Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to sue Mike Rowe for Copyrights
An anonymous reader was among a host of submittors noting that a 17 year old named Mike Rowe has been sued by Microsoft for copyright infringment of their name.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I thought that he had legally changed his last name to "Rowesoft" (hey, it's 6 in the morning, gimme a break), in which case I think it would be totally within his right to have his own name as his domain name. ...but I don't think he has a chance in this - I'm pretty sure this will just set a precedent that phonetics imitating corporations aren't allowed either.
I belong to the ______ generation.
...and offered to sell them the name. To lawyers, that means that he had no real intention of ever using the name, merely profiting from it. (He was just trying to be fairly compensated for his work.)
So, from a "legal" standpoint, he is going to have a tough time of things. He plans to fight though, and I sure wish him luck!
libertarianswag.com
I wonder if they will go after www.smartredirect.com who seem to own mycrowsoft.com
Don.
---------
Eatthepuddingeatthepuddingeatthepudding
Slashdot - The Home of the Tortured Analogy
...not because they are who they are (MicroSoft, who has de facto dominace over the desktop, and thus are evil according to the tinfoil-crowd), but because no one should be allowed to get away with something as silly as this.
Its not even like the name MikeRoweSoft.com sounds that much like MicroSoft.com anyway, at least not to my ears. Possible the pronocication is different in MS HQ, but... this is plain silly. It would have been a different matter if Mike Rowe had called his website MikroSoft.com, but as he didn't I can't see that even MS's battalions of lawyers can believe they have a case.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
but Microsoft has lawyers, money and influence.
On the other hand, he has a right to his own name and though phonetically similar, I don't think a judge would consider him a direct Microsoft competitor. He wants to show off his web design skills? Does that compete with Microsoft?
I'm more surprised that people aren't cracking jokes like:
"Michael, Rowe the boat ashore."
How did Microsoft find out that the domain name sounded like Microsoft? Do they have some software that monitors the domain registry, or was the site getting popular? I guess they figured he was a easy target, but it seems like David wins against Goliath? :)
:P
In my eyes it seems like the overpaid lawyers that Microsoft keeps in it's stable wanted to give the impression of actually doing something
Does this mean I can sue Dr. Nick Evans for stealing my domain name?
And, more importantly, my likeness without my consent?
(This would have been a lot funnier if he still owned the just nickevans.com domain that had a flash page with a big picture of him on it, but he doesn't anymore...)
I belong to the ______ generation.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
> He was damn unlucky.
or maybe part of him really wanted to know if he could squeeze a few quid out of The Enemy. Everyone seems sure he's innocent of this rather understandable human indulgence, when the email he admits to sending is at least indicative of a desire to get $10,000 from MS.
They sound identical:
Mike == Mic, Rowe == ro, Soft == Soft.
The big thing here is that it's his name, he should have the right to his own name and to make a company with his name in the title.
Not only that, but then you shouldn't actually say, in an interview, that you registered the domain because it sounds like "Microsoft". I wish the guy luck, but he really should learn to keep his mouth shut if he can't stop himself saying things that are going to blow holes in his own defense..
That Microsoft's lawyers sent this notice by email is also odd. That's not any kind of proper legal notification. (But then some people trust faxed signatures, so who knows?)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
The article points out that this could easily be confused with an article from The Onion. I'd add "or an urban legend".
Did you notice the law firm that he claimed M$ uses to scare him? In order for the law firm to seem smarter and bigger than the peon they are suing, they are allegedly called "Smart & Biggar"! Obviously fake, right?
And then I looked it up, and it's a real law firm!!!!!! http://www.smart-biggar.ca/About/ (Presumably Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh is based on people's names... :-)
How about if Mike Row offers Microsoft $10 for the microsoft.com domain?
... but we are smarter and bigger. How long until somebody will turn this nice SQL injection into some world-class defacement?
If his domain had 'Microsoft' in it then yes they would have to enforce their trademark. But it doesn't, his domain is MikeRoweSoft which is nothing like their trademark except phonetically.
By your rational they should be challenging the hundreds of other sites which have similar names to microsoft trademarks. Most of which are using the name to increase web traffic for instance 'hotmale.com' or 'm1crosoft.com'. This guy registered a domain of his own name, with the word soft on the end. Microsoft don't have a trademark on the word soft. End of case.
Oh and I don't think you should give people credit for being more reasonable than the RIAA, its like giving someone an award for being kinder than Hitler.
I think you're close, but giving Microsoft too much credit. Under the system of Capitalism where Microsoft has thrived, the concept of a property right is sacrosanct. Anyone really interested in promoting Capitalism would acknowledge that Mike Rowe owns the domain name, and is not under any obligation to sell it, or name a price, or even justify why such a named price is warranted. A simple "That property is not for sale." should suffice, and there should be no questions asked about motivation should Mike choose to change his mind suddenly when the price reachess a given level.
What we see here, again, is Microsoft hiding behind a policy of "We're just good little Capitalists trying to make a buck like everyone else..." while their real policy of "control everything at any price" shows through in their actions.
While I don't always agree with prople who promote Capitalism as the one true way, I do wish even they would recognise when they are being used by corporations bent more on promoting their own power than on promoting Capitalism.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
I agree with the previous poseter. Mike was simply trying to recoup his development cost. To that end, the fee was more than reasonable. I don't think MS has a leg to stand on in this case.
Arf!
True Story:
My mom is the directory of a public library. She was working at the front desk one day a while back, and this paniciky old woman comes up to the desk practically in tears.
The woman is whispering: "I swear, I didn't do anything... I just happened... and it won't stop.... and I would never do anything like... and.... oh... my... I just went to check my email.... and...."
Yup.... you guessed it. She was emailing her grandkids, and typed "hotmale" instead of "hotmail". (Evidentally unleashing a storm of pop-ups) So, this sort of thing does happen.
Story aside, I don't see a problem with whoever registered "hotmale" which is a lot easier to confuse than MikeRoveSoft. To get MikeRoveSoft confused with Microsoft, the user would have to not only have serious issues spelling, but likely would have to have never seen the word in print. I can't beleive a user meeting those qualifications is going to be making any major software purchases soon...
Actually, no. It's by no means brilliant, but it's certainly explainable.
You're a big company. YOu're huge. You are very, very controversial. When intelligent, well-informed people think about you and your business tactics, they combine images of alien zombies with all-encroaching slime-mold and a coven of satanists whose approach to product design and quality control issues is limited to ferrying suitcases of cash to Washington.
It has been proven in courts of law that you steal code and suppress competition. It is well-known that you are cavalier towards other people's patents and copyrights and fiercely protective of your own. In short, you are scum.
So What is your optimal startegy? In order to keep the great ordinary from hearing that you are scum so often that it clicks one day (I'm paying WHAT?!! HOW?!!), you have to control as much opinion as you can and a websight on a domain that is easily associated with your name is very dangerous to you at; least psychologically and at worst, materially.
It's got to work on your nerves. It has to make things run through your head.
A site on a domain like that might be used to report every time your blithe unconcern for security costs your customers billions; it might be used to post wonderfully funny pieces about how your founder is a, vulgar, fast-food munching, nerd with documented B.O.--a loser who couldn't have gotten a pity-screw from a nymphomaniac saint until his net worth was in the *billions* and even then, as the world's richest man, his choices were limited to an employee who looks the worse for wear--who looks more and more like a frump with a case of nerves in each royal portrait.
When you've little to offer but a lot to lose, you have to control what people say about you. You have to find the channels and close them: it's a trend that shows your internet savvy which is why 'Georgebushsucks.com' used to take you to a site and ask you for a contribution to his campaign.
Sorry to hear they didn't just pay the damned kid. One thing about being scum is the psychological inability to realize that writing the kid a check--even one for ten times what he asked for--with a handshake and hinting at an internship one day would beat all hell out of reaching for your lawyers and generating news coverage that proves that even your worst critics are dead right about you.
Of course, if their mindset embraced ideas like this, they would have leaned harder on their quality than on their lobbyists and the would have had nothing to worry about in the first place.
You've got to love it....
To mail me, remove the 'mailno' from my email addy.
"Yeah. It smells, too..."
Back in the early 1990s I lived in Victoria, BC (where this kid lives now) and there was a little computer shop called 'Mike Rowe Computers'.
Looks like it has gone out of business now, but I wonder if it's somehow related... ?
If a guy takes his own name and adds 'soft' in the end, there's a fair chance that it is really just an innocent coincidence.
Question: People tend to use their own name when marketing professional, creative services. Does Mike Rowe has more moral rights to use his own name than Microsoft has rights to dictate the use of common word 'soft'?
Yeah, it's the law, I know, but the world where I thought I was living there were things like 'corporate image'. But it seems that we are reaching a phase where some players don't have to care anymore. Enormous amount of bad publicity over a small matter which does not mean ANYTHING and does not pose any harm to MS as a company. Scary.
Can _anyone_ present even one remote possibility on how the domain mentioned could possibly cause any problems to Microsoft? I guess the pronounciation is more of a problem to Mike himself - if he tells eg. via phone some potential client to send mail to mike@mikerowesoft.com, it might end up into mike@microsoft.com.. and if you tell someone to go to microsoft.com, nobody figures that in their heads as 'mikerowesoft.com' - maybe more of the opposite. And that's still Mike's problem.
But what MS should very well know is that a case like this, based on some damn pronounciation, would gather attention. Negative attention. This is *so* weird. I mean really, really, weird PR from Microsoft.. even a bit unprofessional.. starting all the way from that $10 trick :P
-el
I know of two people with the last name of Rowe. Both are pronounced with an OW (as in "OW, that hurt"). I was just thinking it would be hilarious if Microsoft took this kid to court, and as the police dude is reading "the case of Microsoft vs. Mike Rowe", Mike's lawyer could stand up, say "correction your honor, it's pronounced rOWe"... judge: "dismissed"
My Sig Beat up your Honor Roll Sig
I may be a little offtopic here, but I see since Microsoft has yet to win against Lindows for trademark infringement they decided to set precedence by picking an easier target? Microsoft claims that their customers would get confused by the name. Well, at my work computer, right on the front bigger than life it says "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP". Do a google search for Microsoft, the only place where mikerowesoft.com shows up is in the news portion. I do not see how they can claim brand confusion there. I think the teen's only problem is going to be that since he is a minor, he cannot register a business yet.
"You say my way of thinking cannot be tolerated? What of it?"
You sign an ICANN agreement whenever you buy a domain..it has some interesting clauses. One should read it before buying a domain instead of ignoring it. It sheds A LOT OF LIGHT about how/what another person who feels their rights have been infringed upon can do.
The clause "confusingly similar" might apply here if this domain was brought before ICANN jurisdiction.
Well there actually IS a woman named "Dot Com"
Anonymous Cowards suck.
So, this all sounded pretty stupid, until I realized that well, Microsoft is pretty much just covering their ass. IANAL, but, it seems that this would fall under Trademark infringement. And if i remember correctly, a company risks loosing their trademark if they don't stop people from using it incorrectly. So, basically, I think Microsoft would just rather not have this happen, as loosing the rights to their name might have bad consequences. Hell, we could start making Microsoft Linux, and could you imagine, Microsoft OpenOffice. So yeah. The whole thing sounds a little weird at first, asking this guy to hand over the domain, but if you were Microsoft's Lawyers, what would you do?
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I'm sure Microsoft and their lawyers would like them to be seen as "informal discovery". I'm more inclined to view them as entrapment.
I can't blame them for wanting to protect their trademark, but this goes too far. Didn't Victoria's Secret lose their case against Victor's Little Secret? If I remember right the court's opionion (INAL) was there was no proof Victor's Little Secret diminished the trademark value of Victoria's Secret. M$ will have an uphill battle on this one, that MikeRoweSoft confuses people into thinking less of Microsoft (as if that were possible).
Yeah, shut up and get a lawyer, kid. I'm guessing there might even be someone willing to go to bat for a 17 year old pro bono. You can't buy advertising like this.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Type mikerowsoft on Google News and you'll be asked Did you mean: microsoft?& ie=UTF-8&oe= UTF-8&q=mikerowesoft&sa=N&tab=wn
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=
is MikeRoweSoft.com selling operating systems, or selling anything for that matter?
This is a serious question, It's been slashdotted mercilessly. If not he can probably hide under the parady umbrella that protects Saturday Night Live, MAD magazine, etc from lawsuits brought by over-sensitive mega-corporations.
It seems Google is supporting Microsoft on the Mikerowesoft.com case. Just type mikerowesoft on Google News, hit enter and you'll be asked Did you mean: microsoft? More info on http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe= UTF-8&q=mikerowesoft&sa=N&tab=wn
n0dez
The quid pro quo with trademarks is a little different. It boils down to confusion. It is in everyones best interest that names are unique within a feild. Some people might actualy think they are getting a high quality watch when they buy a Rollex on the street. Trademarks protect both the consumer (from knock offs (amongst other things)) and the producers (from lost sales, cost marketing others products, etc).. But if the producer cant take the trouble to protect their trademarks, then scocity (government) isnt going to help them.
Microsoft sued because if you enter:
"mikerowesoft.com/index.htm"
into Google to try find the CACHED version after the slashdot affect hit it, you get back:
Did you mean: "microsoft.com/index.htm"
from the fine Google servers...
Hence, the problem with a phonetic fix...
--- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
This one's tough to call. Yeah, a person should be able to register their own name regardless of commercial trademark similarities.
But adding "soft" seems pretty deliberate. If he were in the software business, why didn't he call his business "Mike Rowe Software"? It's obvious the pun was intentional. The real question here will be whether or not this falls under the category of "parody", which could protect him. I can't see the site right now, but from what other people have posted, it sounds like he's doing business under that name.
He should take whatever cash is being offered (if any). The courts won't support him IMO.
The attempt to profit from a domain name is a statutory element of bad faith under the Anti-Cybersquatting laws. Whether or not a person did try to profit, under the law, is something for a judge/jury to determine. It doesn't look good if you get an offer (which companies make all the time to avoid the legal costs) then make a huge, unfounded counteroffer.
Besides, if you are truly violating a trademark, it isn't like you are entitled to get your costs back. If your costs are large, a company will probably go to the WIPO for an arbitration and just take the name. That process is much cheaper than $10,000, anyway.
Boom Shanka
Someone pointed out that the only reason MS is pursuing this is because they aren't aware that it's a 17 year old kid behind the domain name, and that this is going to cause a lot of bad publicity for them. The thing is, in light of the above, I think that they're fully aware that it's a 17 year old kid, and that's specifically the reason why they're pursuing this in the way they are. They think that simply filing a lawsuit is going to scare the kid (and his parents) into giving up the domain name. No trial, no expensive lawyers, and M$ gets the domain name for less than $10,000. This is the only possible business rationale for the decision to file a lawsuit. They think Joe Schmoe, living in some middle-class suburb, isn't going to want to take on Microsoft and all its legal resources.
Yet another example of how, in America, justice is for sale to the highest bidder.
Despite all of this talk of name dilution and trademarks, I would think that whitehouse.com would have changed hands long before this kid Mike Rowe got sued. Microsoft whines "But this kid's site sorta sounds like our company name". The white house replies "The .com version of our .gov site is a porn site. Deal with it!" Maybe if Mike Rowe set up a porn site at mikerowesoft, no one would bother him because they didn't want to draw attention to it.
>>It would seem Microsoft has no choice but to back down as, legally, it doesn't have a hope in hell of winning and there are plenty of lawyers out there who would love to get a win against Microsoft under their belt.
If msft can beat up on Lindows, and force them to stop using the name in - what was it - Holland? Then why not beat up on 17 year old Mike Rowe.
Msft, is a bully, and a coward, by nature.
From the article: "By offering to sell the domain for profit (even if sparked by the offer of payment by the other party), according to the bent logic of domain dispute arbitrators, it shows the owner had no legitimate interest in the domain"
Really? Does that mean since MicroSoft didn't invest the money to buy the domain name prior to Mike Rowe's ownership that they have no legitimate interest in the domain either?
Don't get me wrong, I think MicroSoft has a semi-legitimate interest in the domain name but Mike Rowe has even a larger interest. It's not like the name came out of a hat; this is his given name!
If Microsoft was so concerned they should have considered this and bought the name first... But like the rest of Mr. Gates' products he waits for someone else to brainstorm them and than buys (or sues) them out of their product. Pity.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
That's pretty funny. This is probably the end of the line for Mr. Rowe, due to the corrupt American legal system (wouldn't work as well in a civilized country).
First off, you can't copyright names, that's trademark infringement.
Unless MikeRoweSoft dates from the 1970s (implausible) there can be little doubt that Mike chose that name because of the echo of "Microsoft". On the one hand the Judge will rule that no one seeing the names in print could confuse the two. However, hearing the names over the telephone would certainly be confusing, and that combination: intentional echo and obviously confusing will be a slam dunk for Microsoft. However, real contracts being in writing he could argue he is sufficiently distinguished.
In any case, this is not a frivolous lawsuit and he'll be responsible for his legal fees, and Microsoft can easily drive those through the roof (it is very easy with delays, discovery requests and multiple, shifting charges to force a defendent who wishes competent representation to spend hundreds of thousands or millions).
Companies have been known to sue even when even just one portion of the name is similar. There was another case recently that was similar in that it involved a big American company going after a tiny Canadian outfit. In this case, Starbucks (no doubt the provider of cafeine to many /.-ers) sued Haidabucks Cafe, a small cafe owned by Haida Indians in Masset, British Columbia. The names are obviously quite different, both in writing and in speech.
Fortunately, they stood their ground and obtained
the services of a top notch law firm and a web site designer, with the result that Starbucks backed down. That's a good thing, and not just for them: boycotting Starbucks is tough!
I just registered mycrasoft.com. I did notice that mycrowsoft.com was taken by some Netherlands company -- back in 1999.
Still available are mikeroesoft.com and numerous entities involving hyphens.
For the record, I have no intention of selling mycrasoft.com. I think I may use it to satire overzealous lawyers and self-important megacorps.
gnet
Ok, here's what you do when someone (like MS) says "here's $10, fork over the domain!"
Ready? It's really easy.
Tell them to "go fuck themself." Don't quote figures, don't say anything other than "go fuck yourself". Then they have to prove you're a squatter, bad-faith, etc. Which they really can't because A) the site (now slashdotted tot he ninth level of Hell) has content expected to exist on such a site; and B) his given birth name is the name he chose for the domain--something even MS can't deny.
Problems...you betcha! Just read the sad tale of Uzi Nissan. So your given name is not the protected thing you may think...it's all about deep pockets. But with luck you can win.
Personally, I would never have gone with the "-soft" on the end of the domain. But that's me.
he did not make an explicit offer. he only said that his domain was worth $10000 to him because of the cost of making up all the business cards, stationary, advertising, etc. all that has his url as mikerowesoft.com. if MS goes and pays for him to get all new stuff made up, it would cost them $10000. the kid has a company. if you had a small company (or even a decent size company) and some large corporation wanted to buy up your domain name for a measly $10, you would be pretty pissed too after spending tons of money in advertising, building a customer/client base, letterhead, business cards, etc all using that domain name. if you had to go and change it on the drop of a dime because some large multi-billion dollar company calls it a copyright infringement (which it isn't if it's using your own given name), it'd cost you probably a similar amount, maybe even more depending on the size of your company, your client/customer base, etc. he never turned around to MS and said, "i will only sell it to you for $10000". had he done that, it would be an explicit offer. he only said how much it was worth to him and his company and that he had no intention of selling it for even $10000. he did not buy up the domain thinking "MS will find me and try to buy this from me and i can make thousands off of it". he bought it because it consisted of his legal name followed by "soft" because that's what he does. if he was a plumber and used mikerowesoft.com, it'd be different, but he's a software guy.
please me, have no regrets.
Re: MikeRoweSoft.com
Background located at:
http://www.theregister.com/content/6/34955.h
This is not acceptable, moral behaviour on your part.
I will remember this when I need to make my next software selection/purchase.
Alan
Hello Allan,
Thank you for contacting Microsoft.
We take our trademark seriously, but in this case maybe a little too seriously. Under the law companies are required to take this type of action to protect their trademark against widespread infringement. That said, we appreciate that Mike Rowe is a young entrepreneur who came up with a creative domain name. We are currently in the process of resolving this matter in a way that will be fair to him and satisfy our obligations under trademark law.
Should you have further questions, feel free to write us back.
Sincerely,
Jing
Microsoft.com Customer Support
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
I think Harley-Davidson already tried to trademark a sound (the typical Harley rumble) but was shot down ... but it would be just wrong for Microsoft to have rights to any phonetic spelling of a particular sound.
Would that mean they could sue me if I made a song about killing a crow? "My Crow's Offed" coming to a record store near you.
m.mmm..myyy