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.

Comments

Let's just hope...

[mgebbers]

Ms Sasha Dot doesn't get ideas!

Re:Let's just hope...

[Mojojojo Monkey Inc.]

Yeah, she'd get hit up by 10,000 geeks looking for a date instead of 10,000 lawyers looking to sue. I'm not sure which is worse.

Re:Let's just hope...

[drxenos]

Well there actually IS a woman named "Dot Com"

Re:Let's just hope...

[ArsonSmith]

You got her number? my Initials are WWW. sounds like a match.

Re:Let's just hope...

[drxenos]

She's around 60 or 70 and Com (or was it Comm?) is her married name. She was on the news awhile back. She, of course, couldn't understand what all the fuss was about with her name.

Re:Let's just hope...

[Zog The Undeniable]

People with "Coe" as a surname have big problems. Ken Coe, Tess Coe and Phil Coe get you into trouble with large corporations. Bill Coe gets you sued by Phil Silvers' estate, and if your name is Simon, never abbreviate it to Si Coe...people just might start avoiding you.

Seriously, I heard a Mr Coe complaining about this once, and the severe limitations it put on his children's names.

Re:Let's just hope...

[rizzo420]

not necessarily. if the kid gets support from us, he can get enough money to fight them to the point where they just give up because they should have better things to do like write better software than to pick on kids that have names that sound similar to their company name. his actual name is Mike Rowe. That is not a copyright violation. who in their right mind is going to accidentally type in mikerowesoft.com if they want information on windows or office? you have to be really dumb to make that mistake, especially since microsoft is all over the news and tv and advertising everywhere. you see their name everywhere, you're gonna spell it right. it sounds the same. great. so the english language is at fault here apparently, not the poor kid who's mom named him mike and he decided to go into web design.

on the other hand, he probably did name his domain mikerowesoft for the play on words, but MS has to prove it to the courts (the canadian courts that is). i'm not sure what copyright laws are like up there, so it's very possible the kid will get off pretty easily. and it's also possible that the kid does have a small business where his domain could be worth $10000 to him. if i were MS, i would leave the kid alone, better to ignore the problem and continue to make billions than to get even more bad publicity. MS's bad publicity is what will bring them down, since obviously their bad software hasn't yet. let the kid make a few grand off of using a play on words, it's not like MS will make any money off of having mikerowesoft.com. the only thing they'll do is piss off the kids clients who don't realize he had to get a new domain and go there and end up at MS's site. god know MS isn't going to build websites for them.

and i'm sure no one that wants a nice professional looking website is going to go to mikerowesoft.com and see it forwards them to the frontpage website and decide to buy front page and make the page themselves rather than hire this kid's services. there's way more to web design than using a crappy program. frontpage offers no creativity advice, no artistry, nothing that a real web designer can give you. it doesn't make your page more functional or prettier, it just makes it easier to make.

Re:Let's just hope...

[Cesare Ferrari]

Well it isn't quite as simple as that. The game of cat and mouse between companies over brands has been played out for a number of years and there are plenty of ways of ways that Microsoft could tackle this domain.

Off the top of my head, I would have thought Microsoft could say:

1) This is trademark infringement - the name is confusingly similar.

2) They could say the domain registration was made in bad faith (Mike Rowe is aware of the Microsoft name and has registered a domain which he knows is similar to theirs).

3) They could accuse him of passing off (trading off their reputation - not sure if any product is sold at the MikeRoweSoft site).

4) If he provides any services based on microsoft products, he could be accused of reverse passing off (passing Microsoft's products off as his own, hence enhancing his own reputation).

5) They could accuse him of damaging their reputation (although I'm guessing their customers are unlikely to mistake his site for theirs).

There are probably a dozen other things, but you get the idea.

BTW, you're assertion that Mike Rowe can setup a company because it is his name isn't true. How far do you think i'd get setting up a company using my name which had anything to do with motor cars? They'd be lawyers parachuting out of the sky... :-)

Who's Next?

[glomph]

Michael Hunt? Richard Hertz?

Re: Who's Next?

[der_joachim]

Heh. I used to know somebody called Dik Kok. Just a very normal Dutch name, but the officials at UK customs were very rude about his name. :-)

Microsoft's plan of attack

[Anonymous Coward]

Get his site listed on /.

Re:Microsoft's plan of attack

[bloggins02]

And Fark too! The poor guy; I bet he thought having Microsoft's blood-sucking lawyers after him was bad enough, but being Farked and Slashdotted on the same day?

I hope the server's not in his room, because he'd probably be getting a nice tan by now ;-)

things to come..

[grub]

Wait until VA Soft hears about Mr. Slas H. Dot's .net domain..

Re:What?

[Lispy]

His name is Mike Rowe and he owns
www.mikerowesoft.com.

That's enough to call MS's lawyers into his backyard.
They offered him 10 canadian Dollars for his domain. He was not amused.
Get it now?

MS the scammer

[baseinfinity]

Apparently they pulled this rather common scam of offering him a rediculously low amount ($10) for the domain. Then when the target flips out and says it's worth at least $xxx, they sue their asses for trying to profit off of a domain name.

Re:MS the scammer

[tb3]

Except this time the 'target' is a minor. I bet they didn't check that part. Now they're going to get raked over the coals for picking on a kid.
Ah well. Any bad press for Microsoft has to be a good thing. :P

Re:MS the scammer

[EvilTwinSkippy]

I was going to say "Damn man, that sucks to be Mike." but the thought that they were trying to negotiate with a Minor hadn't even occurred to me.

It was still dumb to send a counter-offer if one had no intention of selling it. (Though if I thought for a minute that one of my domains was worth that much to someone...)

Re:MS the scammer

[Hammer]

As far as I understand he was not willing to sell, but if he had to he estimated that his cost for business cards, marketing, creating web presense etc was "at least worth $10000".
So he would consider selling the domain if M$ helped him regain that cost. IANAL but this sounds like a slam dunk for Mr Rowe.

Re:MS the scammer

[MagicM]

From the article:

They responded to this email by offering to give me all of my out-of-pocket expenses in return for the domain name. This came out to be $10; the amount I paid for the domain. (...) I responded by asking for $10,000, which I regret doing now, for my work and domain name.

Technically, one could argue that he asked for $10.- for the domain name, and $9990.- for "his work". Just an honest 17-year-old, trying to make a living...

Re:MS the scammer

[Hammer]

Nope He wanted to regain his costs (that is actually more than the cost of the domain)
my previous comment

Re:MS the scammer

[lynx_user_abroad]

...would be the way to make a counter offer...

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.

Re:MS the scammer

[j-turkey]

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.

You also have to recgonize that Microsoft owns the trademark rights to the name "Microsoft" (or things that sound like it or are spelled like it).

Right or wrong, like it or not -- Microsoft has an obligation to their shareholders (you know -- the quarter million or so people who actually own the company) to protect its trademark from dilution. If MSFT loses, legal/management can say "fuck it, at least we can tell our shareholders that we did our best to protect their best interests".

Their offer to buy mikerowesoft.com out (for peanuts) was just a way to sidestep the trememdous costs associated with a lawsuit. Say after a lenghty lawsuit MS buys this kid's domain for $10,000. Is Mike Rowe really going to walk away happy after a half million in legal fees? That leaves him with a loss of $490,000.

BTW -- how is this about Microsoft promoting their power? By power, do you mean their bottom line? And since when have capitalists ever been driven by promoting capitalism itself? I'm a bit boggled by your logic. Capitalists are greedy and self serving...that's the point of capitalism. The system is designed so that society is able to benefit from the profits generated by the businesses (thus harnessing the power of individual/collective greed). Maybe I'm misunderstanding you...perhaps you should elaborate.

Re:MS the scammer

[TekZen]

It is not a trademark issue because of the capitalization MikeRoweSoft as opposed to MicroSoft.

I know this because I own a retail franchise that sells teenage clothing (Plato's Closet of Cool Springs).

We are allowed to use other brand names like GAP and OLD NAVY in our advertising, but we must use all capital letters so that we are referencing a brand and not violating a trademark.

From my understanding, Mike Rowe was neither referencing their brand nor using their trademark. And since the capitalization is different he is not violating their trademark.

However, none of this means a damn since the lawsuit is for copyright infringement. I am not quite sure how they made that leap.

-Jackson

Re:MS the scammer

[pclminion]

You could look at it another way, too. It could potentially make Mr. Rowe look extremely bad, because he created the site originally with the sole intent of making an offer to Microsoft -- in essence, he set out to profit from Microsoft's trademark.

Now, I'm sure that's not what really happened, but I think it would have been better if Rowe had not made an explicit offer. It could potentially be used against him later. Far better to simply do nothing, I think (except of course to call a lawyer, although I know that's somewhat difficult for a 17-year-old to afford).

Re:MS the scammer

[R.Caley]

Capitalism is supposed to be about a willing exchange between entities for the benefit of both.

No, that is a free market. Capitalism is about a person with resources being allowed to exploit those resources and gain the benefits. The two are often in conflict (eg free markets are damaged by monopolies, but a capitalist would often be best served by trying to create one, similarly for trade barriers and protectionism).

Traditional liberal economics basicly consists of trying to create the environment for capitalism to work, but forcing it to work within a free market.

(at which point I suppose I have to point out that liberal economics is not related to what US politicians and media have redefined the word to mean. I suspect the average /.er grew up with `liberal' meaning `illiberal')

Re:MS the scammer

[rizzo420]

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.

Re:MS the scammer

[R.Caley]

To many people (myself included) capitalism=free markets.

Have you read 1984? If youlet them redefine your language you let them control the agenda. The current US government is definitely capitalist, but definitely not pro free market (consider the trade barriers they throw up when asked by their backers, and consider all the extra subsidy Shrub put into agriculture).

classical liberalism is now often called libertarianism in the US.

No, liberatarians are anti-government in a way that liberals aren't. One of the defining causes of liberalism at its height was universal sufferage (the other two legs in the UK were repeal of the corn laws, and home rule for Ireland, I don't know enough US political history to point up parallels).

*Trademark* not Copyright

[jrumney]

The Register should know better.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[AndroidCat]

Not just the Register. The Canadian Press version also used copyright rather than trademark. Probably the source story that went out over "the wire" misused it and it spread from there. If the email actually said copyright, then it can be filed in /dev/null.

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?)

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[jrumney]

If you read the google cache of the website, you'll see that the word "copyright" comes from Mike Rowe's statement on the story. I seriously doubt Microsoft's lawyers made the mistake, if they did they need to be sacked and sent back to law school immediately. I'd still expect the Register and Slashdot editors to pick up the mistake.

As far as sending the notice by email, initially he did get informal requests to hand it over by email, but the official notice came in the form of a book and accompanying 25 page letter. I suspect the volume of information is intended to intimidate him and any small-time lawyer thinking of taking his case. The legal system really needs an overhaul to make it easier to throw this sort of garbage back at lawyers, as IBM did with SCO's initial discovery consisting of ALL of the Linux source code without being specific.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[ScottSpeaks!]

The difference between trademark and copyright (and let's not forget patents) is a topic covered in the first week of Intellectual Property 101, and anyone with a stake in IP (like users or developers of open-source software) needs to understand which is which. Saying "copyright" when you're talking about a "trademark" is like typing "rm" when you mean "ls": it's your own fault if the shell misunderstands you.

Copyright - literally "the right to copy" - Covers a particular creative expression of an idea, such as a song, a movie, a poem, or a C++ program. Currently lasts longer than any of us will live.

Trademark - literally "a mark used in trade" - Covers names, slogans, logos, and such when used in the packaging and marketing of a product or service. Lasts as long and only as long as it's in active use.

Patent - literally "openly disclosed" - Gives temporary exclusive rights to a invention [insert debate over definition of "invention" here] in exchange for publishing the details of how it works. Currently lasts longer than the technology is likely to be useful.

(The so-called fourth kind of IP is a trade secret, which is the opposite of a patent: instead of publishing a how-to, the inventor keeps it private, so they can try to keep exclusivity indefinitely.)

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[Java Pimp]

That Microsoft's lawyers sent this notice by email is also odd.

This is Microsoft's new, more efficient, form of communication and distribution. Just the other day I got a critical Service Pack update from them. I find this so much better than trying to remember to check Windows Update periodically...

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[jrumney]

The emails leading up to that point were basically informal discovery.

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.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[T-Ranger]

It is worth pointing out that the quid pro quo behind Copyright and Patents are the same. One applies to technology, one to art, but the "deal" is the same: you (a creator) create something new and the government (scocity) will offer you protection for it, for a limited period of time.

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.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[SyntheticTruth]

Way back in the day (1996 to be exact) I called my Website a "webzine" since that is how I saw it. All was just fine for months and then one day, I recieve and e-mail from so-n-so firm of lawyers represending some NYC based company that owned the trademark to "webzine" and they wanted me to stop using that term on my site. At first, I thought the same thing, "An e-mail? This has got to be bogus."

So I called, talked to a very nice gentleman lawyer and he pointed me to references and sure enough, they did own the trademark. So I did stop using it, but I also did get the notice via e-mail.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[illuminatedwax]

*POP* A new subpeona has been downloaded and is ready to be delivered to you. Please click here to review it and print it out.

Re:*Trademark* not Copyright

[Ironica]

The difference between trademark and copyright (and let's not forget patents) is a topic covered in the first week of Intellectual Property 101, and anyone with a stake in IP (like users or developers of open-source software) needs to understand which is which. Saying "copyright" when you're talking about a "trademark" is like typing "rm" when you mean "ls": it's your own fault if the shell misunderstands you.

Yes, yes, yes... but then the laws in Canada, where Mike Rowe lives, are a little different. For example:

A trade-mark is registrable if it is not:

(a) a word that is primarily merely the name or the surname of an individual who is living or has died within the preceding thirty years (unless it has been so used in Canada by the applicant or his predecessor in title as to have become distinctive at the date of filing an application for its registration);
.
.
.
"Distinctive", in relation to a trade-mark, means a trade-mark that actually distinguishes the wares or services in association with which it is used by its owner, from the wares or services of others, or is adapted so to distinguish them.

So you see, they might have a bit of a problem claiming that a name which, primarily, is the guy's first and last name, without any funny spelling or anything, is trademark infringement... since that name isn't trademarkable unless it's already distinctive. On that they could have a claim, but they may actually have an easier time getting their way under Canadian copyright law, which I'm not nearly as familiar with as US copyright law... are you?

What's next?

[l0wland]

Apple sueing Fiona ?

If you don't want this to happen to you...

[Zigg]

Don't make them an offer. It seems that the big catch here is that Mike made a $10,000 offer to Microsoft ('s lawyers?), and that single act essentially made their case that it was a bad-faith registration.

Re:If you don't want this to happen to you...

[Oddly_Drac]

"It seems that the big catch here is that Mike made a $10,000 offer to Microsoft ('s lawyers?), and that single act essentially made their case that it was a bad-faith registration."

The point is that it's not really down to the lawyers to decide, and it's going to have a hell of an uphill struggle trying to explain that 'Mike Rowe' was trying to use his chance grouping of syllables in his own name in 'bad faith', although he might've shot himself in the foot by admitting that he'd already thought about it.

However, now I'm thinking about names to register because a $10 cheque from Microsoft would be worth framing.

Re:If you don't want this to happen to you...

[AllUsernamesAreGone]

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..

Re:If you don't want this to happen to you...

[theLOUDroom]

Don't make them an offer. It seems that the big catch here is that Mike made a $10,000 offer to Microsoft ('s lawyers?), and that single act essentially made their case that it was a bad-faith registration.

Wow, there are already 3 or more +5 comments regurgitating this crap from the article. I don't buy this for a minute. Everyone has their price, and it shouldn't be an act of "bad faith" to name it.

Take slashdot for example. I doubt I could buy the domain for $10, but I bet valinux would be perfectly happy to sell it to me for 1 billion dollars. That's the reality of the situation. I fail to see how stating that reality is an act of "bad faith".

The only reason arguments like this work is because the other side doesn't have the resouces to fight them. It has basically nothing to do with the validity of the actual claim.

Re:If you don't want this to happen to you...

[Tassach]

Microsoft made an offer; Mr. Rowe simply made a (perfectly legal) counter-offer. If Mr. Rowe had written microsoft and said "I'll sell you my domain for $10K", it would be evidence of a bad faith registration. Instead, Microsoft initiated the transaction by sending an offer letter, so any response or negotiation related to that initial offer is in good faith.

overuse of 'copyright infringement'

[Mozai]

Shouldn't that be "trademark" infringement? I didn't know Microsoft had exclusive distribution rights to the series of sounds in their name.

I'd bet a nickel the reporter who wrote the first story and editor never looked up the difference between "copyright infringement" and "trademark infringement," and then the story was duplicated to other news services without anyone bothering to double-check it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

maybe they will go after

[PaulGrimshaw]

hotmale.com next? ;)

p.

Re:maybe they will go after

[Halo-]

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...

Re:maybe they will go after

[Zak3056]

My mom is the directory of a public library.

Your mom is a card catalog?

Re:maybe they will go after

[emilymildew]

Angelfire.com used to be a free hosting place for lusers who didn't have their own domain names.

Anglefire.com, a pretty common mis-typing of Angelfire, was a hardcore porn site.

Imagine my amusement when I realized how easily people thought I was hosting porn.

Re:maybe they will go after

[Glothar]

[Feel free to insert your own joke about "rifling through drawers" here]

Re:maybe they will go after

[epiphani]

And your father smelled of the dewy decimal system!

At first

[ziggy_zero]

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.

Re:At first

[Zak3056]

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.

You would be incorrect--just ask Uzi Nissan. And he was BORN with that name, he didn't change it.

Re:What?

[LinuxInDallas]

The phoenetic similarity may not be evident to someone that doesn't speak english natively...

You're doing the Devil's dirtywork!

[Matey-O]

Slashdotting that poor poor mikerowesoft.com website. That $10,000 settlement just got sucked up in bandwidth useage!

(yeah yeah, I clicked it too...the Devil made me do it.)

Well, this is one way to take his site offline...

[quakeslut]

After trying the legal route, Microsoft today took a teenagers website offline by taking their case to Slashdot.

The resulting traffic accomplished what their legal papers were previously unable to do...

Re:What?

[Araneas]

Time to feed the trolls who won't read the article.

Mike Rowe owns the domain MikeRoweSoft.com
Microsoft objected and offered to take it off his hands for "out of pocket expenses" rather than suing him into oblivion. Given that Mike's expenses were about $10 and that he had spent time and effort building up a web presence based on his own name, he made a counter offer of $10,000.

Now Microsoft is claiming Mike Rowe is trying to domain squat for profit and bringing out the big guns.

Alas, he fell into the trap...

[bc90021]

...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!

mycrowsoft

[dontod]

I wonder if they will go after www.smartredirect.com who seem to own mycrowsoft.com
Don.
---------
Eatthepuddingeatthepuddingeatthepudding

Re:mycrowsoft

[joostje]

Hey, and ./ has it's very own domain on slashdot.mycrowsoft.com!

All of this could be easily avoided...

[JumperCable]

...if they just bought Mike Rowe a bottle of viagra.

I certainly hope that MS don't get away with this.

[WegianWarrior]

...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.

Site died, content here

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously the site died right away. I was able to copy Mike's message when the topic was still in red.
I don't think he saw the /. rampage coming :)

Wow, all of this exposure is starting to overwhelm me. I appreciate all of the emails I have been getting recently. If I don't respond to you that doesn't mean I don't appreciate it, I have been getting flooded and I am only responding to the ones I see fit. I am starting to get coverage all over the world. I have heard I have been on the news in the UK. That really surprised me. Anyways, thanks for visiting my site. I will keep you updated on everything that is happening.

And on 15 jan 2004:

I received an email from Smart & Biggar, Microsoft's Canadian lawyers, informing me that I have been committing copyright infringement against Microsoft. They told me that I must transfer my domain name over to Microsoft as soon as possible. I was baffled by this email, yet thought it was funny at the same time. Microsoft was going after a 17 year olds part time business that he put a lot of time into just because it has the same phonetic sound as their company.

I responded to this email saying that I was not ready to give up my domain name since I had put so much time and effort into establishing my name, getting my business cards out and posting my services on the Internet. If I were to give up my domain, I would lose all the time and effort I had put into it. I requested that they offer me a settlement of some sort to help with me losing my business. A few days later I received an email back from them telling me that they would give me all of my out-of-pocket expenses for the domain name, which came to be $10USD. I was surprised that they would offer such a little amount of money to persuade me to hand my domain over to Microsoft. In response to this recent email, I sent one back to them describing how much work I have put into my business and that the domain was worth at least $10000. They refused to give me anything more than $10USD so I proceeded to ignore their most recent email. I didn't hear anything from them after their last email.

Yesterday, January 14, I received a package from the lawyers' office FedEx Priority Overnight. Inside I found a book over an inch thick with a 25 page letter explaining to me that I had all along had the intention to sell my domain name to Microsoft for a large cash settlement. This is not the case, I never thought my name would cause Microsoft to take this course of action against me. I just thought it was a good name for my small part-time business. In this letter it explains that Microsoft's customers could get confused between my page and theirs, which doesn't make any sense since Microsoft doesn't design websites. They do, however, sell a program called Microsoft FrontPage, which they say can cause some confusion between me making websites for my customers and them selling a program to make websites to their customers. I think it is just another example of a huge corporation just trying to intimidate a small business person (and only a 17 year old student at that) to get anything they want by using lawyers and threats. It reminds me of the Starbucks thing against the little coffee shop in the Queen Charlotte Islands.

The kid has rights...

[lukewarmfusion]

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."

Do they monitor the domain registry?

[sokk]

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? :)

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 :P

My name is Nick Evans...

[ziggy_zero]

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...)

Google Cache, www.mikerowesoft.com

[bc90021]

HERE

M$ Legal

[madmagic]

The article at the Register says:

"Mike told us that when an email from Microsoft's Canadian lawyers Smart & Biggar arrived on 19 November..."

IHNJH, IJFLS "Microsoft's Canadian lawyers Smart & Biggar"
-mm
charles dickens couldn't have written it better

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Google cache of site...

[pdjohe]

I had trouble going to the website. So here is the Google cache of mikerowesoft.com.

Re:Yes, that's what I thought

[wwest4]

> 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.

blowmesmartandbigger.com?

[kir]

Check out my website: blowmesmartandbiggar.com.

No... my name is not Blowme Smartandbiggar. Nor is it Blowme S. Andbiggar.

\\signed\\
Blow M. Smartandbiggar

Re:Yes, that's what I thought

[brandorf]

Phonenitics similarities aside, every time I speak "Microsoft" aloud versus "MikeRoweSoft" there is a difference in the phonetic spacing. Though that could just be because I want to find a difference. Personally, I serously doubt that anyone could possibly get the two companies confused. Though honestly I agree that his biggest mistake was to say that his domain was worth $X. Even thoug Mirosoft supposedly said they were willing to cover out of pocket expenses for the domain. Personally I'd like to see copies of these emails and letters.

I expect M$ to win this

[pesc]

From the article:
He registered the domain in August because he thought it would be cool to have a site that sounded like the famous company to show his Web designing skills.

Well, that's exactly what a trademark is supposed to protect against; someone else using your brand-name for their own purposes. And because the way the trademark law works, Microsoft has to defend their trademarks; writing letters, suing; or else they risk the trademark being generic; free for anyone to use.

Microsoft may be an evil corporation, but I can't blame them for protecting their main trademark.

That the defendants name is Mike Rowe is interesting, but I personally think it is clear that mikerowesoft is intended to look alike and benefit from the name recognition of "microsoft". Mike Rowe can easily invent another domain name that includes his name and build his own brand name without leeching on Microsoft.

Re:I expect M$ to win this

[evilquaker]

Well, that's exactly what a trademark is supposed to protect against; someone else using your brand-name for their own purposes. And because the way the trademark law works, Microsoft has to defend their trademarks; writing letters, suing; or else they risk the trademark being generic; free for anyone to use.

So why hasn't Microsoft gone after support.mycrowsoft.com?

Re:I expect M$ to win this

[ReadParse]

He thought it would be cool to have a domain name kind of like that of Microsoft, but not to the point that he used one that was "confusingly similar", as they say in the cease-and-desist letters. Not a single person would ever accidentally go to MikeRoweSoft.com in an effort to get to Microsoft. People would only go to this site trying to get to Mike Rowe's site, and Mike would probably even have to spell it for them (no, not the company... it's like, my name, then "soft"). It's moderately cute and nothing else. Not at all like whitehouse.com or nasa.com trying to get unsuspecting whitehouse.gov and nasa.gov surfers.

I agree that it's regretable that he turned their insulting offer into a respectable one, thereby appearing to be a squatter. I've always been a firm believer in the ability for individuals to register domains based on their name, and this is a good example of that. Hopefully the judge will realize why he made the offer and won't just make him out ot be a squatter based on that alone.

RP

Re:I expect M$ to win this

[roman_mir]

I, on the other hand, expect MS to lose this fight. I do not see how it is clear that Mike has no right to create a top level domain name with his own freaking name as the first part of it and Soft as the second part. Sure, the kid recognized that his name + Soft is close in pronunciation to the infamous software producer but how is this different from something like: Tom's Diner or John Doe Bakery?

Besides, the kid is a minor. As far as I see MS had created an entrapment situation for him by offering to sell the domain name.

He already had some content on his website prior to the incident, so the domain was not standing there under construction, doing absolutely nothing.

Re:I expect M$ to win this

[Schnapple]

From MikeRowSoft.com:

Microsoft was going after a 17 year olds part time business

I responded to this email saying that I was not ready to give up my domain name since I had put so much time and effort into establishing my name, getting my business cards out and posting my services on the Internet. If I were to give up my domain, I would lose all the time and effort I had put into it. I requested that they offer me a settlement of some sort to help with me losing my business.

This is going to be the real downfall of this kid. It would be one thing if it was just a vanity blog page (which it might mostly be - I got this quip from someone who posted the text of the page above), but it sounds like this kid was trying to run a business that had a name that sounded the same as Microsoft. If my name was Mick Don tried to come out with a restaraunt that went by the name "MickDonAlds", McDonald's would sue me into oblivion. If this kid had a website, "MikeRoweStinks.com", then he'd probably be fine. But come on now, he's trying to start a business by mimmicking the sound of another company. Maybe he can use the excuse of being young/ignorant, but he's in the wrong here.

Re:I expect M$ to win this

[ScottSpeaks!]

I've always been a firm believer in the ability for individuals to register domains based on their name, and this is a good example of that.

There's a pretty substantial body of case law covering people whose names happen to conflict with trademarks that have been established by major corporations. Any individual case still comes down to the particulars of the situation, the quality of the legal representation, the biases of the judge/jury, and the phase of the moon, but there are still some patterns.

A guy named McDonald who wants to use his name on a restaurant would probably be out of luck, but if he were opening an electronics store, he'd be OK (and could probably even defend his ownership of mcdonalds.com... if he'd registered it before Kroc's outfit did).

Mike Rowe is probably going to lose this. Not because his registration was "in bad faith" (he pretty clearly intended to use the domain for himself, and only asked for $10K after Microsoft made him a lesser offer), but because of the underlying trademark conflict; the domain registration is only the tip of the iceberg. He's trying to use the name MikeRoweSoft in one of the same categories of business that Microsoft is using their name. His best defence is that no one would seriously confuse the two companies. The fact that it's his name might score him a point with a sympathetic judge. But unlike copyright law, trademark law doesn't recognise parody or irony, and I think the phonetic similarity of the two will prevail. And if he loses once, there's no way he'll be able to afford an appeal.

Looks like he wasn't too smart

[DARKFORCE123]

If he had just refused to hand over the site with a legitimate reason, that would have been one thing.

Instead he asked for 10,000 dollars so he appears to be extoring M$.

Smartest move ever.

Re:I certainly hope that MS don't get away with th

[iCEBaLM]

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.

Fact Checking?

[dr_dank]

Well, Mike is reassuringly candid and although we have not seen Microsoft's letter and the company has yet to confirm or deny its threats are real, it seems to hang together.

So The Register readily admits that they haven't seen a shred of evidence other than this kid's word that this has taken place?

Computer Gook?

[tbase]

Mike, a self-described computer gook, registered the name in August.

Is this a typo or have I been left behind in the newest slang update? I feel so old.

M$ Lawfirm = smart and bigger!

[llamafirst]

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... :-)

Re:What?

[dattaway]

How about if Mike Row offers Microsoft $10 for the microsoft.com domain?

Re:What?

[esarjeant]

I'm not so sure MS is doing this because of domain squatting, it could just be that it's going to cost them a lot less than $10K to take him to court. Mike should have checked on this first, for $5K the MS response might have been quite different.

At any rate, he is clearly infringing on the Microsoft trademark. Imagine if someone could call themselves "Gee Em" and start selling cars, or if a company adopted the name "Eye Bee Em" and started selling computers and consulting services.

Re:Sounds fishy...

[platypus]

Looky here and search for mikerowesoft

They may be smart & big...

[TheMidget]

... but we are smarter and bigger. How long until somebody will turn this nice SQL injection into some world-class defacement?

Re:Dont they have to?

[MrAngryForNoReason]

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.

Which brings to mind...

[vasqzr]

What's more expensive:

Bandwith bill after a /.'ing

or

Legal bill for fighting Micro$oft?

Re:Yes, that's what I thought

[nahdude812]

I own maybe 7 domain names for various reasons. None of them were purchased with bad faith (eg, they're not designed to be similar to other companies or names, and as far as I know, none are). However, if someone came to me and claimed that I was infringing on their trademark, and offered me $10,000 for it, none of them are important enough to me that I wouldn't take it.

Likewise, if they came and offered me an absurd fee such as $10, it'd be a natural conclusion for me to counter offer something that I *would* be willing to sell it for. I'd say that there are few privately held domain names that there isn't some purchasing price for. Even corporately held domain names would come with a purchase price, though that price might lump in the corporation. Eg, if I offered Adobe $700 billion, I'm guessing I'd come away with a shiny new domain name, and probably a new office building filled with employees to go with it.

My point is that just because the kid *was* willing to sell the domain doesn't make it a bad faith offering. None of mine are bad faith, and I'd easily sell any of them for 10 grand.

1st rule: SHUT UP AND GET A LAYWER

[wowbagger]

The first and most important rule in ANY case where somebody is threatening legal action:

SHUT UP AND GET A LAWYER!

The second most important rule:

UNTIL YOU HAVE A LAYWER, STAY SHUT UP.

Suppose somebody contacts you and says:

"You are in violation of our copyright [sic] on our site - give us the domain or we'll sue!"

The proper response is something like:

"Very interesting - OK, please give me the contact information for your law firm, and I'll have my attourney contact your attourney. I prefer to have all furthur contact through my attourney, so please route everything through your legal group."

If they persist in contacting you directly, inform them firmly that all furthur contact should go through their attourney to yours, and any direct contact is harrassment.

In a case like this one, where you ARE being contacted by the other side's legal department, then you should GET AN ATTOURNEY LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN YOUR AREA. First thing. Then route all contact through him.

Otherwise, shut up - say nothing to the other side. While it may be a civil matter rather than a criminal matter, remind yourself that "Everything I say will be used against me in court."

Re:1st rule: SHUT UP AND GET A LAYWER

[Old Wolf]

And how is a 17 year old student supposed to afford a lawyer?

Only a PR compaign can save this guy

[jomagam]

Send the Register link to all your friends. This guy's only chance is turning this whole situation into a PR nightmare for m$. "Big bad corporation suing bright eyed teenager". I'd love a little report on the Daily Show on Comedy Central about this for starters.

poor bastard fell for it...

[SleezyG]

Hook, line, and sinker.

When a company with as dubious a past as Microsoft attempts to take legal action against you, you should IMMEDIATELY consult with a lawyer before even gracing them with a response. It's similiar to being arrested (not that you can ever prove I have been). "Anything you say and do can be used against you." Or whatever the Canadian equivalent might be.

Re:Yes, that's what I thought

[dubious9]

Seriously though. I didn't get the lawsuit until I actually read in the article that the supposed infraction was mearly phonetic. How many people pronouce things online?

And seeing as this Mike Rowe has ownership over his name and plans to study computer science and makes no mentions to MS on his site, the case seems pretty clear to me. It usually takes a lot for WIPO to overturn ownership on a website, and I don't see any clear evidence that Mike Rowe was cybersquating. Come on, phonetic spelling in a written medium? And I'd just like to know how MS found his site in the first place. Do they have a phonetical analyzer?

Re:What?

[kien]

At any rate, he is clearly infringing on the Microsoft trademark. Imagine if someone could call themselves "Gee Em" and start selling cars, or if a company adopted the name "Eye Bee Em" and started selling computers and consulting services.

I fail to see how anyone could connotate "geeem.com" with "gm.com" and "eyebeeem.com" with "ibm.com" just as much as I doubt one would confuse "mikerowesoft.com" with "microsoft.com". I suppose it might be possible for non-native English speakers using Babelfish for translation, but I doubt that US and Canadian trademark law is enforceable for every concievable worldwide possibility.

--K.

being sued...

[Anonymous Coward]

being sued by Microsoft for copyright infringment of their name...

...priceless.

Yep

[spectasaurus]

"... his domain would confuse Microsoft customers."

Sounds about right. Microsoft customers (by definition) are not the brightest cookies out there. Case in point, Clippy.

Brilliant!

[TygerFish]

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....

Mike Rowe Computer store.

[Jasonv]

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... ?

Good god..

[superhoe]

Nothing changes the fact that using the word 'soft' in the end of name has been very common (though unoriginal at this point) practice in many scenes since the early 80's.

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

Based on the Nissan.com Case .....

[leoaugust]

"I am motivated to stick with what I believe in."

And so he should. 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.

I think if he does get enough support, he probably should fight back. But it brings another case of the Nissan.com domain to me in which the domain name can't be used commercially.

What I thought was very interesting about the case was mentioned in the FAQ to the Nissan.com case. It said

1. As of June 12th 2000 there are (2223) domain names registered on the Internet containing the word nissan in them. To the best of our knowledge, most of those domains are not owned by Nissan Motor Co. Click here to view a partial list of them.
2. Also here is another list with nissan as the first word of the domain name there are (860 ) of them Click here to view. If you wish to see which entity owns any particular listing, just click on the WHOIS link next to it.

In the www.MikeRoweSoft.com case the interpretion is weaker as the similarity is "phonetic" which is really quite fuzzy, compared to the actual presence of the word "nissan" in the domain name. Despite this the original owner of the Nissan.com domain could not prevail.

If you go to the website Nissan.com you see the following Notice: In compliance with a ruling issued by the United States District Court in Los Angeles on November 14, 2002, in the lawsuit of Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. v. Nissan Computer Corporation, this web site has been converted to non-commercial use.

The story from the Domain Name Handbook was

1. Japanese automaker Nissan Motors Co., Ltd. and Nissan North America, Inc. filed suit against Nissan Computer Corp., a North Carolina-based corporation since 1991 with a registered trademark for its name.
2. Uzi Nissan, an Israeli-American born in Jerusalem, registered NISSAN.COM in 1994 to expand his computer business and NISSAN.NET two years later to expand his ISP business.
3. In August 1999, he posted a logo similar to that of Nissan Motor Corp, and began promoting automobile-related products and services.
4. The automaker filed suit for trademark dilution on December 10, 1999. The court granted a preliminary injunction and held that Mr. Nissan is trading on the automaker's goodwill and diverting potential Nissan car customers to other websites.
5. He was ordered to post a prominent disclaimer of any connection to Nissan Motor Corp and refrain from displaying any auto-related information.

So, I guess, I could see something like this happen. Mike Rowe may be ordered to post a prominent disclaimer of any connection to Microsoft Corp and refrain from displaying any computer-related information. IANAL.

Re:Based on the Nissan.com Case .....

[rmohr02]

This is different from the nissan.com case--the owner of that domain didn't choose the name because it was like the car company's name--Mike Rowe openly admits to choosing the domain because it sounded like Microsoft. I doubt he has a registered trademark on "MikeRoweSoft" either.

They don't want the content, just the name

[A nonymous Coward]

Their point is that he could just register a new domain name, change the URLs, and keep all the work he put into the content.

They don't want the content, he can take that with him.

It's like parking next to a fire hydrant, they are saying move along, take your car.

And all you flamers who don't read very carefully, note that I make no mention of whether M$ is doing the smart thing, the right thing, the correct thing, or anything.

Re:They don't want the content, just the name

[daviddennis]

A "MikeRoweSoft" logo is worthless if you can't use it. Copy taking advantage of the pun is wasted copy if they take the name away.

So no, he can't really keep his content because it revolves around his name. At least as far as I can tell; I haven't been able to see the site in its pre-suit form.

D

Re:They don't want the content, just the name

[swv3752]

Google Cache

D'oh!

[fritter]

Oh, man - I was wondering why this copy of MikeRoweSoft Windows was so cheap!

I would have tried to check this story out on CNN, but for some reason my genuine Magnetbox TV isn't working.

Re:I certainly hope that MS don't get away with th

[gidds]

Microsoft, who has de facto dominance over the desktop, and thus are evil according to the tinfoil-crowd

No, they're not evil because they dominate the desktop.

They are evil because they use that monopoly unfairly, to illegally (attempt to) dominate other areas. They are evil because of their unethical and illegal business practices: buying out or crushing all competition, secret agreements with vendors, spreading lies, putting profits over user experience and security, doing their utmost to prevent interoperability with other software and systems, continually breaking the spirit and the letter of anti-trust agreements, and much more.

Microsoft are evil, not because they dominate the desktop, but because, thanks to them, most people (think they) have no alternative.

Re:Just Great

[pr0c]

The only way that this could be wrong is on Slashdot... Opening a restaurant called MickDonalds wouldn't be acceptable nor would a WaltMart. But hey... this is Slashdot! Right or wrong everything Microsoft does is hated >>:[

In other news...

[Mark_in_Brazil]

...the holders of domains MyCrow.com, MyCrew.com, WhenDoes.com, WinDozens.com, MikeRose.com, and MikeRosoff.com have all hired lawyers.
Mr. Mike Rosoff of Kennebunk, Maine is especially worried, because he has received a cease-and-desist letter from Microsoft lawyers claiming that his social security card, driver's license, passport, and all items using his birth name are infringing on copyrights.
More on the story as it develops...

--Mark
__:-b

Re:I wonder who is going to win.

[alecto]

I have always wondered if these lawyers of Microsoft's are just free ranging lawyers . . .

Free range lawyers. Heard those are good eatin'! Much better than the stalled lawyers, that are all stressed and fed hormones and stuff.

Pronunciation of Rowe

[WhytTiger]

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"

Mikerowesoft, Lindows, what's the difference?

[ekasteng]

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.

Holydays work : please help your friend...

[Atreide]

Poor dear Microsoft.

Your friend Microsoft is lost in the maze of IP infringement.
Please help him to find out all the names used by evil hackers who want to steel mighty things from your friend.

Because there are so many bad boys in the world that speak strange languages,
help your little friend Microsoft to get every occurence of name spelling that can sound like his very own name.

Of course in english, our friend Law Yer has just come with the evil name : Mike Rowe Soft, so this one can not be proposed.

When you have finished this game, hand out the answer to your dad or your mom and go on to the next game.

For instance, in French :
[mi | my] [c | k | que] [r] [o | au] [ss] [o | au] [ft | pht]

microssoft , mikrossoft
miquerossoft , micraussoft
mikraussoft , miqueraussoft
microssauft , mikrossauft
miquerossauft , micraussauft
mikraussauft , miqueraussauft
microssopht , mikrossopht
miquerossopht , micraussopht
mikraussopht , miqueraussopht
microssaupht , mikrossaupht
miquerossaupht , micraussaupht
mikraussaupht , miqueraussaupht

mycrossoft , mykrossoft
myquerossoft , mycraussoft
mykraussoft , myqueraussoft
mycrossauft , mykrossauft
myquerossauft , mycraussauft
mykraussauft , myqueraussauft
mycrossopht , mykrossopht
myquerossopht , mycraussopht
mykraussopht , myqueraussopht
mycrossaupht , mykrossaupht
myquerossaupht , mycraussaupht
mykraussaupht , myqueraussaupht

Re:Yes, that's what I thought

[RowdyReptile]

Personally, I serously doubt that anyone could possibly get the two companies confused.

From the article, "Microsoft... stating ... that his domain would confuse Microsoft customers."

Well, there you have it. It's only MS customers who'd be confused. ;)

It's not the Redmond goons, it's the lawyers...

[dfung]

Crazy situations, but wouldn't you be looking for the Candid Camera when you get a call from Smart & Biggar that say that they represent Microsoft?

Bill Gates and company probably don't care, but they lawyers are probably personally sick of last name puns and have gone postal!

Re:It's not the Redmond goons, it's the lawyers...

[hdparm]

Mike told us that when an email from Microsoft's Canadian lawyers Smart & Biggar arrived on 19 November laying out its complaint, he was "amazed and appalled".

Mike will be fine, though. It has just been reported on local news that he got an offer from Smarter&Biggest to represent him in court for free.

Microsoft is just covering their asses

[CastrTroy]

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?

Where he screwed up

[kelzer]

Many posters have mentioned that he screwed up by offering to sell the domain to MS for $10,000. (Why these posts have all been modded up when all they've done is re-state what the Register article says is beyond me. I guess moderators don't RTFA either.)

What he *should* have done when they offered to reimburse his out-of-pocket expenses (the $10) is ask for $10,000 to cover his costs not only for the domain, but also for the original marketing research he used to choose an effective domain name, the logo development, marketing expenses related to generating traffic to his website, his legal expenses, etc.

trademark, dammit

[ajagci]

That would be a trademark violation, not a copyright violation. The two are completely different legally. Among other things, microsoft is legally obligated to defend its trademark or face losing it.

However, if Mike Rowe's use is non-commercial, Microsoft's action is unnecessary and the shouldn't prevail (but it's probably too costly to fight them).

Other Domain Spats:

[I-R-Baboon]

MikeHunt.com - Being sued by Moe Szyslak, owner of Moe's Tavern for prank call infringement.

HenWeigh.com - Being sued by Jenny Craig, settlement offered of $15 in McDonalds Gift Certificates

ShoBullshit.org - Next on the list for SCO for misleading location of mystery source code backed up on mothership hiding behind Venus.

MyLittleBoy.net - Sued by Michael Jackson for misleading name. Settlement reached at 100 little Sailor outfits with various sizes.

MajorWoody.us - Major Horace Woody has apparently given Woody Woodpecker a bad name. The Pecker and Woody are working out a deal out of court however.

FamilyLove.net - Pending legislation by the State of Arkansas's Singles site, FamilyLovers.net.

SlashingDot.org - In close contact with Cowboy Neal as geeks to not want to be confused with a "News for Serial Killers" site.

gaggle.com - Upsetting google.com, but google is unwilling to start gang warfare as drive by DoSes sometimes comprimise innocent networks.

DeathRow.us - Death row inmates suing for misrepresentation of convicted criminals actually on Death Row.

Garbage.com - Also being sued by Microsoft for copyright infringement of copyright. Alleges that this name is a common slang for their products in knowledgable circles.

Interesting question

[HangingChad]

Where exactly the line falls. If his name was John Doe and he registered JohnDoeSoft.com, would M$ try to claim every tech oriented product that ends in "soft" like PeopleSoft? Or is it that Mike Rowe sounds like Micro if you say it fast?

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.

Re:Just Great

[Crockerboy]

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.

Google supports Microsoft

[n0dez]

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

Re:Google supports Microsoft

[DurtyWiteBoy99]

Google's spellcheck is kicking in here and is why the question: Did you mean Microsoft? comes up. I tried typing in MikeRowSoft in MS-Word and it too came up with Microsoft as the suggested word. I know I left out the E in ROWE. It did not come up with any suggestions with the E. Bill Gates needs to call off the dogs on this one. What idiot would mistake Microsoft from MikeRoweSoft?

Re:Google supports Microsoft

[Basehart]

Redmond is worried people will enter Microsoft into Google and get Did you mean: Mike Roe Soft

Microsoft & Google...

[sjs132]

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...

He's perfectly entitled to make a counter offer...

[Larmal]

IANAL, but if somebody makes you an offer on something, are you not allowed to make a counter offer? I don't see how he can get nailed for trying to profit off a domain name when all he's trying to do is recoup costs. They offer him 10 bucks, he says no, and counter offers with 10,000$. I just thought that was called "negotiating"...

Re:What?

[the_mad_poster]

Care to explain how he's "clearly infringing" anything? The phonetic similarities are incidental. In my accent, I first pronounced his domain as 'mike.rowe.soft.dot.com' whereas I pronounce Microsoft's as 'microsoft.dot.com'. The phonetic similarities wouldn't even be close enough to confuse mediocre speech recognition unless you're a mushmouth, although the tool likely wouldn't recognize the spelling for Mike's site anyway.

As for similarities in the way they're spelled, the only thing the two domains share is 'soft' and '.com'. If somebody is so abysmally stupid that they could misspell microsoft as mikerowesoft, they probably aren't smart enough to by typing on their own anyway.

This is no different than the Nissan car company abusing Uzi Nissan because of his name. Corporate abuse of power, plain and simple. Am I jumping to conclusions? You betcha. But, maybe before somebody flames me for it, they ought to stop and consider why I'd automatically assume that a big corporate would be abusing it's power in this situation. I don't suppose I've come to expect that from these companies based on their past actions, right? Noooooo.... they're just good little capitalists struggling to earn a living like the rest of us. They would NEVER play the courts or stomp helpless individuals over make-believe issues like this. Uh uh. Obviously, Mr. Rowe is a bad, horrible, stinking, dirty, godless commie and Microsoft is doing its Patriotic Duty (TM) in stomping the shit out of him.

OK... that sarcasm seemed to cross into something else entirely...

it seems pretty obvious...

[pgilman]

it seems pretty obvious that, since he was actually doing something with the site, was actually using it, that his intent was not merely to turn around and sell the name, he was not just "squatting." every domain squatter i've ever seen buys domain names en masse and puts up a generic page saying, "this domain is for sale;" that's clearly not the case here.

he agrees that he thought the phonetic similarity to "Microsoft," a bit of wordplay, was amusing, but that's a separate issue.

his site didn't look like a Microsoft page, didn't offer the same services or products as a Microsoft page, in short, had nothing in common with Microsoft's website. there's no way that anybody with enough intelligence to recognize that the little plastic mouse moves the cursor on the screen could possibly confuse the two.

summary: he was not squatting, did not act in "bad faith," and is no threat to Microsoft in any way.

shame on you, Microsoft.

Lessons learned

[Safety Cap]

"They [Microsoft Laywers] responded to this email by offering to give me all of my out-of-pocket expenses in return for the domain name. ~. I responded by asking for $10,000, which I regret doing now ~."

Here is a tip: if you receive a letter from a Lawyer, and want to respond, always have your own laywer vet your response.

Google Cache link

[CineK]

As Mikes' site is already slashdotted
here goes google cache link for this.

Re:Just Great

[pr0c]

It says in several places that he offers web site services. IMHO that means he is offering computer services under a name that is intentionally to be mistaken as microsoft.. He uses that entire domian name as his business name Mikeroesoft. He is NOT selling software as far as i could find (site is slashdotted for me now too) so why would he have soft in his name? OHHHH thats right, to mislead and use microsoft's name. It couldnt' be any more deliberate or obvious really. If this goes to court he'll get laughed at and lose potentially a lot of money.

Re:Just Great

[b17bmbr]

1. use real name
2. put dot com after it
3. sued by big corporation
4. ???????
5. profit

Re:Just Great

[mek2600]

Nobody thinks that him being named "Mike Rowe" is a problem, it's that he added a "Soft" being it that's causing the problem. This is a stupid lawsuit because Mr. Rowe is an idiot for getting himself sued so easily.

Smart ... and Biggar???

[frostman]

omfG, is that really the name of their law firm??

Well, I guess I can see how they got Biggar: by racking up the billable hours presenting 25-page cases against 17-year-old students.

I guess they're pretty Smart if they can get Microsoft to pay them for it.

Maybe SCO should talk to these guys, it looks lately like their law firm, Small & Dummar, isn't getting the job done...

Tough to Call

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Tough to Call

[hesiod]

> He should take whatever cash is being offered (if any).

10$ wos MS's offer, although it was only a ploy to get him to misstep & become sue-worthy. Is being bullied out of your rights worth ten dollars?

M$ must be eliminating sound-alikes...

[VinceWuzHere]

A story broke about two weeks ago about http://www.mikerosoft.ca. Mike's site (a different Mike, eh) had a web presence since 1997 and delivered small bits of code, drivers and other technical tidbits. A check of his site today shows that he's redirecting traffic to a new url pending the outcome of his discussions. He does NOT want to sell out to Micro$fot according to his site.

Re:Just Great

[ePhil_One]

This is a stupid lawsuit because Mr. Rowe is an idiot for getting himself sued so easily

That right! If the stupid Canadian education system had done its job and made Mr Rowe a legal expert on the subject of domain disputes, none of this would have happened.

Silly student, domains are for large corporations!

It depends on the counteroffer

[thefinite]

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.

Re:It depends on the counteroffer

[thefinite]

Fair questions. First of all, you are right about it being civil instead of criminal. No inducing criminal acts in this case.

Secondly, if they offer to buy, and he makes a counteroffer that can be proven to be in good faith (i.e. purely recouping reasonable costs) it will not necessarily establish bad faith. In fact, if all the other elements of bad faith in the statute are absent, then it probably isn't enough on its own anyway.

Finally, with all of that in mind, offering to buy the domain name is not unethical at all. No need for any Bar to step in and get involved.

Re:Just Great

[phorm]

Soft is very common for many companies. This is especially true if the kid is a software designer. Perhaps Mike wanted to put up demos of programs he has created.

The problem is with companies claiming ownership to everything under the sun even remotely related to their trademarks.

If the domain with micrasoft or something similar I'd say it's a scam. I highly doubt anybody would misstype microsoft as mikerowesoft and end up at the wrong site.

Business Decision

[gubachwa]

Viewed purely as a business decision, wouldn't it have made more sense for Microsoft to just pay the kid the $10,000 for which he was asking? I mean, isn't it going to cost more than $10,000 in lawyers' fees going court and eventually bringing the thing to trial (should it go that far)? The only way it's going to cost less than this is if Mr. Rowe gives in without a fight.

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.

It's official.

[Futurepower(R)]

Software giant threatens mikerowesoftZDNet.co.uk,UK-8 minutes agoMicrosoft has set its lawyers onto a 17-year-old software writer from Vancouver, called Mike Rowe, because he has registered MikeRoweSoft.com, which the

Microsoft not pleased about mikerowesoft websiteAnanova,UK-3 hours agoA Canadian teenager called Mike Rowe who added the word soft to his name for his website title, has been ordered by Microsoft to hand over the domain.

Microsoft won't go soft on Mike RoweLondon Free Press,Canada-4 hours agoVANCOUVER -- Like any good fledgling businessperson, Mike Rowe knew

Microsoft lawyers threaten Mike Rowe (17)The Register,UK-5 hours agoIn what could easily be mistaken for an Onion story, Microsoft has unleashed the full fury of its lawyers on 17-year-old Canadian high-school student, Mike Rowe

Mike may be Rowe, but 'soft' is troubleSeattle Times,WA-7 hours agoBy The Associated Press. VANCOUVER, BC - Mike Rowe knew he needed a catchy name for his Web-site design company. But the folks

Big bully Gates targets teenTimes of India,India-8 hours agoVANCOUVER: No matter what Shakespeare said on the theme of nomenclature, Microsoft has thought it fit to sue a teenager whose domain name is a lot like the

Microsoft vs MikeRoweSoftIndependent Online,South Africa-10 hours agoVancouver, British Columbia - Mike Rowe thinks it's funny that his catchy name for a website design company sounds a lot like Microsoft.

Microsoft takes on teenNEWS.com.au,Australia-10 hours agoMIKE Rowe thinks it is funny that his catchy name for a Web site design company sounds a lot like Microsoft. "Since my name is Mike

Langford student battles tech giant over use of his domain name: Canada.com,Canada-Jan 17, 2004Mike Rowe, a Langford high school student who does Web site design part-time, is locked in a legal battle with one of the world's biggest companies.

Microsoft vs. Mike Rowe SoftWIS,SC-47 minutes ago(Vancouver, British Columbia-AP) Jan. 19, 2004 - It's Microsoft versus Mike Rowe-soft. Mike Rowe, 17, wanted a catchy name for his Web site design company.

Support CD Babyp2pnet.net,Canada-1 hour agoBecause Mike, who lives in Victoria on Vancouver Island in British Columbia, Canada (and a short drive from p2pnet.net's thriving central base : ) makes a

Microsoft Talk Legal to 17 Year-Old Owner of MikeRoweSoft DomainShortNews.com-2 hours agoMike Rowe, 17, from British Columbia, Canada decided to start up a small web business and called his domain MikeRoweSoft. Smart

Microsoft Corporation vs MikeRoweSoftOfficialSpin-3 hours agoVictoria, British Columbia -- (OfficialSpin) -- 19/01/04 -- A 17 year-old high school student, Mike Rowe, who just so happens to earn a few extra bucks...

Microsoft demands teen to give up domain nameSalem Statesman Journal,OR-7 hours agoVANCOUVER, British Columbia - Mike Rowe knew that he needed

Old chicks want it, too.

[Anonymous Coward]

and this paniciky old woman comes up to the desk practically in tears.

This "old woman" can disavow with words her secret desires, but her fingers knows what she really wants. On one level she wanted to check her email but deep down she really wants an emale . . . ; )

www.uglysoft.com

[jpaz]

I've got the domain www.uglysoft.com. I think they have more reason to sue me, I think. Heh.

It *IS* copyright! (in Canada)

[jellybear]

Actually, it probably IS copyright that Mike Rowe
is being sued under, and here's why. Under
Canadian trademark law, a person is allowed to
use his or her own name. Smart & Biggar
are, I am sure, aware of this. That is probably
why they are trying to sue for copyright infringement.
The fact that they are making such a stretch
just shows how weak they feel their case would be
in an action for trademark infringement. So
it could be Mike Rowe stands a good chance after all.

Yet we all ignore whitehouse.com...

[Stalus]

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.

Re:Yet we all ignore whitehouse.com...

[j-turkey]

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.

You're forgetting something really important here. First of all, the name White House is not trademarked by be the federal government. If you don't believe me -- check!

Secondly, the federal government is not a commercial entity (although it's probably the largest employer in the country and has insanely high revenues). The federal government has no responsibility to its shareholders and it has no trademarks to protect.

Finally, the fact that Mike Rowe is setting up a web design firm to sell consulting services (in an industry directly related to that which Microsoft does business in) rather than a porn site is the crux of the issue. They feel that he's diluting their trademark. What if I sold a soda called Caouk-ah-Coula? Still sounds just like Coke-a-cola, and a vendor at the ball game yells the same thing out loud, regardless of which product he's selling.

Like I said in my earlier post. I don't necessarily agree with what MSFT is doing, but I can certainly understand.

Why not? It worked with "Lindows"

[walterbyrd]

>>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.

Microsoft had interest?

[east coast]

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.

Re:Just Great

[Hobophile]

My favorite example is "Wells Fargo" and "Wells Cargo."

Clearly the cargo company is playing off of Wells Fargo's reputation for secure transport. I suspect that the only reason they didn't get sued into the ground over violating the financial institution's trademark is that the founder's name is Maynard W. Wells.

I think using your own name in the mark offers you a fairly high degree of protection, for all the common sense reasons posters here are so quick to point out. So from a trademark dispute standpoint he might have a defensible case, although there's a big question mark regarding his ability to finance such a defense against Microsoft's horde of lawyers.

In any case he's almost certainly going to lose his domain name. ICANN has a long and unblemished history of spinelessly caving in to the demands of large corporations.

Even partial similarity can get you sued

[belmolis]

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!

Just how stupid is MS anyway?

[SmallFurryCreature]

If MS was smart they would have registered all the similar sounding names. The cost of that including upkeep is small enough for a big company.

So they found someone who found a clever name for their site. Any smart company aware of such things as goodwill and public image would then offer say to take over the domain name and offer a nice settlement so the site can be rebranded. Perhaps if you are american you try to figure out if it is a domain-squatter or if there is a legit site there. Maybe Microsoft doesn't have any way to visit websites. I advice them to install mozilla.

What you do not due is sent the lawyers after some kid. Rule 1 of running a shop. Do not kick the kids of your customers. It is basic lesson but that american companies just can't seem to learn.

To those who going to quote law you are so wrong. Even a million dollar settlement would be peanuts compared to the bad publicity. If this gets picked up then MS will have spend many times more in advertising.

Something similar happened here where a little girl in holland owned a fansite dedicated to harry potter. When the first movie was about to come out she got a letter from the studio claiming she was infringing and she had to hand the site over. Que it being reported on the news and the studio having to backpeddle so fast it wasn't even funny anymore.

Oh well. Americans eh.

Git yer homophones while they last!

[gnetwerker]

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

Re:Just Great

[NanoGator]

1. use real name
2. put dot com after it
3. sued by big corporation
4. ???????
5. profit

Allow me to edit #2 for ya there:

2.) put another few letters on the end, thus ensuring that the name sounds like a trademark, then put dot com after it.

That gives me an idea....

[HogynCymraeg]

I own a company called "Bill G Eats". Can I join in?!!?

Microsoft customers bring class action law suit...

[smokin_juan]

"...his domain would confuse Microsoft customers."

So microsoft is implying that their customers are so stupid as to confuse microsoft.com with MikeRowesoft.com? I sheepishly admit that i'm a microsoft customer and seeing that i've admitted it here, my browser admits it at every page and my undisclosed e-mail program admits the fact - microsoft has implied that I, like millions of other microsoft customers are morons.

With these facts brought to light I hereby bring forward a class action lawsuit against microsoft for slander and defamation of charachter.

Seriously, how can i e-mail my resume to a potential employer without their reading my mail header and instantly assuming stupidity due to the use of microsoft products? how many times will my resume, created by an undisclosed microsoft product, be passed over when a potential employer reads the html source code and notices that i'm a microsoft idiot?
I'm appalled offended and I won't stand for this horseshit.

Dumbass kid...fell for the trap

[fudgefactor7]

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.

What we continue to forget about trademarks...

[myrashka]

IANAL...but having dealt with trademark issues regularly, it seems to me we forget some of the basic tenets of trademark law (this is unlikley exahuastive):

• Do the two companies sell similar goods/services and are the names used for those similar goods/services?
• Are the names similar?
• Are the goods/services marketed in the same or similar channels of trade?
• Was there an intentional infringement of the trademark (i.e. to benefit from the credibility or visibility of the established trademark)?

In addition, some other criteria might include:

• Is there proof of customers being confused by the names?
• How widely known the names are (federal trademark protection is typically extended to those who engage in interstate commerce).
• Would a reasonable person confuse the two companies?

Where things become dicey for Mike Rowe is if the following is true (from the article):

"He registered the domain in August because he thought it would be cool to have a site that sounded like the famous company to show his Web designing skills."

This intention would likely violate the tenet of trying to benefit from the established name's reputation, economic value, marketing, etc (and regardless of your feelings about Microsoft, there's no disputing that the name Microsoft is well recognized with considerable economic value and economic goodwill). If Mike Rowe just had a software company called "Mike Rowe Software", he'd likely be ok (since usually, it's very hard for a company to strip one of their legal name) since most people know how Microsoft is spelled (a consequence of the widely known name)...and new customers would likely be quickly debunked of any confusion...not to mention I think there are any number of spellings tha people would try before getting to MikeRowe. Maybe MikeRow, MikeRoe, MicRow, etc...but Rowe is not really a common spelling of a common word...but more often a last name.

The counter offer is not unreasonable (names are sold all the time if there's no infringing trademark but similar sounding names - yes, that's very possible and happens all the time).

His minor status might give him some leverage PR wise - but it might also invalidate his registration depending on Candian contract laws (since the registration of a domain name is a contract and typically, contracts entered into with minors without a parental/guardian signature are usually unenforceable). On a PR basis, Microsoft can probably absorb this (especially since he's a 17 year old with a business...typically shows sophistication that most people will use to overlook the PR issue).

Anyways, some thoughts...I hope he get's to keep it if he wants it - and if not, at least get reimbursed for the cost of registering a new domain name and alerting all his customers (and perhaps fixing all his marketing). Contrary to popular opinion, reimbursement for the hosting, time to create the website, etc are not likely reimbursable (the only infringement is the name - and there's not evidence the site's design is tied into the name).

Mike's age

[chobee]

At the age of 17, can Mike Rowe legally negotiate the sell of the domain name without the authorization of his parents? He should try to back out of his trapped position stating an his age as a factor. Can microsoft legally negotiate with a 17 year old or is this in its self illegle?

Damn ...

[Durandal64]

There goes my software company which specializes in crows .. My Crow Soft.

McDonald's

[DynaSoar]

McDonald's has tried the same stunt. They sued a Scottish cafe owner by the name of McDonald for trademark infringement.

They lost. They also garnered more bad PR than all the PETA types that have gone up against them could have ever hoped for.

Mike could win big if he hung in there.

WOW...Now that's just spooky

[MrFreshly]

My post from a week ago...I was joking! These bozos are serious!

Uh, Slashdot just did MS's work for them.

[Beardo the Bearded]

Maybe that's who the anonymous submitter is...

"Hey Bill, we can't get this site shut down legally."

"Eh... I'll send it to /. - it'll be gone in two hours."

I complained, MS responded....

[GeneralEmergency]

Re: MikeRoweSoft.com

Background located at:
http://www.theregister.com/content/6/34955.ht ml

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 sound cannot be trademarked?

[muck1969]

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.