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."
Now will Wine have to change its name because of the Win part of its name?
The Lindows name is stupid anyway.
'Nuff said.
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
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?
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
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.
"Lindows" is about cheesiest, stupidest thing i've ever heard. Plus, they suck.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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]
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)?
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.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
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.
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.
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....
huh .. initially every one wanted to linclude the words linux in their name so that ppl knew it was some kind of linux ;
;
.. whose gonna win?
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
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Besides - what "punitive action" are *you* taking, or are you "in bed" with them too?
...could it be...Winsux? :)
-----------------------
You are what you think.
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
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.
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."
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.
"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."
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.
WRONG! MS has many trademarks on the word Windows alone. Here is one of them.
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
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.