lin32.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    41. Re:Donate money to help!!! by avdp · · Score: 1

      If you read your own link you would know that the mathematical term is "Googol".

      Google is not a word in any dictionary.

    42. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the rest of this thread you would know that 1) a judge in the US has taken it very seriously - seriously enough that's gonna go to a full blown jury trial and 2) the bigger issues here is that windows is a generic term within the context of computer (that's why Apple Computer is OK but Microsoft Windows is not).

    43. Re:Donate money to help!!! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of that, I still don't think they'll win. The term Window, for example, may be fairly common term to geeks like us. For the handful of us that use that term compared to the sea of people using Windows, suddenly the term's not so generic. Microsoft's use of the 'window' changed the perception of what a 'window' is in the computer world. It used to be just an area of the screen to blit text/graphics into, but now most ppl see it as a full blown resizable widget with File/Edit/Window buttons. (Note: I never used the word 'invent' so don't argue with me that Microsoft didn't invent it. I don't care.)

      Lindows does not have that strong a case. In the CEO's position, I'd just change the stupid name and cry about it to Slashdot for sympathy. He can still make his case against Microsoft without putting his product on the line.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    44. Re:Donate money to help!!! by t0ny · · Score: 1
      Ok, so show me how the "IN" in Windows and Linux are different letters.

      If you cant, then I am correct that that 6/7 letters in Windows and Linux are the same.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    45. Re:Donate money to help!!! by t0ny · · Score: 1
      If you cant, then I am correct that that 6/7 letters in Windows and Linux are the same.

      Meant to say between Windows and Lindows, not Linux.

      --

      Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    46. Re:Donate money to help!!! by k8to · · Score: 1

      Yes except of course as everyone has pointed out, there IS _no_ "windows" trademark. It's not a trademarkable set of letters because it's a common english word. Microsoft has no trademark on the word "Windows" and if it did it would be legally unsustainable.

      --
      -josh
    47. Re:Donate money to help!!! by Ciggy · · Score: 0

      It's not that hard to make up a trademark that does roll off the tongue and does not exist in the dictionary (yet): Google

      Google was named (AFAIK) after googol (= 10^100) with a slight change of spelling, but it's probably too close for someone's liking to insist it can't be trademarked.

      --

      A rose by any other name would smell as sweet;
      A chrysanthemum by any other name would be easier to spell
  97. How about-- by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Informative

    SELECT disclamer FROM ianal;

    The Lindow Operating System.

    First, Microsoft will have a harder time attacking this due to the fact that it is closer to "X Window System" than it is to "Microsoft Windows."

    Personally, I think that the WIndows trademark should be nullified simply because there are other, older software packages still in common usage, particularly X who share a very common name. Since trademarks cannot be selectively enforced, this creates a bit of a narrow trademark for Microsoft. IANAL, but I think that Lindow would be clear.

    Also, Lindow is the name of a peat bog in Western England, Cheshire, iirc. Hence the 2000 year old Celt who was dug up there was called Lindow Man.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:How about-- by midav · · Score: 1
      Personally, I think that the WIndows trademark should be nullified

      IANAL either, but AFAIK 'Windows' can not be trademarked (in the US, at least) at all, since unqualified nouns are not trademarkable. I.e. you can trademark 'X Windows' or 'MS Windows' but not 'Windows'. Is it different in Europe?

      Or at least in Sweden and Finland?

    2. Re:How about-- by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Nope. You are wrong. Take a trip over to uspto.gov and use TESS to search on some common words. If you are lazy then perhaps you can tell me what is qualified about Apple, Ford, Oracle, Shell, Target, Dell, Fox, Discover (take your pick on this one), etc. Everyone of them has a copyright on just the name alone.

      At least you qualified your statements with IANAL and AFAIK. Most people on slashdot spout things as gospel without everything looking it up.

    3. Re:How about-- by Clockwurk · · Score: 1

      Or at least in Sweden and Finland?

      "Windows" is not a word in Swedish or in Finnish, hence the trademark.

  98. European Legal System by pavera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every time something bad happens tech-wise in a court in the US, this place is crazy with comment of how the US sucks, how horrid the legal system is here, how its just stupid what companies can get away with in court, now a stupid ruling is handed down in a European court and everyone is mum... no one seems upset at the legal system, in fact most people here are defending the decision as a good one, even though when MS tried this stunt in the US system they failed. So much for the Europeans living up to their liberal ideals and standing up for the little guy....

    1. Re:European Legal System by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So much for the Europeans living up to their liberal ideals and standing up for the little guy....

      Eh? People shouldn't expect a court system to 'stand up for the little guy'. Courts should impartially apply the laws of the land. If by so doing, the 'little guy' wins, then so be it.

      If this court has correctly applied the law (and come on, people, it's not that big a stretch to see that the name Lindows might have been deliberately chosen to be readily associated with Windows) then that's the way that I suspect most people expect the European courts to work. One should also note that trademark laws in Europe versus trademark laws in the United States though similar are not identical. That court cases on different sides of the ocean produced different outcomes may be a consequence of those legal differences.

      Note also that trademark law is not uniform across Europe. Microsoft may have deliberately chosen Finnish and Swedish courts to pursue these claims first, because they felt the laws would be most amenable in those jurisdictions. (I don't know anything about Finnish law--this is a hypothesis.)

      Finally, this is a preliminary injunction. Microsoft has asserted that Lindows is doing them harm, and until those claims are fully tested in court, Lindows has been temporarily barred from the use of their name. If it is later determined that they are not diluting Microsoft's trademarks, Lindows can sue MS for damages associated with the injunction.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    2. Re:European Legal System by kavau · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I wouldn't be so sure. If I recall correctly, when Lindows came out, Robertson was heavily criticized here on Slashdot for his choice of the "Lindows" name. The predominant sentiment here on Slashdot was that Robertson wants to attract popularity to his OS by baiting Microsoft into a trademark infringement lawsuit.

      On a side note, just as everywhere in the world there are both liberal and conservative forces in European countries. And it's not the first time that the conservative forces win (see e.g. the European version of the DMCA)

  99. In other news, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linus was happy that his name would no longer be associated with Microsoft.

  100. Re:MOD PARENT UP, are mods sleeping? damnit?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No it is still a troll. Win and wine don't even sound alike.

  101. Better yet, package deal. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    They should do a joint marketing agreement and package of Windex surface wipes with the boxed Windex OS (ex-Lindows).

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:Better yet, package deal. by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      They should do a joint marketing agreement and package of Windex surface wipes with the boxed Windex OS (ex-Lindows).

      I like it!

      "Clean off windows the easy way with Windex Wipes!"

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  102. euphony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like the sound of Unix; Linux sounds fine, but not quite as good as Unix. Windows is neutral, but I cringe everytime I hear Lindows--It sounds like fresh shit smells, and I applaud the decision on aesthetic grounds.

  103. Just Added .fi And .se To SMTP Server Blocklists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buh-bye Finland and Sweden. Your chicks are cute, but your judges are intolerably stupid.

  104. It means a new product is born! by karmaflux · · Score: 1

    Lindex wipes your hard drive to a streak-free shine! Now with a refreshing citrus scent, Lindex is the best option for a transparent user interface. Bundled with it is the latest Firebird build, sure to make your chrome stand out.

    --

    REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.

  105. slightly off topic but... by Jedi1USA · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I noticed some striking similarities with this site when looking up some product info.

    Why doesn't MicroSoft go after these guys?

    http://www.microsemi.com/

    Name has the same MS looking name and font...Products are in multi-colored "windows"....

    Just thought it was funny. ;^)

    --
    My old sig was REALLY stoopid.
  106. Suggested name change by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1

    Instead of using Lindows, could they use "stick it to the man" instead? Lindows was such a dumb name anyway.

  107. Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy? by evilandi · · Score: 4, Funny
    Talthane: Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy

    We do? I apologise unreservedly. I'll try harder.

    --
    Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
    1. Re:Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy? by mandolin · · Score: 1
      Europe has a relatively low rate of piracy

      We do? I apologise unreservedly. I'll try harder.

      You're already screwing it up. You need to try hARRRRRder.

  108. Windows a generic term ? by Jesrad · · Score: 1

    Considering that most laymen always call Operating Systems "Windows" (as in: What Windows is running on your Mac ?) I'd say it can be argued that Windows is not only a common word, but it has also gone the way of Scotch adhesive tape: it has become a generic term.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
    1. Re:Windows a generic term ? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Which would be fine if the term windows wasn't already a generic term used to describe particular types of operating system which do not necessarily have anything to do with Microsoft.

      Scotch did not have anything to do with tape before Scotch started to manufacture it so there is no problem with this evolving into a generic term for tape.

      Microsoft have capitalised on the word "windows" becuase they hijacked an already generic term used to describe operating systems and benefitted by associating their product with this term.

      For a long time Microsoft were unable to trademark the term "Windows" for exactly this reason and this was fine since anyone else could also have used the term Windows to describe their O/S and no one would gain an advantage not available to the other. By Trademarking the term "Windows" Microsoft have prevented other O/S producers from using what is a generic term for describing O/S in their products name and that is unfair.

  109. Re:Gah! by lawpoop · · Score: 1
    ..."it's a generic word found in any dictionary."

    Except Swedish and Finnish dictionaries!

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  110. Lindos! by Guppie · · Score: 1

    Lindows already owns the domain lindos.com (perhaps for misspelling reasons). It would be pretty funny if they switched to that instead...

  111. copycats by cintyram · · Score: 2, Insightful

    huh .. initially every one wanted to linclude the words linux in their name so that ppl knew it was some kind of linux ;
    now lindows wants ppl to know that its a good operating system and some windows apps run on it.
    so Linux + windows doesnt sound abnormal or cheap
    but the "windows" in lndows is actualy a reference to micro$oft windows.
    what i dont understand is how worse is this from any prodcuts which have the word windows incorporated in them to convey to the user that they are compatible with M$windows ?

    so whats next? windowmaker?

    oh and by the way i own http://lingows.com and http://lingows.net.

    i bougth the domains so i could host some services for multiple language support for linux;
    i wanted a name to rhyme with lingos
    and found this interesting;
    now this is only a one letter change from lindows.com but i dont think thats a big problem;
    infact i would be glad to carry any advertisements of lndows non english versions for free:) along with any other distros which have decent non-english language support ;

    copyright vs copyleft .. whose gonna win?

  112. So Ford makes browsers now? by Pac · · Score: 1

    Where can I download this Explorer of theirs? Does it runs on Linux? Does it have tabs and popup blocking?

  113. And in other news.... by Nybble's+Byte · · Score: 0

    Microsoft was ordered to stop calling Windows an operating system.

  114. Phew! Change the name! by dilute · · Score: 1

    "Lindows" always seemed iffy to me - the whole point, as far as I can tell, was simply to appropriate an unmistakeable part of the other guy's trademark so as pull away some of his customers. In other words, a ripoff.

  115. Re:Gah! by Animaether · · Score: 1
    Not only is it a name, it's a generic word found in any dictionary.


    Although I only have Dutch, German, French and Polish dictionaries, I do bet that none of the other European countries (U.K. countries excluded) have 'windows' in the dictionary as a generic word.

    And since this story -is- about European countries... well, you do the deduction.
  116. What impact will this have by combinatorics · · Score: 1

    How many Lindow's users are there in Sweden and Finland? Any?
    How many Wal-marts?

    --
    Dada ended art.
  117. Winux by tjamme · · Score: 1

    ... is another name they could use. At least for the time it will take any court to react.

  118. The simple solution by dentar · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Don't do business in those little insignificant countries. If their judges are that stupid, offer the product under a different name there, and everyone else gets lindows.

    I'm surprised that judges in other countries are more ignorant than the US ones. I would -expect- a US judge to be stupid...

    --
    -- I am. Therefore, I think!
    1. Re:The simple solution by inerte · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects the Finnish Jurisdiction!

    2. Re:The simple solution by rylin · · Score: 1

      Yeah, boycott linux today! :rolleyes:

    3. Re:The simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You convinced me. I'm not going to Finland over
      Christmas break. I'll go elsewhere, like Bahamas instead.

    4. Re:The simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're all bimbows, every one.

    5. Re:The simple solution by kisak · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is that Windows is a generic term in English but not in Swedish. Windows and Lindows are both meningless in the Swedish and Finish languages and the potential for misleading the customers is much larger than in the US. I don't know the Swedish judges arguments, but this is something to consider in this case when the (on average stupid) US judges seemes like being more reasonable in this instance...

      --

      --- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---

    6. Re:The simple solution by TeknoHog · · Score: 1
      Don't do business in those little insignificant countries.

      In this context of Linux, Finland is hardly insignificant.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  119. No problem by Ataraxy+Oyez · · Score: 2, Funny

    Change the name to Widows because that's what your partner will feel like after you fall in love with your new non-Windows computer.

  120. That will change by nnnneedles · · Score: 1

    That will change in the next few days (jan 1st) when the EU gets 10 new member countries, including Poland which is 60 million alone.

    --
    Will code a sig generator for food
    1. Re:That will change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      38 millions, you must have confused Poland with Ukraine (which is not joining the EU yet)

    2. Re:That will change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the new countries are joining on 1 May 2004.

    3. Re:That will change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so will the piracy rate ;-P

  121. Re:copycats MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOD PARENT UP
    There is a valied point in cintyrams statement..
    there could be hundreds of products similar in spelling or pronunciation to a popular product..
    legal actions aganist everyone of them...is nothing but an act of dominance by big companies like microsoft...

  122. How about "WinPlus"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has no "Windows", but You can see from the name, that it's better option than MS-Windows.

    Btw, why is "Windows" a trade mark? There is a huge difference between "Windows" and "MS-Windows"!

  123. perhaps they should by dr_labrat · · Score: 1

    change it to "Nildows"

    --
    The secret of success is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake those, you've got it made. (Marx)
  124. Dear Microsoft by holy_smoke · · Score: 1

    Bite me. Lick me. Like it. Regards, Michael

    --
    Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
  125. No, but you can download windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Right here.

    And you can buy them here.

  126. Re:Gah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My mistake, I should have said "English dictionaries". Sorry, I'm a dumb Canadian, eh?

  127. Free downloads for life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the ChoicePC article at NewsForge:

    > For their $100, all of which is slated to go directly to the support of the resellers, contributors also receive ... Download of every desktop version of LindowsOS released during your lifetime

    Yeah, until Microsoft wins the lawsuit in a significant number of countries and they have to change the product name to something else. Nice try, though! They must be hanging around Microsoft lawyers too much.

  128. New names for Lindows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well maybe they should change the name
    Remember when Apple named one of it's new machines "Butt headed Astronomer" ?

    Lets see Lgatessucks or maybe Lbilltheschmuck
    or maybe in honor of how fast Microsoft updates its software
    they could call the new lindows simply "Late"

  129. Name Change Suggestion... Glass by PalmAddict · · Score: 1

    let's all call it: Glass "The natural replacement for Broken Windows"

    1. Re:Name Change Suggestion... Glass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gnusafety-glass ?

      how about penguindows?

  130. stupid by JollyTX · · Score: 1

    Good! This was a stupid name to begin with, and it got even more stupid after Lindows gave up on their ambition to be Windows-compatible.

    --
    Can you hear me, Major Tom? I'm not the man they think I am at home...
  131. Rename Lindows fonster / ikkuna by FreeUser · · Score: 1

    I would rename Lindows fonster (or whatever the Swedish plural is) in Sweden, and ikkuna (or whatever the Finnish plural is) in Finland and be done with it.

    Hint: both are the literal translation of 'window' into each langauge. Comply with the court order, and fuck Microsoft where it counts, hard, in one fell swoop. :-)

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  132. Windows is a generic term by Confused · · Score: 1

    Windows is a genereic term in english, but is it in swedish or finnish?

    1. Re:Windows is a generic term by avdp · · Score: 1

      As far as I know it is not (my finnish and swedish is a bit rusty), and that's probably why MS won over there.

    2. Re:Windows is a generic term by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Correct!

      Thats exactly why they won.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
  133. In other news by revividus · · Score: 1

    OSDN has announced that they will be charging license fees to all websites with slashes and dots in their URLs.

  134. they lost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to remember that ms lost its trademark battle here in the united states to lindows. did it get overturned on appeal, or did i miss that? or are they just trying the same battle in every other conutry?

  135. SCO gets a hints for new angle to the case by kalki · · Score: 1

    since SCO owns UNIX. It can appeal that Linux is a tradrmark infringment as well.

  136. Name suggestion... by redtail1 · · Score: 1

    Lind'oh!

  137. Re:Gah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dumb Canadian == (Score: -1, Redundant)

  138. Nothing wrong with the decision by MagicBox · · Score: 1

    To be honest, I always thought that L-indows was trying to cash in on the W-indows name anyway, rather than trying to do any good to the open source community or name. See, I do not care which camp you belong to (Linux or Windows), if your intentions are driven by $$ rather than pure passion for advancement and innovation then you're all the same in my eyes.

    --

    The phaomnneil pweor of the hmuan mnid. Fcuknig amzanig eh!
  139. bah. by pb · · Score: 1

    Lindows is a distribution built on top of Linux, and the X Window System.

    <Lindows> You probably think this song is about you, don't you...

    --
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
  140. MS-Linux by im+a+fucking+coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's time to stop screwing around and just incorporate Magenta Smurfette Linux for the desktop. Who cares if some tin hat socialist judicial system wants to object. Let 'em.

    But at least we now know it was the Norweigan's who had the Swedish jokes right, and not the versa vice.

  141. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by phorm · · Score: 1

    Microsoft / Microsoft porn magazine for women who like small men

    Are you *sure* this wasn't started by Bill Gates in order to find dates?

  142. Other words too by presearch · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has also announced that it has exclusive and first use rights on the words "shit" and "fucked".

  143. I don't know Swedish Trademark law by ninewands · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the "void for being generic" argument that worked in the US lawsuit will work in Sweden. I would agree that Microsoft should be allowed trademark rights in "Microsoft Windows" and even "Windows (pick a number and/or combination of letters here)" worldwide, but "Windows" by itself is, as was proved in LindowsOS's motion for summary judgment in the US case, just TOO generic to be registerable as a trademark. That would be like allowing IBM to register "Blue" as a trademark because of the long-standing nickname they've borne.

  144. Windux! by mulhall · · Score: 1

    It's a winner!

  145. used before microsoft by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The term "windows" was part of software systems names long before microsoft co-opted it. Xwindows in 1985, Xerox Windows in 1979, and probably others.

  146. In other news #2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The previously anonymous Lynn doe's name was changed to Jane doe's, the work Lynn tells us was mostly done by John Doe's programming skills. John has been a programmer since back before the abacus and even the sand table's of egypt, he has long since learned to remain out standing in his fields, and so he was unreachable for comment. Some crazy woman at Geico, said, they lowered their colestorol, in an exclusive we found an empty 6 pack of rootie tootie glass's handcrafted out of recycled broken pieces of her last known address's windows.

    Seriously though. Does anyone actually believe Lindows vs. Windows raised some confusion?! From the 8 year old kids in Wallmart to the Grey White Blue hair's who we asking questions about Lindows SCSI support and hardware modems for their Grandson's iptables firewall project.

    in that BBC news caster "world coming to an end" accent . . .
    Last time we interview Wallmart's electronics section, and could hear nothing but screaming about "where are the mandrake disks! I don't want a damn XP upgrade!" Store workers were busy picking up wrecked and trampled windows XP boxen off the ground while customers were tossing the XP boxen out of the way. Lynn doe's last comment was, "Duck! Lookout! I think it is swarm. Hit the dirt!" All while a winner with dough, wearing sandals was busy formatting WallMart's display computer and pocketing the covers from all the XP manuals laying on the ground. Police arrived and shortly threw lynn doe out on her bum. Out in the parking lot citizens were saying that next year wallmork will have thirty-nine foot blow up "Tux" Penguins just in time for christmas decorating.

  147. New OS...SMODNIM by XaosTX · · Score: 1

    I think that I am going to release a new OS named SMODNIM with a tagline "Turning the World of Windows Upside-Down"

    1. Re:New OS...SMODNIM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And backwards, if it were strickly upside down, then it would be MINDOMS

    2. Re:New OS...SMODNIM by XaosTX · · Score: 1

      That's why I said "turning" not "flipping" ;-)

  148. hey, slashdot doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't see any comments! Crap. I might have to do my work!

  149. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    But,

    At least in the US, Microsoft's trademark is not for "Windows", it's for "Microsoft Windows". Several other software products already contained the term "Windows" at the time Microsoft attempted to grab the term.They couldn't, at least without adding the Microsoft part of the name.

    Microsoft is trying to stealth-grab the term that they couldn't get legally, and the court has been bamboozled. (Did I really just use that word?..sheesh) Unless the new company contained more of the unique aspects of Microsoft's product name (like a play on the word Microsoft), the Lindows name should stand if the system is to remain sane and legitimate.

    On a more general note, recent trademark legislation is at odds with the reality of a crowded namespace and increasing globality of markets. Coders know how to deal with this, lawyers may take a while to catch up. Eventually, we'll either have the case where

    1) A finite number of desireable trademarks are controlled by multinational big biz, or

    2) Lawmakers understand and apply scoping rules that allows local application of trademarks and follows market and product segmentation closely and quickly.

    It's a choice between local variables and gw-basic style global variables. And Bill Gates has the lobbying power. Heh, just guess which one it will be...

  150. Just call it... by Scorpion_1169 · · Score: 1

    Rymes-With-Windows... this way it's obviuos that it is not actually Windows while still providing an amusing similarity.

  151. Re:fuckindows by ScottKin · · Score: 1, Funny

    Based on your previous posts, like this beauty:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=88892&cid=76 99 363

    I have determined that you are a twit.

    The name is "Krishna" not "Crishna".

    Twit.

    ScottKin

    --
    I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
  152. WTF are you talking about? by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

    WTF are you talking about? The two look NOTHING like each other. Sure they both have blue and white bottles, but so do millions of other products. They don't even seem to be the same shade of blue. The way the name is printed, design of the label or even design of the bottles are not even remotely similar. Sanex and Sanicur don't even sound that similar to each other.

    I'm sure Sanex would be happy to sue any of its competitors out of oblivion, but if they're to win an injunction for that "blatent cloning" they'd better make sure the judge is kept well stocked with crack.

  153. Lindows, Shwindows by spiritraveller · · Score: 1
    I am anti-Microsoft and pro-Linux. But I have to say I saw this coming. Lindows is very close in name to Windows. And I have actually heard people call in on the "Clark Howard" radio show (a consumer advocate) complaining that they bought a Lindows computer at WalMart. They actually thought that it was a version of Windows.

    This is the ostensible purpose of trademark law, to prevent consumer confusion. Of course, a preliminary injunction here will be highly damaging to Lindows, even though it doesn't apply to the US.

    Now, if they did this to XWindows, I would be complaining. But, nobody is selling XWindows as a boxed product and prominently displaying its name to uninformed consumers.

    There's no threat of consumer confusion regarding XWindows. There is regarding Lindows.

  154. I like "Sindows" by coinreturn · · Score: 1

    Sindows - as in it's sinful to emulate Windows. You could also use Windex and violate two trademarks at once.

  155. Cold medicine analogy by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 1
    When I buy cold medicine at the CVS, there are two brands on the shelf - Triaminic, a well known brand, and "Tri-acting" the CVS brand. Both have the exact same active ingredients, as well as the same color and flavor. On the CVS brand, there's a big "CVS", as well as a line that says something like "Compare to Triaminic".

    The point is, CVS is selling the same formulation, and want you to know you are getting the same stuff as if you paid more for the brand name. They are NOT trying to fool you into thinking there stuff is Triaminic, or made by the same company. It's very clearly labeled as not being labeled.

    Clearly, they are trying to benefit from the Triaminic branding, but they are not trying to pass their product off as being Triaminic - only as being the same as Triaminic.

    As to Lindows, the few ads I've seen (mostly in the TigerDirect catalog, some of my favorite bathroom reading), do not appear to be attempting to confuse the customer into thinking it's Microsoft Windows. Indeed, they explicit state that they are not. Sure, their product name is a rip-off of Windows, but it seems from their ads that the point of that is to convince people that Lindows will act like Windows, not that it is Windows.

    So from the "Triaminic" point of view, their use of Lindows seems morally and legally legit, at least in the U.S.

    --
    It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    1. Re:Cold medicine analogy by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      RMS would like to personally thank you for using CVS instead of BitKeeper(TM) Pharmacy down the street.

  156. We're not bigots by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

    Just because we don't agree with most of what MS does doesn't mean we're blind to the fact that there may be instances where MS is, in fact, in the right. Lindows is designed to look similar, act smiliar, smell similar to Windows. Their name would have no brand recognition if it weren't for Windows. Microsoft IS right on this one ***choke*** ***goes and rinses mouth***.

    Besides, like some other people have pointed out, "window" is a very common word in english, but not in European languages. While one could argue that MS can't trademark Windows in English speaking countries, the certainly doesn't hold true elsewhere.

  157. And their new name is... by Biljrat · · Score: 1

    Windux!

    1. Re:And their new name is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or how about LAW?

      "Lindows Ain't Windows"

  158. A french company sued too by file-exists-p · · Score: 1

    In another news, MS corps sues a french reseller and asks for 150,000 euros see (in french) this linuxfr article.

    Actually I can understand a bit more this procedure in non-english speaking countries where "windows" is more a brand name than a common word.

    --
    Go Debian!

  159. You definitely are retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you should have wrote:

    You better not be contaminATing the gene pool.

    ...but you didn't, because you're a fucking retard.

    And you original post was the absolute dumbest thing I have ever read on slashdot. (and that's saying a lot)

    1. Re:You definitely are retarded by strike2867 · · Score: 1

      You still have no idea where I got the idea for that post. You have no argument, you have no facts. With your first comment you became a hole in the ground. But now youve started to dig.

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
  160. Already used... by mst · · Score: 1

    Here, here, and here.

    But why not one more? :-)

  161. What they should do by Salsaman · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...is rename themselves Xindows. Then they could claim the name was derived from the X Window System.

  162. What about car companies, or Apple? by freeweed · · Score: 1

    Everyone keeps talking about how you can't trademark common words in the US, etc. Does this mean car companies don't have any trademarks on their vehicle model names? After all, most car models use common words (other than cool companies like BMW or Acura :).

    So, could I legally sell a sports coupe with a horse on the hood called a Kia Mustang? Would Ford be powerless to stop me?

    And what about the Apple Music/Apple Computers debacle? I can't think of a more generic word that "Apple", yet as I recall Jobs & Co. had to sign agreements way back when that stated they wouldn't get into the music industry, because of Apple Music's trademark. I still haven't heard how iTunes affects this, btw, so if anyone has any insight...

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:What about car companies, or Apple? by saddino · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, no, no. Everyone who is talking about "common words" not being valid as trademarks is misled.

      Common words make excellent trademarks, as long as they are not descriptive of the product.

      Scope is a common word, and it a great trademark for mouthwash. It would not be a good trademark for a telescope.

      Crest is a common word, and is a great trademark for toothpaste. It would not be a good trademark for a shield.

      Walk into a supermarket: hundreds and hundreds of common words for product names, all good trademarks!

      So...back to your question. Apple is a great trademark for a computer company. It is a generic word that has nothing to do with computers.

      Windows however, is descriptive -- the word is a generic term for a GUI view -- and hence it may not be a good trademark. That is what we're about to find out in the US. Apparently Sweden thinks otherwise.

  163. It's funny by H8X55 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Welcome to slashdot.

    if some company tried to piggy back off of the beloved Red Hat Linux with their own Head Rat Linux everyone would be up in arms. What about Soose Linux? Or Debbie N Linux? Is that ok? As long as the offender is on MS's back everyone think's it fair and ok.

    Lindows sounds silly anyway, like a parody. I use linux, and the first time I saw "Lindows" I rolled my eyes.

    Why not just call it mp3.com linux? oh yeah, nevermind.

  164. rename it to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fenster Linux, (german to english)

    or find the sweedish translation

  165. TI EXPLORER LISP MACHINES ... by foobsr · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... were pre 1990. E3-Project

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  166. A person's name by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

    A person's name is a bit more problematic. If you look at law firms they use the partner's name. There has to be many "Smith LLC," and the like. IIRC Hilton had some problems some years back with someone named Hilton opening their own hotel under their name.

  167. Work-around by Golias · · Score: 4, Funny
    Now announcing a new product release:

    Licrosoft Windows!

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    1. Re:Work-around by CognitiveFusion · · Score: 1

      I would love to see "!Windows"

      --
      Fools ignore complexity; pragmatists suffer it; experts avoid it; geniuses remove it. ~A. Perlis
  168. New Name by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

    Why not just rename it "71nd0w5"?

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  169. Possible Name? by a1cypher · · Score: 3, Funny

    Heres a name that I like.... Doors - "its easier to walk through a door than it is to jump through a window".

    1. Re:Possible Name? by nfsilkey · · Score: 1

      DoorsOS

      :)

    2. Re:Possible Name? by a1cypher · · Score: 1

      Yes, but wheres the catchy slogan. =)

  170. morons warned to stop using elmer fudd's name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    talk about irrepairable damage?

    few know that elmer was planning a big comeback, before the now known to be phonIE, fuddles' virotic eyeconic payper liesense stock markup fraud execrable momeNTdumb, took us off.

    elmer has been herd to say, so long as he has two lips, his return to stardumb is almost assured.

  171. Why not "Lindow" (singular)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "Lindow" as in "X Window"

    1. Re:Why not "Lindow" (singular)? by popo · · Score: 1


      Actually, correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't "X Windows" in reality just called "X". I think the "Windows" part was added on unofficially in common usage...

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  172. Goatse Troll is Karma-Whoring! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod down accordingly!

  173. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows / Lindow -no confusions because "Lindow" would be more similar to "X Window" than to "Windows"

  174. I WANT MORE SPAM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mail me under

    joachim.bremer@web.de or
    bremer@cs.uni-frankfurt.de!

    Penis enlargement offers welcome.

    PS: goatse man is my idol! And I LOVE tubgirl!

  175. Problems with this: by popo · · Score: 4, Informative

    The question here is about the "Scope" of a trademark, and whether "Lindows" is confusable.

    Typically if a trademark is huge (like Pepsi, Nike, etc.) the scope of the mark is larger and more leeway is given to the holder of the mark.

    On the other hand, there is a long established history of "sound alike" marks. The famous mid-century German camera was the "Leica". The not-so-famous japanese clone was the "Ricoh" (which with a Japanese accent was indistinguishable.)

    It should also be said that "Window" is *not* a Microsoft trademark. Apple's first Macintosh OS used the term "Window" to describe an enclosed area of screen real-estate used by a specific application. This is important because a trademark should *not* be descriptive in terms of functional value.

    So part of the issue here is the strength and recognizability of the "Windows" trademark (which granted is huge) versus the functional, descriptive, and commonly used term "Window".

    The judge clearly gave Microsoft a wide berth in terms of ownership -- making the judgement call that "Lindows" was in fact too close to "Windows" -- which in turn raises some questions: What about AOL's "Messenger" product -- has Microsoft infringed? What about "StarOffice"? (or "OpenOffice"?). Let's not forget that "Office" is also a Microsoft trademark.

    One could then argue that "Messenger" is in fact a 'descriptive, functional' term... but then again... so is "Windows".

    The crux of the problem is this: In the rapid development process of software creation and technology in general, the 'descriptive/functional term' and the 'protectable tradename' are typically closely linked.

    Given that one cannot trademark a term that describes 'functional value', this presents an inherent problem with software and technology trademarks, and gives an unfair advantages to the first mover, or the established market leader.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Problems with this: by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      This coming from a company that used the term Internet Explorer, even though it was trademarked. Their defense: Internet Explorer is too generic a term. Yet Windows, with "window" being a term not invented by Microsoft, isn't generic.

      Trademarks get strengthened by use and defending. They get weakened legally if you don't defend them. Part of Microsoft going after LinidowsOS is that they can't allow even partial weakening in this case because it may affect future products.

    2. Re:Problems with this: by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      "Office" would actually be a more defensible trademark term because there is no prior generic use of the word "office" in computer science and operating systems, unlike the term "window". If someone had trademarked "office" for a productivity suite, it would probably hold up. The same is true for "explorer" and "messenger".

      If Microsoft indeed has a trademark of the word "Office", it's curious they haven't gone after the competing companies using the *exact* word, but *have* gone after Lindows.com for a *rhyming* word, and have in fact not pursued many companies also using "Windows" and "Win" in product names - this would tend to support Robertson's argument that the litigation is a tool to suppress his business.

    3. Re:Problems with this: by Keeper · · Score: 1

      What companies out there use "Windows" in the title of an operating system product?

    4. Re:Problems with this: by One+Louder · · Score: 1

      IBM - AIXWindows

    5. Re:Problems with this: by Keeper · · Score: 1

      AIXWindows is not an operating system. It is a set of 'enhancements' to X/Motif.

    6. Re:Problems with this: by One+Louder · · Score: 1

      Windows started out as a window manager, or "enhancement" to DOS. By Microsoft's expanded definition of "operating system", AIXWindows would certainly count.

    7. Re:Problems with this: by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Even if we try to assume that the nature of the tradmark remains unchanged from its origin, AIXWindows isn't a window manager -- it's a set of extensions (or a library; didn't look at it close enough to really tell) to another window manager and library (X+Motif).

  176. I WANT MORE SPAM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mail me under

    joachim.bremer@web.de or
    bremer@cs.uni-frankfurt.de!

    Penis enlargement offers welcome.

    PS: goatse man is my idol! And I LOVE tubgirl, as well as mheinz@cs.uni-frankfurt.de

  177. Windex Wipes - Glass, Surface & Hard Disk Clea by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

    "Clean off windows the easy way with Windex Wipes!"

    Windex Wipes - the Glass, Surface and Hard Disk Cleaner.

    Shit. That was too good to happen, they've already been borgified.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  178. intelos become ntelos for same reason by jarkun · · Score: 2, Informative

    Our regional cell-phone provider "intelos" was forced to change their name to "ntelos" because intel wasn't happy with the name.

  179. Obvious Next Name by chaoticset · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...could it be...Winsux? :)

    --

    -----------------------
    You are what you think.
  180. Re:MOD PARENT UP, are mods sleeping? damnit?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes... in English. if you don't know, how are they pronounced, there's still a one-letter difference

  181. Mercedes Perfume? by CODiNE · · Score: 1

    How about if made by a famous woman named Mercedes? Does the fact that the person may or may not have been named after the car change anything? Would a person have to have been born before the (TM) of the Mercedes vehicle name? Does a person naming the product after themselves become exempt from infringement ? Obviously nobody wants to sell purfume that smells like a car, even if it is fancy. What if the maker of Mercedes perfume felt the lawsuit itself was creating confusion in peoples minds whereas before nobody really connected the two Mercedes brands? Ie: Nobody would confuse Apple computers with the Macintosh Apple brand until the Apple company sues Apple which creates a mental connection many never thought about. If you can't tell who is suing who, obviously confusion is being made. Countersue I guess. :)

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    1. Re:Mercedes Perfume? by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      " How about if made by a famous woman named Mercedes? "

      She would most likely lose. For example there was a guy named Tim Allen who created a web site called timallen.com. Tim Allen the comedian and actor sued tim allen (lowercase) and won the rights to "his" name and the domain.

      Why is Tim Allen the real Tim Allen and tim allen not the real Tim Allen? Because he has more money and more fame that's why. Anbody else who is named Tim Allen does not have the rights to that name whether they were born before or after the real Tim Allen.

      It's would be funny if it was not true.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    2. Re:Mercedes Perfume? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      There would be no problem with trademarking the word "Mercedes" for use by a perfume manufacturer since they are in an entirely different line of business to the famous Car Manufacturer also called Mercedes.

  182. In that case.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..may I suggest Windoves?

  183. Lindow is a surname by mar1boro · · Score: 1

    Lindow is a surname. Rare, and ranked #25385 in the United States. Over here.

    Hire a Lindow, make her the Primary Marketing Consultant, and rebrand as Lindow's Operating System.

    --
    -- "It was as if the paint factories had decided to deal direct with the art galleries." - Thursday Next
  184. Sweden? by cybercuzco · · Score: 1

    Sweeden? Finland? Since when do their laws apply in the US? So they cant use "lindows" in sweeden. Big deal, Wal-Mart is selling them in the US. Call it BGSD (Bill Gates Sucks Distro) and MS will be happy (sorta)

    --

    1. Re:Sweden? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Ask Apple to name it. When Carl Sagan told them to rename the code name to a PowerPC mac (I think the 7100) they did, and re code-named it to BHA - Butt-Headed Astronomer.

    2. Re:Sweden? by benzapp · · Score: 1

      Not only that, their combined population is only 14 million, smaller than many US states. They are really irrelevant in the grand scheme of international business. They could ban the sale of computers or cars, and I don't think anyone could care.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    3. Re:Sweden? by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      No kidding, if Lindows stopped selling in Sweden and Finland they're out what, $30?

      I'm just waiting for a subsequent story in which Lindows advises the courts of sweden and finland to suck the cock.

  185. LINW by Salamanders · · Score: 1

    Lindows is not Windows. :)

  186. Windows isn't like Xerox; it's like windows. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't use "xerox" myself. I think that phase of usage has passed. Xerox isn't the main maker of copiers anymore, and copiers are ubiquitous enough we just call them "copiers".

    The problem isn't that "Windows" is a generic term used to describe any graphical operating system. The problem is that "windows" is the name of the graphical thingies that comprise any graphical operating system, and has been for longer that Microsoft has been using the term to describe their own operating system which uses windows. It's more than just a generic name for something in computers, it is the name for the very thing which Windows and all other GUI OSs I'm aware of use.

    Consider Kleenex -- I use "kleenex" as a generic term for "facial tissue". Now, what if instead of "Kleenex", Kimberly-Clark decided to call their product Facial Tissues(tm)? This is essentially what Microsoft did -- name the product after what it is. Which is fine, until you start telling other people they can't use that term or terms that evoke the same idea anymore.

    Of course Lindows is supposed to conjure an association with Windows. It is undoubtedly meant to imply a product that is similar to Windows, which is indeed what Lindows wants to be. However it is highly unlikely that this would actually cause confusion. "What is a Fudge Cram pickup truck? Sounds a lot like 'Dodge Ram'... must be the same thing!"

    Here's a somewhat related note on trademarks and common words. There was a box of some generic ginger snaps, and on the box in big letters it said "Made with Real Ginger!" With a tiny little (tm). "Real Ginger" was their trademarked name for whatever it was they put in their "ginger" snaps that was most certainly not ginger. Which is basically being able to shout blatant lies to people, as long as you say "just kidding" in a whispering voice that someone might hear. I can feel my cynicism congealing just thinking about it.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:Windows isn't like Xerox; it's like windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 flamebait warning:

      fuck micro$oft and everything they stand for

      I am sat in my office looking out of my Windows (tm - i think not)

      Later today I will drive home and so as not to crash and burn, this will require my looking out of the front Windows of my car (a 1952 vw with split screen Windows)

      When i get home to my house which is in a picturesque location so i may feel the need again to gaze through my Windows in order to become an armcharir Explorer of my enviroment.....

      At which point did or can my day to day activities and items become a trademark

      Billy boy get down of that pedestal, and smell the coffee (Java for preference) your corporation is bullshit your ethics are bullshit and your product is bullshit, get over yourself and go write some working code

      C'mon I dont think even the RIAA have stooped to the trademark level (yet - but how soon until aerosmith and bon jovi get pitted against each other in a suit for copyright violation for both having a song called crazy?)

      In short take your stolen code (hey SCO try that one, but on behalf of all of the guys that have been forced out of business or sued for their own intellectual property) and your shoddy, bloated, spying, insecure, overpriced, nonsence Windows family and shove it up your filthy corrupt ass.

      Note: I am really getting fucked off with the shit that M$ keep trying to pull....what next the next upvc replacement glazier that comes along offering to install windows for you at a bargain price getting sued.... fuck off.

      anyway thats my 0.02p (but my partner paid 129.99p for the licence allowing me to rant on her behalf.....piece of shit software manufacturer..)

  187. If Windows can stop Lindows... by FortissimoWily · · Score: 1

    ... Then surely the glass manufacturers of the world can stop Microsoft from using the exact name of one of their products? I wonder how many disappointed customers have gotten confused and purchased CD-ROMs instead of large sheets of glass? ;P

  188. Anderson Windows Watchout... by ComputatusMaximus · · Score: 1

    You're next.

  189. this was obviously the right thing to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone with a brain can tell that "lindows" was intentionally named to mimic microsofts windows and to be confused with microsofts windows.

  190. Re:Quite Incorrect by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

    That probably was the intention but it doesn't alter the fact that Michael Roberts has every right to call his product Lindows and Microsoft have no grounds for complaint.

    Windows was a computing term long before Microsoft decided it was a good name for their product, they shouldn't have been able to trademark it in the first place and they shouldn't complain when other people decide to use the variants on the word Windows in their software products either.

  191. XWindows, WindowMaker... by sprekken · · Score: 1

    People using Mac OS X or Linux don't call their OS "Windows" like MS customers do.

    But they do refer to their window managers and GUIs by that "generic" term. There are many people that don't disassociate their GUI OS interface from the underlying OS, hence XWindows is really just a part of the operating system to them.

    1. Re:XWindows, WindowMaker... by danheskett · · Score: 1

      But they do refer to their window managers and GUIs by that "generic" term. There are many people that don't disassociate their GUI OS interface from the underlying OS, hence XWindows is really just a part of the operating system to them.
      But that number is very small, as in, the number of people (who at the heyday of Xerox) who correctly identified Xerox machines and non-Xerox machines.

      Today, if you receive call from any random person, complaining about a problem with "Windows", you know with 99% level of confidence they are talking about a Microsoft product, right?

    2. Re:XWindows, WindowMaker... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, you know with a 95% certianty that they are talking about a Microsoft product, but that might be BECAUSE THEY HAVE A 95% MARKET SHARE!!

  192. Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yumpin Yimminy! Windows, Lindows? WTF's the difference?

  193. Good Thing by NJP · · Score: 1

    Personally, i believe this is a good thing! The reason for this is that although LindowsOS has some good software in it, Click-And-Run, for instance, it has the most rediculous name! It sounds like a cheap rip-off OS, and the larger it grows in the desktop market, IT will be their (the average joe family) perception of Linux, and quite frankly, i do not trust a product called "Phoney" so why should i trust "Lindows"!

    --
    >
  194. I have a better name! by ab_iron · · Score: 1

    How about "LikeMic" (pronounced "Like Mike") because it functions like Micro$oft.

  195. Some Suggestions For Name Changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Swodniw
    Swodnil
    Lindols
    Winux
    Lin-dohs!

    or

    Fenetres (French for Windows)
    Doors
    Knobs
    Panes
    Glass

    or

    Not Lindows
    Non Monopolistic Operating System
    Micro Brains
    Bill Gates Sux Our Balls

    Name it after the Judge/opposing lawyer who made this all possible. Or, in that vein

    Bill
    Billdows
    Gatesclosed

  196. Silly judge by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying that the Lindows isn't obviously made to sound like Windows, but that the Windows trademark, should have been invalid in the first place. Aside from being a common household word, the X Window System (X11) predates Windows by several years. If anything, Microsoft violated them. And Lindows uses XFree86, which is more or less a descendent of the the X Window System.

  197. Groucho saves the day! by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 1

    From a diffrent angle Lindows could argue it itself is a generic name (Lindows in swedish being the gramatic equivalent Lindow's), there are at least a few Lindow, living in Stockholm, and then use a variation of the marx brothers defence. I'd also like to add that this indeed has been covered in swedish mainstream media www.dn.se/ekonomi (in swedish ofcourse).

  198. Re:Quite Incorrect by angle_slam · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Windows was a computing term long before Microsoft decided it was a good name for their product, they shouldn't have been able to trademark it in the first place and they shouldn't complain when other people decide to use the variants on the word Windows in their software products either.

    If a friend said to you, "I bought this program but I have to return it because it only runs on Windows," would you have even the slightest doubt about what he meant? Of course not. Everyone knows, in the computing field, what Windows means. The reason Lindows is "winning" in the US isn't because the name Windows is generic. It's not. The reason is because in the 1980s, when MS named the program Windows, the name was generic.

  199. You sure it's Microsoft? by CySurflex · · Score: 0, Troll

    If you guys RTFA you'll notice that it's actually Linus suing Lindows, and he wants them to remove the "Lin" part from their name...

    1. Re:You sure it's Microsoft? by linuxrunner · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Are you a complete moron??

      From the Article:

      Microsoft sued Lindows.com in the U.S. in December 2001, accusing the company of infringing its Windows trademark

      --- End Transmission ----

      --
      www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
  200. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by angle_slam · · Score: 2, Insightful
    At least in the US, Microsoft's trademark is not for "Windows", it's for "Microsoft Windows". Several other software products already contained the term "Windows" at the time Microsoft attempted to grab the term.They couldn't, at least without adding the Microsoft part of the name.

    WRONG! MS has many trademarks on the word Windows alone. Here is one of them.

  201. Re:The irony by symbolic · · Score: 1

    They could still have thier trademark on the phrase "Microsoft Windows", but they would no longer be allowed to have the word "Windows" itself trademarked, like it is now.

    Microsoft ended up trademarking a term that described a key component of an operating system that existed long before Billy & Co. even had a clue- that being the Mac of course. Given this alone, if I were a judge, I'd yank the trademark without a second thought. If Microsoft was dumb enough to bank its success on such a common term, too bad.

    For the record, there was a lot of activity going on about the time that Windows 1.0 was released. What's interesting is that while it came out shortly after the Apple Lisa was released, the Lisa's interface (and that of the Mac that shortly followed), was far more polished. Microsoft didn't come up with anything of the same caliber until Windows 3.0, which wasn't released until 1990, SEVEN YEARS later. It was only then that "Windows" incorporated a desktop environment that used what I'd consider "real" windowing.

  202. Not generic in non-english languages by McDutchie · · Score: 1

    Since "window" is a common English word, the word "Windows" might be seen as generic and non-trademarkable in English-speaking countries. In other countries such as Sweden and Finland that obviously wouldn't apply, since the words for "window" in Swedish and Finnish are quite different.

  203. Its only in Finland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the US the court ruled its ok to call it "Lindows".

  204. Xwindows name first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Microsoft is trying to prevent Lindows
    from calling itself Lindows when Microsoft
    stole the name windows from Xwindows,
    right?

    This is a game Microsoft can't win in the long
    run as more people hear that fact.

  205. American Courts by Bull999999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People may complain about the American courts but at least the American judge didn't force Linows to stop using its name. I sure hope that Linows win and offically make Windows a generic term (which it is).

    --
    1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    1. Re:American Courts by kisak · · Score: 1
      I sure hope that Linows win and offically make Windows a generic term (which it is).

      Windows is not a generic term in the Swedish language, and that is for sure offical. Businiss on a world wide scale is much more challenging than selling to the home marked.

      --

      --- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---

    2. Re:American Courts by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      Does that mean that I can trademark common English words in Sweden?

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    3. Re:American Courts by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      In the US, the judge was initially inclined to grant Microsoft's request for preliminary injunction, but Lindows.com was allowed to present evidence that the Windows mark might reasonably be rendered invalid by a jury, and the judge was convinced.

      In Europe, apparently learning from their mistakes, Microsoft specifically asked for the injunction to be granted without prior notification to Lindows.com, claiming imminent harm their trademark - after two years.

    4. Re:American Courts by Flambergius · · Score: 1

      I should think you could. I'm not a lawyer and a Finn, not a bloody Swede, so just a laymans opinion here.

      Could I name my new product "Aurinko" and get a US trademark for it?

      The English language is often used by Finnish companies just because this. I know this from a personal experience: I was able to use common English words for the name of my start-up a couple of years ago. A fairly good name, better than anything that was available in Finnish ... not that made any difference in the end. :-)

      --Flam

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
  206. change name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lindows should change its name to Doors.

  207. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was about to say this exact same thing, FreeUser already said it. I don't have mod points so I'm making this stupid AC post instead ;)

  208. Great.. by adrizk · · Score: 1

    This doesn't bode well for that Lmacosx project I was planning..

  209. Re:Gah! by Lord+Kholdan · · Score: 1

    Not only is it a name, it's a generic word found in any dictionary. If they were to try using the name "L-OS/X" or "L-AIX" I could see where there would be a problem.

    It's not a generic finnish or swedish word.

  210. Ok, no problem guys... by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... from now on, our distribution will be known as 'Windux'.

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  211. Someone else already pointed this... by hummassa · · Score: 1

    but there is no such term as XWindows.
    X Window System
    or
    X11
    or
    X
    but no XWindows.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:Someone else already pointed this... by Ursius · · Score: 1

      I hope many pointed this out. But regardless... X window or X windows Plural... Simple English. I forgot to put the space between them which makes my point even more clear... X=Brand Windows generic term used in GUI reference. Am I wrong?

    2. Re:Someone else already pointed this... by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      Wait, wait, so you're saying a generic word "windows" can't be trademarked, but a letter "x" can? That doesn't quite sit right...

    3. Re:Someone else already pointed this... by Ursius · · Score: 1

      When was X trademarked? I merely said it was the brand. Whether or not the brand was trademarked is irrelevant. Maybe I am not saying my point clearly. Water Can't be trademarked. Evian Water can be. Windows alone should not be allowed to be trademarked. Hello! Is it glass is it Microsoft Windows. I mean this sentence "My windows Keep getting Cracked." Yea what am I referring to? Its a generic term. And I don't ever remember saying that a letter of the alphabet could be trademarked.

  212. pay pack time by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    I think this is where the X Consortium comes in and calls MS on the use of "Windows" - after all, the X Window System was around a long time prior.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  213. Is Linux trademarked? by fractaloon · · Score: 1

    I'm curious.. is the name Linux trademarked? Not that I see it happening but could Linus gone and sued Lindows in the same fashion?

  214. Re:Well... Lets's not forget. by IAmAMacOSXAddict · · Score: 1

    Personally I think it is very screwed up that a court would give Micro$loth the "copyright" on the word Windows. Especially seeing as even they coppied it from XWindows. I would like to see them explain themselves out of the fact they themselves stole the name... Bob

    --
    MacOSX, because making *NIX better is a lot better than waiting for Micro$loth to fix Windows
  215. New name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Licrosoft.

  216. Key Importance by tgraupmann · · Score: 1

    This has been an ongoing battle. They parts of the story are that the notice comes from sweden and finland. This case was already thrown out in the US, and should be upheld. MSFT fighting a battle they just can't win.

  217. In the future, by sdcharle · · Score: 1

    it'll be called LOSX, Lolaris, LeOS, or LOS/2, one of those.

  218. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    didn't Microsoft lose a similar tradmark action years ago?

  219. it's lame anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The name "Lindows" is lame anyway. First of all, it is obviously intended to play off "Windows". More importantly, it just has a loser namby-pamby sound to it. It's obvious a bunch of geeks were in a room somewhere trying to think of a name and someone said, "I know! 'Lindows', because it's a combination of LINux and wINDOWS." And then the others said, "Hey, that makes a lot of sense."

    Shut up! Yes, it does make some sense, but it sounds like crap! It's lame and derivative. It's the name of a product that you're going to try and sell. I don't want to think too much like marketing people (since they're evil), but the name should HELP you sell the product, not make you think that the people who made the product do everything in a half-assed manner and/or have a speech impediment. "Lindows" has a negative amount of panache. The Lindows people should be thanking God that they have been given an opportunity to re-examine the name and realize how dull it is. Maybe they can use the opportunity to come up with a better one. (Wait, who am I kidding? Maybe they can hire somebody to come up with a better one.)

  220. MS own arguments! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    There was a case against "internet Explorer" where MS argued that the tradmark holder couldn't use common words in a valid trade name...so by MS own admission, Lindows is a valid tradmark name...while "windows" is not...that's why the "name" of it is "MicroSoft Windows XX" without the MS at the beginning, it's not a valid tradmark in the US...Outside the US is a different story...foreign court always tend to favor the incumbant in these issues...and of course the "english" names aren't common words in other languages!

    1. Re:MS own arguments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outside the US is a different story... the "english" names aren't common words in other languages!

      Of course, no-one outside the US speaks English. There's no such place as Canada. The United Kingdom is a myth. The Republic of Ireland uses Irish exclusively. Australia and New Zealand are uninhabited...

  221. Needs quality to become lexicon by spleck · · Score: 1

    "Xerox" and "Band-Aid" went from brandname to common use because people were generally happy using those products and preferred them. This makes sense in the case of "Windows" because users of unix, Linux, and Mac OS generally don't prefer Windows, so they definitely won't call what, in their mind is a superior product, "Windows". On the other hand, people that do use Windows primarily and have not been exposed to *nix or Mac tend to call them "Windows."

    So basically, I'm just making a couple observations:
    1) Technopolitically untainted people DO call other GUIs "Windows"
    2) Technologically experienced people refer to an OS by the correct name simply because of their disdain for the opposition.

    1. Re:Needs quality to become lexicon by danheskett · · Score: 1

      2) Technologically experienced people refer to an OS by the correct name simply because of their disdain for the opposition.
      That's false I believe. There are millions of people out there who know exactly what Windows, Mac OS, and Linux are, and call thme by there proper names because, well, that's their name. Not to discredit Windows. That assumption is absurd and drastically general. It presumes to know that *everyone* who knows about alternatives implicitly dislikes Windows, which is provably false.

      1) Technopolitically untainted people DO call other GUIs "Windows"
      If they do, its out of error, not because they generally think of the GUI as "Windows". If you received a random phone call from any computer user randomly selected, and they asked you a question about "Windows", you personally could say with 99% level of confidence they are reffering to a MS product, couldn't you?

    2. Re:Needs quality to become lexicon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if someone was calling in with a problem in their OS I would assume they are running Windows! I don't think that has anything to do with trademarks though....

  222. Language by Rimbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think a reason that MS is having more success in Europe is language. Consider this: You wouldn't consider trademarking "The Road." It's... the frickin' road. But then say "El Camino," and at least we Americans who are old enough immediately think of a certain miniature pickup truck.

    If you're in a country where English is a second or outright foreign language, "Windows" might thus seem to be more like something you could trademark. And "Lindows" might seem to be an obvious attempt to capitalize on the name, as if another car company had released a pickup truck called "Los Caminos."

    1. Re:Language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then say "El Camino," and at least we Americans who are old enough immediately think of a certain miniature pickup truck.

      ... while our upper lips curl in an inadvertent sneer at the thought of such an ugly and useless vehicle.

      Yep, guess I must be old enough.

    2. Re:Language by Rimbo · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Language by Squashee · · Score: 1

      Since I am from Sweden I can tell you that this was exactly the case here. Microsoft has a trademark on "Windows", since it is not considered to be a generic word. Simple as that.

      And while I'm at it, if we step outside Trademark law and the courts and consider the name Lindows for what it actually is, there can be only one reason for why that perticular name came to be. Morally Microsoft is actually right in this case.

      --
      When in doubt, act determined. Business 101
    4. Re:Language by Rimbo · · Score: 1
      Since I am from Sweden I can tell you that this was exactly the case here. Microsoft has a trademark on "Windows", since it is not considered to be a generic word. Simple as that.


      Shit, I was just making a wild guess. I didn't actually expect to be right!

      And while I'm at it, if we step outside Trademark law and the courts and consider the name Lindows for what it actually is, there can be only one reason for why that perticular name came to be. Morally Microsoft is actually right in this case.


      I agree with you... IF we also agree that "Windows" is not so generic. Put it this way -- in Sweden, the courts are right, but in the USA, the courts are also right to throw out Microsoft's suit. Now if Lindows were selling a product called Lindows XP, then there'd be trouble in the USA. That would be a more obvious breach. Or if the name "Windows" had been slightly altered in the USA, such as "Windoze," and then Michael Robertson had started a company called "Lindoze." This is why Miller Lite beer is not Miller Light beer.

      What it really comes down to is that Microsoft made a bad marketing decision in selecting a name that was too generic. This isn't the only time they've made that mistake. If I make a word processor called Word, for example, Microsoft is not going to be able to use the courts to get me to change the name, because the name is just too generic.
  223. Good to know! by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 0

    Lindows was a goddawful ugly and stupid name. Being a distro that is gaining ground these days, it gave Linux a bad name, and made a lot of people think the sole purpose of Linux was to compete against Microsoft.

  224. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by sdcharle · · Score: 1
    How does the parent's lack of understanding of the most basic aspects of trademark law qualfy as "insightful?"

    You missed the moderator's meeting where they laid down the law:

    A comment is to be rated insightful if and only if:

    • It is over 100 words long
    • At least 90% of those words are spelled properly
    • Reasonable grammar is used
    • After reading the comment, a person with no knowledge of the subject matter might have to think for a second or do a Google lookup before saying 'That's complete bulls***'.

    I hope this clears it up for you and everyone else.

  225. Similarity to Coca-/Pepsi-Cola (Win-/Lin-dows) by spleck · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anyone else see the similarity between Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola? I never heard about any lawsuits there.

    Cola is a generic term used in the industry but it is part of Coke's brand identity. It's part of a trademarked name (as is "dows"). :)

    Win is the abbreviation of Windows and its all around. I don't see dows32 programs being written. Lindows simply replaced the specific portion of a generic word.

    It's a good thing Ford didn't name his product the Ford Car. If we talked about someone's "car", we'd have to be corrected that its an "automobile" or "horseless-carriage".

    And what about Mazda changing the name of the B-series pickup to the "Mazda Truck". Hopefully they won't decide to trademark the name... especially in Finland or something. My god! They could take Ford out of business!

  226. Winux would infringe another trademark... by Thumpnugget · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, except if Microsoft tried to use the name "Winux" in any product they would immediately be sued by the owner of a trademark on which that name infringes: a certain Mr. Linus Torvalds who owns the trademark for a software product named "Linux". It's been said that this Mr. Torvalds is not enamored with Microsoft, either, as they have secretly plotted to harm the software project on which he works that bears this trademark (while intended to be kept secret, this information later became public), and also for their poor software design. While Mr. Torvalds is a single individual who would be litigating a corporate entity of massive proportions, it is well known that he would have significant financial resources to back him in any action against Microsoft if such a need ever arose.

    --
    Free yourself. Everything else will follow.
    1. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly my point. If you can see that Linus would be a 'hero' for defending the Linux trademark, then you must see Microsoft in the same light in the case of Lindows.

      Just so it's clear, I'm not defending Microsoft here. I'm attacking this hypocritical behaviour. It's okay for Linus to defend his trademark, but Microsoft can't? This type of behaviour, besides being childish "boo hiss I hate Microsoft" it also will backfire against the Open Source Community. Fair is fair. If you guys can't demonstrate fairness and at least some objectivity, then don't expect your warnings about how 'evil' Microsoft is to be heard.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by jrockway · · Score: 1

      Uh oh, what's that glass thing between you and the outside? A window? If there's more than one, you have windows. Obviously, Lindows is a combination between AN ENGLISH WORD and Linux. Sorry M$, you picked a damn bad word to claim to trademark. Sue Mr. Webster while you're at it.

      --
      My other car is first.
    3. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Just because you have different feelings about trademarks than the law does, doesn't mean the law doesn't apply anymore. The law and the courts say differently than you do.

    4. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Uh oh, what's that glass thing between you and the outside? A window? If there's more than one, you have windows.... Sorry M$, you picked a damn bad word to claim to trademark. Sue Mr. Webster while you're at it."

      What's that fruit you're eating? Apple! What's that light coming from outside? The Sun! Who's that chick from the Matrix? The Oracle! Who's your date from last weekend? Palm!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      Yeah, except if Microsoft tried to use the name "Winux" in any product they would immediately be sued by the owner of a trademark on which that name infringes: a certain Mr. Linus Torvalds who owns the trademark for a software product named "Linux".

      Actually, I bet if SCO bit the dust completely and Microsoft decided to build and market an OS that was some sort of hybrid between Unix and Windows, Win-UX (or WinUX) would be considered a perfectly fine name and nobody would bother to sue.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    6. Re:Winux would infringe another trademark... by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      "Linux", however, falls into a category of "fanciful" names which are much easier to defend than descriptive or generic names. Xerox and Kodak are similar fanciful names.

      "Windows," as has been repeated many times, is not only a generic English word, but also is a generic term in the field of computer science which predates Microsoft's usage, and should never have been granted as a trademark.

  227. WRONG! MOD DOWN! by gerf · · Score: 1

    UI looks like Windows (fairly generic to be sure, but some things came from MS, such as the "Start" button in the lower left hand corner), and certainly when the name "Lindows" was coined it wasn't with the generic "windows" usage in mind.


    You are WRONG. Lindows has an "L" in the lower left corner. NOT a Start button. Their layout of their gui resembles windows very little actually. They have some controls that are similar, a folder resembling My Documents.... which i don't think is patented. Most of their User Interface resembles Linux more than Windows, actually.


    And, Mr. Retard, have you ever used MATLAB 6.5? I have. It has a "Start" button in the lower left of the program!!!! OH SNAP! Go back to school, or at least learn something that a 20 year old with little to no research can lambast you on.p?

  228. Lindows name issue: by ChaseMod · · Score: 1

    Far be this from the end. It seems like yet another tactic by M$...It's names now, but what then, do we go after how we label the boxes ? Will it work both ways ? Will Microsoft finaly have to put a consumer warning on their boxes that their product users may experiance drowsiness ?

  229. Must speak the language to dictate the language by karlk79 · · Score: 1

    only people that should do this is the country the company resides in. And how in the hell can a country that dosent speak english mainly do this (oh they cant) hell i can barely tell the difference between arabic words, should i be allowed to say what is alike?

  230. Is this the future of corporate lidigation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems a bit underhanded to file this in Sweden. Unless I'm mistaken, both companies involved are american, why not take care of it in american courts?
    It seems as if you can't win in the United States, just go abroad and file suit there. I'm sure if you try a court in every country, at least one judge will go for it. It's basically just 'court shopping'. Given a large enough population, you can always find one wacko to go along with your ideas.
    But can you imagine the cost involved in highering Lawyers in a Foreign country, espesially if you have no corporate representation there? You'd have to contract out to a new legal firm in the country (I'm assuming that american law firms only practice in the US). Hell, you could drive a company out of business just by fileing suit in a couple dozen different countries, and making them hire a couple dozen different lawyers.

  231. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? But: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sec. 15 of the Lanham Act (15 USC 1065(4)) states that "no incontestable right shall be acquired in a mark which is the generic name for the goods or services or a portion thereof . . "

  232. Heh...What a tool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lindows.com Chief Executive Officer Michael Robertson in a statement issued in response to the Swedish injunction, lashed out against Microsoft's legal pursuit of his company, accusing Microsoft of using lawsuits "as a battering ram to smash Linux."

    Funny - I don't see MS suing RedHat, or Debian, or SuSE, or Gentoo....Just suing a company who chose a name and symbol that hit too close to the mark...What a tool...

  233. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by Schnapple · · Score: 1
    Mercedes (automobiles) vs you making Mercedes Perfume without using the mercedes car symbol. undecided... i tend to think that this would be infringement, since mercedes is a well known luxury brand, automobile or not.
    Everyone's favorite rock group, Metallica, sued Victoria's Secret (I think) for making a nail polish color called... Metallica. Metallica (the group) won. Consider this the Napster warning shot. It's ironic since Lars stole the name Metallica anyway (a friend of his had a list of potential magazine names - Lars suggested a different one and kept "Metallica" for himself).
  234. No Problem. by kramer · · Score: 1

    Okay, they can't use 'Lindows' in Finland and Sweden?

    May I suggest a quick name change to 'Sven-dows' in those two countries?

  235. Re:Quite Incorrect by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1
    "The reason is because in the 1980s, when MS named the program Windows, the name was generic."

    Yes, that's right and when they trademarked it the name was generic too which really means that they shouldn't have been able to trademark it means that they are in the wrong now when they are trying to defend a trademark which never should have been a trademark.

    If that wasn't the case and the word "Windows" had never been used as a generic computing term before Microsoft trademarked "Microsoft Windows" then I'd agree with you about the Lindows affair but because of the history behind this I have to disagree that Microsoft are in the right persuing Lindows for trademark infringement.

  236. Wrong: Windows is trademarked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Windows is not trademarkable ....

    Wrong. From Microsoft's list of trademarks (RTF), linked from Microsoft's trademark's page, the Windows(R) operating system is trademarked. Scroll down to page 5 on the RTF.

    It has been trademarked for many years.

  237. Re:The irony by lcsjk · · Score: 1

    Did'nt QuarterDeck come up with the name windows in their literature long before Microsoft started calling anything with the Windows name?
    Also, although I do not remember the dates, but in the mid '80s or earlier, NCR Corporation started selling a windowing package to customers to interface to their Unix machines, long before MS brought out Windows 3.0. Did MS have an earlier release they called "Windows"?

  238. Re:Windows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lindows new name... LNW Lindows Not Windows

  239. Are you deaf or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Linux rhymes with Minix?

    You fucking tard!

  240. The answer to the Lindows problem - Pig Latin. by Kgreene · · Score: 1

    Now introducting the our newly renamed OS - Icrosoftmay Indowsway.

  241. How well des Lindows work? by randomErr · · Score: 1

    So does anyone know how well Lindows works? Does it emulate Windows API well?

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  242. Special version for Sweden... by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    ...Swindows

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  243. We're all shedding tears by ihummel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lindows is a lame name to begin with. I don't think that it is a Good Thing(TM) for Linux vendors to try to make carbon copies of Windows. Sure it might win a few people over, but we need to win converts on Linux's strengths, not on the perceived strengs of its competitors.

    1. Re:We're all shedding tears by Sacks · · Score: 1

      I fully agree. IBM tried this years ago with OS/2 Warp and Merlin. Then w95 came out and invalidated everything they said. End of OS/2 as a possible competitor. To bad. I liked Merlin and currently have it on one PC on my network just to play my Dos games.

    2. Re:We're all shedding tears by Doctor+Crocodile · · Score: 1

      I fully agree. IBM tried this years ago with OS/2 Warp and... er, dunno about merlin, afaik that's a trade name for the engine in the spitfire.... OS/2 code base was a joint development with MS NT. There was a major falling out over MS decision to pull out (no doubt taking all of IBM's IP with them)

  244. Now I know whats wrong with me !!! :-D by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1
    Not to sound too nationalistic, but Europe is much bigger than the US - it's just more disorganised, and hamstrung by the French. ;-)

    It's that dammed french ancestry, no wonder I'm hamstung. :-D
    --
    in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
    Francis Smit
  245. It IS a play on the Windows trademark... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is it really that hard to SEE or BELIEVE? That Lindows is a play on the Windows trademark? And no it's not about the windows at your house or on the car...it's about a computer OS that proclaims to run Windows software, I say that's close enough to be infringing on their trademark...

    1. Re:It IS a play on the Windows trademark... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even so, you have to be pretty damn stupid not to get that it's a joke. How many people are that stupid? What kind of damage does it amount to? Next to nothing.

      The most the should have to do is tag a precurser onto Lindows ie Linux Lindows, MS DOS, IBM DOS etc

  246. Rhymes With Orange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Granted, in this lawsuit there may be some potential for actual damage. Lindows is a potential bid'ness rival to the offended Windows product. Usually these trivial copyright/trademark lawsuits are completely laughable in terms of "damage". The target often has nothing to do with the offended product or its field. (ie. McD's threatening to sue a little girl a few years back for inventing a basketball game called Nothing But Net because it "infringed" upon their then ad campaign's catch phrase.)

    I don't think Lindows was trying to trick or fool anyone into thinking this was Micro$oft Broken Windows. Unless they were ripping off packaging, colour schemes, etc, the mere word Lindows shouldn't be enough. Didn't both IBM and Micro$oft both pedal a product called DOS? THAT confused me, not Windows/Lindows. These Micro$oft fuckers should just be happy Bush dropped the federal monopoly lawsuit after their major campaign contribution to him.

    It seems Lindows only "crime" is that they have rhymed their product with Micro$oft's. I've always wanted to produce an oversized, gas guzzling vehicle named the Explore-her. I guess I'd be sued for rhyming too. What about the Lexplorer? Could both Ford *and* Lexus sue Chevy? Just to prove the silliness of all this, how is it possible for one word to violate two trademarks?

    All this copyright/trademark bullshit is almost always just anal-rentitive lawyer-weasels trying to create make-work projects for themselves by inventing ways to sue people over nothing. That and corporations trying to mark their territory like a dog on a firehydrant. We're expected to cower and say "Oh, you are soo big and powerfull. Oh, I admire and will obey you. I will bend over before you and swalling afterwards."

    And for those of you who've forgotten, judges salaries and numerous other courtroom costs for such "vital" cases are paid for by your taxes.

    1. Re:Rhymes With Orange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops, that should read

      "Bend over and SWALLOW afterwards"

      Sorry, got a little -er- excited.

  247. Windows trademarks ;) by theolein · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Has Microsoft also registered the words "Crashes", "Exploits" and "Vulnerabilities" then?

    1. Re:Windows trademarks ;) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the words "patches" and "worthless bloatware"

  248. Re:Quite Incorrect by angle_slam · · Score: 1
    I think anti-MS bias is affecting everyone's thinking about this issue. The name Windows is one of the strongest marks in the world. The fact that they may lose TM protection is solely due to a technicalilty.

    Put it another way, if the owner of Lindows, instead of being obsessed with MS, was obsessed with beverages, and started marketing the products Ludweiser and Lepsi, would you think the case is so far-fetched?

  249. This Just In by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The inventor of the spyworld staple, the Microdot, is suing Microsoft because it changed two letters on his copyrighted invention's name.

    Also, Slash, former guitarist of note with Guns N' Roses, is suing Slashdot for adding "dot" to his trademarked name.

    In other news, England is suing everyone who dares to use their language, English, without paying a licence fee and/or royalty.

  250. pricewatch still lists it by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    http://www.pricewatch.com/

    look up at the top left corner.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  251. Re:The irony by symbolic · · Score: 1


    There were several competing interests at the time, including VisiCorp's VisiOn, IBM's TopView, Digital Research's GEM, and QuarterDesk's Desq. And of course, the one that preceded all of this by a wide margin, and served as the inspiration for the Mac interface, was the Xerox Star. But Xerox, it seems was using this more as a testbed than a commercial venture.

    Yes, there was a Windows 1.0, and a Windows/286. Windows' original name was Interface Manager, but was changed before its release.

  252. Website by filmsmith · · Score: 1

    I'm amazed that no one (that I could find, anyway) has yet pointed out the striking lack of originality in the Lindows website navbar at the top!

    Who exactly ARE these guys trying to copy? They seem to be pulling together the worst of each major OS and trying to put them to use.

    Poor, dumb bastards.

    fs

  253. In other news: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Anderson Window company has just announced that the Redmond Corportion of the same name \ as one of its products has infringed on one of their trademarks. Anderson Windows has a line of small plexiglass products that it sells that is known as Micro Soft Windows that predates the formation of Gates' company.

  254. Re:WRONG! MOD DOWN! by miryth · · Score: 1

    I think this is most likely the most flamey post I've seen in quite some time.

    "OMG U R TEH SUX U DONT NO NETHING" would have served your purpose just as well, I believe.

  255. If the only thing MS can find to go after... by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

    ...is the name, then they're in pretty good shape.

    They could always call it X-Lindows, unless MS decides it has a case against X-Windows...

    1. Re:If the only thing MS can find to go after... by Sacks · · Score: 1

      I hope the world will one day be X-Microsoft and X-Gates. That will make me X-static. :)

  256. Re:Quite Incorrect by One+Louder · · Score: 1
    The reason Windows is uniquely associated with Microsoft *now* is that they had trademark and hence exclusivity on its usage.

    That doesn't change the fact that the trademark should never have been granted in the first place - and it shouldn't matter how much money or marketing effort they expended to build it up. It's the fruit of a poisoned tree.

    There were several products with "Windows" in the name when Microsoft Windows came to market.

  257. But aren't apple being sued.... by therufus · · Score: 1

    .... by the Beatles company Apple Corp?

    Couldn't be bothered looking for the link but it was on /. a few months ago. IMHO, Windows is a generic term. Microsoft Windows is a trademark.

    I just copywrited the word "computer" so f**k you all!

    --
    You moved your mouse. Please restart Windows for changes to take effect.
  258. The obvious answer by LooseChanj · · Score: 1

    "Windoze(R)"

    --
    Mix the failings of Usenet with the shortcomings of the World Wide Web and the result is slashdot.
  259. Finland and Sweden? by brendan_orr · · Score: 1

    The last I checked, both companies are US based, how is it that foreign countries can enforce a name change for a company that doesn't have its primary base in that country.

    1. Re:Finland and Sweden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can enforce the name change in Finland and Sweden, although it should be noted that this was just a preliminary injunction and the court cases continue. The courts don't care what name is used elsewhere, and it wouldn't be the first time that a company must use different names for the same product in different countries.

  260. The first useful Microsoft legal victory? by JaxWeb · · Score: 1

    I think everyone else is missing the key point: Lindows was a stupid name anyway! Maybe now they'll rename it so something presentable.

    --
    - Jax
  261. Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  262. Re:Quite Incorrect by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

    I disagree, it's not a technicality - for some reason or other MS have been awarded the mark "Windows" against all the laws governing trademarks.

    At the time "windows" was a generally accepted generic term to used to refer to GUI operating systems, Microsoft have gained an exclusive advantage by having the sole right to use this term in their O/S product which they should not have ever been given.

    I'm not saying that MS wouldn't have got where they are today if they chose not to trademark the word "Windows" but the fact that the world associates the word "Windows" with a Microsoft product today makes no difference to whether they should have been given a trademark on it in the first place.

    I'm sure that the Lindows name has been chosen to deliberatley annoy Microsoft and get a lot of free publicity for themselves but that makes no difference whatsoever since they are contesting the fact that the word Windows can be trademarked in the first place.

    It looks like Michael Roberts is well on his way to winning his case in the U.S. which is why MS is choosing to attack the name in other countries.

  263. More news from court by bbsguru · · Score: 2, Funny

    This just in! Microsoft has obtained an injunction against the US. A court in Finland has ordered the United States Government to cease the
    publication of the Declaration of Independence.

    Apparently, the original text uses the phrase "All men are endowed by their Creator...", and the word "endowed" sounds a lot like part of Windows.

    It is expected lawyers will seek injunctive relief against the makers of "No-Doze" as soon as they can figure out who makes that stuff.

  264. Re:Well... Lets's not forget. by scot4875 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't know why I'm bothering to reply to this, Mr. Micro$loth, but repeat after me:

    Trademark, not copyright.

    Once more:

    Trademark, not copyright.

    They're completely different beasts. Yes, it would be screwed up if a court gave MS a 'copyright' on the word Windows, but they didn't, so it's not.

    --Jeremy

    --
    Jesus was a liberal
  265. M$ Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So will I be forced to stop posting as 'Anonymous Coward' because M$ already obviously owns the 'Coward' term?

  266. hmmm by the_other_one · · Score: 1

    Rename the company to BigHard.
    Call the product Rock.
    It should break windows.

    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  267. Re:Copyright/Trademark Extension? MOD PARENT DOWN by thorgil · · Score: 1

    ehhh microsoft porn!?

    I read micro softporn magazine

    Am I the only one?

    --
    Warning: This sig contains a small bug. ==> *
  268. ...but not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows cannot really be considered a generic computing term neither in Finland or Sweden as the official languages there are finnish+swedish and swedish respectively. Just because you might use "windows" in broader meaning when speaking english, has little meaning here, where "windows" == "microsoft windows".

    In US such a judgement would be unjust, but in Finland or Sweden it is simply the right one.

  269. What's Next ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Will MyCrowSoft sue Chruches
    for unlicensed
    Stained - Glass - WINDOWS?

  270. Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insightful with a twist of funny.

  271. Infrigment by Sacks · · Score: 1

    If Lindows is creating confusion, then any fence maker should sue ole Billy for using the word Gates. Make him stop using such a confusing word that means an opening in a fence.

    Same anology that M$ is using. Billy doesn't get his way twice in the US, go crying to the other countries because he is sooo persecuted. Next M$ will be going after Anderson Windows and other window makers for houses.

  272. Lindoze? by wonton_mein · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I agree with one poster. The Lindows name is stupid. Did anyone mention Lindoze for a change?

  273. Which windows? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    My Sun systems are full of windows. Ther have been since the times of SunOS.

    So if somebody tell me " this software runs only in windows" I would as: "the operating system. or are you talking about a generic graphic desktop?"

    No joking, for many people windows != Windows

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  274. So? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Windows is a generic term on the IT industry. If MS was stupid enough to use it for their main product, well, though.

    At least in English speaking countries, they have no legal leg to stand it. It speak volumes that MS had to go to places like Sweden or FInland.

    What is next? Impunge in places where Zulu and Mongolian is spoken?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  275. Wankers (TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wankers

  276. new name by FryGuy1013 · · Score: 1

    LindowsOS Windows

    --
    bananas like monkeys.
  277. Re:Well... (OFF TOPIC) by cymen · · Score: 1

    Off topic but you can just remove libnullplugin.so from the plugins directory and be rid of the prompts for all the different plugins (pretty sure that Firebird uses it just like Mozilla).

    I have the flash and java plugins installed. It would be awesome if Mozilla/Firebird had the option to turn off specific plugins for websites just like popups.

  278. not fair... by _Qiang_ · · Score: 1, Interesting
    why on earth judge find favor on Microsoft

    can lindows.com get away with lindows.org or lindows.net ?

    this reminds me that whitehouse.com is pr0n site and whitehourse.gov is the US gov site.
    why don't the whitehouse take all the whitehouse.* domain ?

    if they can't, then i don't think it's fair to order lindows.com to drop it's name.

  279. I see what you are saying, but... by t0ny · · Score: 1
    Here is the point I think everyone is missing: MS is not saying Linux, OSX, etc, cannot use the term "window" to describe things in their operating system. This, for example, is why Xerox is afraid to bring up the issue since they have allowed their brand name to become synomonous with photocopying (and thus fear they could lose the case in court).

    The issue is that MS is trying to prevent somebody from releasing a product with a derivative name. As I stated earlier, "Lindows" is an 85% match to "Windows"; they only changed one letter! We are talking about a product NAME, not MS trying to trademark the use of an industry term.

    There is a difference between "a window" and "Windows, the operating system". They are not attempting to legislate the use of the term "window", nor would they be able to. Likewise, you wont see a computer program company named "Macrosoft" or Microsorft", or one called "Apples". It is far too derivative, and, in the terminology of the matter, it dilutes their brand name.

    It isnt a far stretch of the imagination to see that Lindows is trying to cash in on the Windows brand name.

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

  280. And here it is by coyotedata · · Score: 2, Funny

    Lindeaux

  281. You fooled me by coyotedata · · Score: 1

    I always thought of miscrosoft windows everytime I heard any word whose second third and fourth letters were i n d.

  282. Parody by SnprBoB86 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am not sure about Finland and Sweden, but in the USA wouldn't the name "Lindows" be protected as a parody?

    --
    http://brandonbloom.name
  283. Re:Well... Lets's not forget. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    repeat after me: Trademark, not copyright.

    Repeat after me:

    Microsoft Windows(tm), not Windows(tm).

    In the U.S. at least, Microsoft does NOT have a trademark on "windows" (though it'd obviously be delighted if everybody thought it did). That (plus prior art) is why Redmond has been unable to garner any injunctions at home (and, incidentally why it'd never be able to sue XWindows). Perhaps things're different in the EU.

  284. Bah! by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

    That's only because Bill named Microsoft after his own penis size.

    --
    Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  285. Re:Well... (OFF TOPIC) by josephpate · · Score: 1

    Haven't used Mozilla in a while, but is there some sort of IE-esque "Zone" scheme that you can use to block popups/plugins/Javascript from sites that are in the appropriate zone?

    I use Opera, and have all of those things disabled anyway (along with images), so forgive me for being a little ignorant.

  286. What about Swindows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ??? that can't be taken?

  287. Trademarks: Lindows vs. Microsoft Windows by solprovider · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, the word Lindows was chosen because of its relationship with Windows. And they could be in trouble legally because they are deliberately confusing their trademark with Microsoft's in the mind of the consumer. The ability to distinguish a product in the mind of the consumer is the ONLY purpose of a trademark. So causing even accidental confusion is frowned upon by the courts.

    The defense is not that Lindows is causing confusion, but whether "Windows" can be a trademark in the software domain. "Microsoft Windows" can be trademarked, because it is a generic term used in conjuction with an identifier. And if someone tried to trademark "Macrosift Windows", Microsoft would have a case.

    But the generic term "windows" had already been in use in the software domain for several years before Microsoft applied for the trademark. Research how Microsoft gained the trademark. Several other companies were using "windows" in other software trademarks. Microsoft bought several of those companies to remove the patent and trademark office's objections.

    If "windows" is a generic software term, then Microsoft cannot object to companies using similiar trademarks. The US courts seem to agree, and may take the generic trademark from Microsoft.

    ---
    As far as "Winux" being confused with "Linux":
    Visually, there is only a 20% difference in letters, but it is the most significant character. But "W" sounds much like "L", so Linus would have a good case based on the similarity of pronunciation. He would not have much of a case against "Dinux", "Kinux", "Pinux", "Sinux", "Tinux", or "Zinux".

    (I am currently fighting a trademark case where both the words and audial identifiers are similar. We are arguing that they are distinct enough not to cause confusion in the mind of any consumer.)

    --
    I spend my life entertaining my brain.
  288. You Ignorant American (A Rant) by Flambergius · · Score: 1
    (Although this message is a reply I'm not really ranting about the parent specifically but rather about numerous comments in this story. I do address "mcc" directly, but my intent is not ad hominem. Oh, and I'm Finnish.)

    Okay, this is starting to bug me. A lot of people seem to have a real difficulty grasping the fact that Finland and Sweden are sovereign nations, quite separate from the USA, and that English is not an official language in either country. Furthermore they are getting moderated up. (Luckily, they are also being corrected in replies.)

    My American friends, have you ever wondered why you have a reputation on being ignorant? Well, in short, because sometimes many of you really are.

    I don't want to make this into anything larger than it is. The matter in hand is not that important. Not all Americans are ignorant, and everybody is ignorant sometimes. Still, here we do have a real-life, caught-in-the-wild example of the Ignorant American. That can be useful.

    Now, of course, I don't know what finnish and swedish law are. But I don't see any good justification for them being different.

    Indeed. I do wonder if you can see any good justification how the above could piss me off.

    Come on guys and gals, this isn't that difficult stuff here. A jurisdiction has a finite set of official languages. Common words of those languages are not trademarkable in that jurisdiction. Common words of other languages, in general, are trademarkable. If that isn't obvious to you right away then, in my opinion, your point of view is limited in a way that does not take into consideration the large majority of the world (i.e. you are ignorant).

    Furthermore and a bit more abstractly, despite its pretty much universal acceptance as a Good Thing, trademark is just a legal artifact. A social contract made to benefit the society and codified in the society's legal system. I find it hard to believe that same exact application of the principle would be the optimal for all societies. This should be apparent to any engineer-type at least. Sovereign nations/jurisdictions/societies not only have the right but also the duty to apply the principle in a manner correct to their particular circumstances. It should not be a great wonder if Finland and Sweden have different trademark laws than the US; our parliaments might have been doing their jobs. That's just a small wonder. (It's inconsequential that Finland and Sweden, as members of the EU, aren't really sovereign in traditional sense.)

    Huh, I feel better now ... being pedantic does that for me. I will now proceed to presumptuous. (And I kid you not.)

    If you feel that you are an Ignorant American and you wish to work on not be one, you might consider re-reading the comments to this story but this time try to assume the perspective of a Finn or a Swede.(*) You're not doing it right if you can get to the bottom without getting angry. It's that bad.

    And finally, this won't affect the legal situation between Microsoft and Lindows in the USA. At worst Lindows might have to change name of its overseas operations. Many companies and products are forced to do so.

    --Flam,
    who got a "troll" for this, and wonders what he'll get now

    (*) How to do that. Finns are a lot like Canadians, not quite as good in ice hockey and with even more massive inferiority complex about our neighbors. Swedes are gay.
    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:You Ignorant American (A Rant) by mcc · · Score: 1

      Um.

      1) I was not discussing Finland. In fact, 98% of the comments in this discussion are not discussing Finland. The conversation has gone off of the topic of the story post. The person I was talking to was talking about the general case of whether Lindows is an okay trademark, so I responded in a general sense. Had he been talking about Finnish law, I would not have responded at all, because I lack knowledge in that area. However since he did not seem to be talking specifically about Finland or any other specific country, I chose to respond to his points from the viewpoint of the law of the country in which Lindows is based (America) and then explicitly state I did I did not know how the law in Finland worked.

      You may stop reading here if you like.

      -----

      2) Just because I am not a citizen of a country does not mean that I do not have the right to criticize its laws. I do not have the right to do anything about them, but if I think they are stupid, I have every right to say so. Similarly, you will notice that slashdot frequently features discussions about American law in which non-Americans weigh in with opinions.

      3) According to this, 66% of Finland has at least a passing grasp of English.

      4) In my personal opinion, if a country's trademark law only recognizes the untrademarkable status of generics if they are in the native language, that is stupid. (Of course, I don't know whether they do or not.) Generics rules exist to demarcate that which is so common that it is unreasonable to grant only one company a use of it. If English were a language almost unheard of in Finland, that would be one thing. But English skills, at least basic ones, seem to be common there. I would use this same line of argument to argue that, for example, common spanish or french words would be untrademarkable for the products they describe in America. This is of course just my opinion.

    2. Re:You Ignorant American (A Rant) by Flambergius · · Score: 1
      The person I was talking to was talking about the general case of whether Lindows is an okay trademark, so I responded in a general sense.


      And now I feel really stupid. I apologize.

      I was browsing at "+3" so didn't see the message you were replying to. I know I really really should have checked the whole thread. Again, I apologize.

      You may stop reading here if you like.

      -------------

      I do stand by what I said in general. Of course I was totally in error to put it as a reply to your message. Other messages did discuss the topic in the way I lambasted you for. I did consider starting a new thread but decided against it because I wanted to quote that one line. Oh well.

      Basic skills in English are common in Finland, and to my knowledge even more so in Sweden. In general English language is very widely spoken as the first foreign language around the world. At some point English will likely become so pervasive that it should be treated differently from other languages - the true global language, but we are not there yet.

      Of course, there is nothing objectionable about considering widely used words from any language as common. That's just common sense. In this case I don't think "Windows" would be such a word. Almost everybody in Finland would associate that word with Microsoft's OS, and only that. Pretty much a trademark by default.

      "Help", "money" and "computer" might be nominally English words that should be considered common words in Finland. That is because they have crossed into Finnish: "helppaa", "mani", "kompuutteri". There are probably other examples. Point isn't that so many Finns know the English words, but that they have become/are becoming part of the Finnish language.

      Not that this anywhere near the point I was trying to make. But let's not go back there.

      --Flam,
      so shooting your own leg might be a bit like this, interesting

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
  289. Small addentum by zzabur · · Score: 1

    Couple of year ago a friend of mine started a well-known computer hobbyist event called "Assembly". He couldn't trademark it (in Finland) based on that "assembly" is a generic word (in English language). Mystically, it seems that this logic selectively applied only to Finnish citizens and it not to MS?

    --
    Auferre trucidare rapere falsis nominibus imperium, atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  290. Ah crap... by anish1411 · · Score: 1

    I best tell my gf to stop calling me Longhorn, before MS find out about it...

  291. Resentment is the sincerest form of flattery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone in Europe hates the US because they're no longer worried about the Russians, or Germans (make the the Japanese for all you asians). Neither are they really worried about terrorism or 3rd world dictatorships gaining control of nuclear weapons. Why? Because that would require setting aside their leftist ideology and dealing with reality, and leftist would rather die than do that as history shows us.

    I'm not going to bother to defend the actions of my country in the middle east because our actions require no defense, at least not when it comes to charges from left wing ideologues who are just tickled pink to have issues they can construe into something they can whine about. Well whine all you want. Cry and carry on till the cows come home because at the end of the day the U.S. is the one with the military clout, and in the real world that pretty much means that whatever we say goes. Lucky for you and the rest of the world we are not in fact the imperialists you like to imagine us to be. The Soviets cornered that market and lucky for you we were there to stop them. Keep bitching and we might just not be there next time. We might decide to let the rest of the world rot in the mess of its own manufacture.

  292. Re:Well... (OFF TOPIC) by cymen · · Score: 1

    You can block popups from sites but I don't think you can choose plugins or java/javascript blocking for specific sites.

  293. Re:Well... (OFF TOPIC) by Ed+Almos · · Score: 1

    THANK YOU !! A million times thank you from the bottom of my heart !!

    My local ISP uses a flash advertisement at the top of their home page and I have been clicking 'no' on that damn flash request for the last two years.

    Sir, you are a gentleman and a scholar. May Natalie Portman cater to your every need until your dying day.

    Ed Almos

    --
    The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, 56-120 A.D.
  294. Re:Well... (OFF TOPIC) by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

    I didn't remove that file because it isn't there in version 0.7, but the prompts automatically stop after two or three clicks.

    Which version do you use?

    --

    Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
  295. Linus unix=Linux; Linux Windows=Lindows by mulp · · Score: 1

    So where is the infringement on Microsoft's questionable claim on Windows (Microsoft didn't get an injunction in the US because the judge agreed that there is a serious question about the validity of the Windows trademark).

    Is X Windows an infringement on Windows?
    If not, why not?

    At the time Microsoft applied for the registered trademark status, Windows was an application layer just as X Windows was.

    You might respond that my claim that Windows is not a valid trademark and that my logic doesn't make my position true.

    Well, likewise, just because you claim that Lindows was chosen to infringe on Microsoft's Windows trademark doesn't make that true - alternative reasons exist, eg., the contraction of Linux Windows. So, the question becomes "is there confusion?" and Microsoft isn't arguing that anyone is confused.

  296. they also stole..... by CyberdogOSX · · Score: 1

    ..... Apple's web site tab navigation. better get ready for another letter boys :-)

  297. Re:Quite Incorrect by angle_slam · · Score: 1
    the fact that the world associates the word "Windows" with a Microsoft product today makes no difference to whether they should have been given a trademark on it in the first place.

    I disagree. The fact that "the world associates the word 'Windows' with a Microsoft product" has EVERYTHING to do with trademark protection. Unlike patents, you do not have to register a trademark. You gain trademark protection from usage. Registration merely gives some additional benefits to the owner. (See this trademark tutorial).

    Also, I think people misunderstand what the term "generic" means. If someone uses a term to generically refer to a product without identifying the provider of the product, then the term is generic. E.g., you may say "give me a tissue" or "I need a new tire" because the actual brand of tissue or tire is irrelevant to you. Do you honestly think that people generically refer to OS X as "Windows"?

  298. Openable Thing Made of Glass? by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    "windows" is a common word meaning "openable thing made out of glass".

    Sloppy definition.

    Not all windows are openable -- think commercial buildings, e.g. skyscrapers; hotel windows; etc.

    Not all windows are glass -- think plastic, e.g. Plexiglass; or mica, in the case of high-temp ovens; etc.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  299. As much as I hate to admit it... by Reteo+Varala · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty glad that this has occurred. The argument is not about name-holding, but confusing the customer.

    I work in software sales, and there's been a good number of times someone was under the impression that Lindows was another version of Windows... just because of the name.

    The benefit is that at least I can begin my spiel about Linux. ;) Particularly the pretty blue boxes with the picture of the chameleon...

  300. What is 135? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is 135?