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)
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.
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
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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... :-)
... but we are smarter and bigger. How long until somebody will turn this nice SQL injection into some world-class defacement?
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.
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..."
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?"
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.
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!
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