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?
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
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.
...that it's just Finland, the cradle of Linux, where this happened...
-- Power corrupts, but PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
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
/.'s 10 Millionth
"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.
The Lindows name is stupid anyway.
'Nuff said.
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
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.
What does this mean for Windex?
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
that at least Sweden is neutral! :-)
Just change the name to Winux!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Sheesh.... Before you know it someone will patent point & click online shopping.... ;)
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
Now about the lawsuit-proof name "Darlsux" ?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
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
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
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
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
Why doesn't the owner of X Windows sue Microsoft for misappropriating their name?
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".
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,
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.
...that goes back even before the '60s."
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.
"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."
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:
You don't copyright a brand name, you trademark it. And yes, Microsoft has a trademark on "Windows".
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
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.
Thewe's one pwobwem howevew, and that's that "Winux" sounds wike its the opewating system that Ewmew Fudd's hackew bwothew uses.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
From the article:
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.
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]
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..."
> 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.
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
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.
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
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....
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.
We do? I apologise unreservedly. I'll try harder.
Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
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
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
... were pre 1990. E3-Project
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Licrosoft Windows!
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Heres a name that I like.... Doors - "its easier to walk through a door than it is to jump through a window".
Besides - what "punitive action" are *you* taking, or are you "in bed" with them too?
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.
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.
bance.net
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 : )
Our regional cell-phone provider "intelos" was forced to change their name to "ntelos" because intel wasn't happy with the name.
...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
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.
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.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
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
... from now on, our distribution will be known as 'Windux'.
TallGreen CMS hosting
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."
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!
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.
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.
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 ---
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.
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
Lindeaux
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
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.