Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Setback For Microsoft In Lindows Trademark Case

Posted by timothy on from the context-context dept.

One Louder writes "Lindows.com is claiming victory in an important ruling in the Microsoft case - the judge ruled that the jury must only consider the genericness of the term 'windows' prior to the introduction of Microsoft's products, and that a term that is generic cannot be made ungeneric. Of course, in Microsoft's home turf, the story has a different spin. In other countries, they're telling judges that Lindows.com is an imminent threat requiring immediate injunctions, while in the United States, they're dragging the case out, perhaps for years, by appealing issues in a trial that hasn't even happened."

13 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. In other countries... by JanneM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...it is a much easier issue. If it's a non-english speaking country, there is nothing generic about the words "Windows", "Word" and so on. Lindows is pretty clearly infringing in those cases.

    Choosing a name that will get you on the losing side of a trademark disupte, guaranteed, strikes me as a pretty shortsighted thing to do.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:In other countries... by jeffkjo1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      However, in the United States of America, Microsoft has never been able to trademark the term 'Windows' in any fashion.

      Pull out your Windows CD's (You have real CD's right?), There's a TM symbol next to 'Microsoft' but there is not and never has been one next to 'Windows.'

      I used to be on MS's side in this case, but the idea of a 'windowing' operating system pre-dates Windows by several years. We all saw that documentary on TNT a few years back... MS and Apple both stole the idea of a windowing operating system from HP.

    2. Re:In other countries... by JanneM · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I can't speak for other languages, but in Sweden, at least, we translate it. Where you have a "window" with a "button", we have a "fonster" with a "knapp".

      So, yes, "Windows" really is a non-word, and it rightly becomes a big, relevant problem for Lindows.

      To turn it around, assume a product (a window cleaning agent, say) from Sweden named, exotically, "Fonster". Then some other company releases _their window cleaning compound and names it "Fonsder". Would it not be reasonable - and quite easy - for an american court to find that "Fonsder" was unacceptably close to "Fonster" and that they did attempt to ride on the coattails of the first company's brand penetration?

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:In other countries... by froncke · · Score: 3, Interesting
      If it's a non-english speaking country, there is nothing generic about the words "Windows", "Word" and so on. Lindows is pretty clearly infringing in those cases. Choosing a name that will get you on the losing side of a trademark disupte, guaranteed, strikes me as a pretty shortsighted thing to do.
      I don't know about that. I can see why Microsoft would be upset by the name, but from both the consumer and Lindows' points of view, it seems like a brilliant strategy. I mean the consumer knows what "Windows" is and when you're making a product that has the sole purpose of looking as much like Windows as possible, calling it by a similar name makes a lot sense to Joe Average. They'll expect something almost-but-not-quite Windows when they buy Lindows. And that's what they're getting.. As for a law suit? Everybody knows that a sure-fire way to generate publicity is to have Microsoft sue you ;o)
  2. Not that simple - English is *the* tech language by blorg · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I wouldn't say it's that simple. English was and is the prevailing tech language, that would be used for computing terms in other countries (witness France's efforts to replace the use of the term "e-mail" with "courriel" and then compare popularity on Google.fr.

    And 'windows' was definately a generic computing term before MS took it for the name of their product.

  3. I thought this was settled YEARS ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IIRC, when MS first put out "Windows" they wanted that trademarked, but as it was judged too generic the actual name ended up being "Microsoft Windows". Or am I misremembering?

  4. So it could also be "Windows"? by Serious+Simon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So "Lindows" is not infringing because windows is a generic word, not because it is too similar to Windows. Then, even a marketing a product with Windows in its name would be permissible. Lindows Windows?

  5. It's not about the name, it's about competence. by BassKnight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This case looks just like Microsoft trying to step over its competitors with a worthless excuse. I don't remember Microsoft sueing Sun for the OpenWindows desktop that comes with Solaris.

  6. Roberton isn't in it for the money by blorg · · Score: 4, Interesting
    He has 'lost' many times in the past (e.g. as former CEO of mp3.com, he lost a major suit with the record companies). Have a look at his bio. He was also the person who put up a $100k prize for hacking the X-Box to run Linux.

    Basically, his world view seems to be that he has enough money already, and will do things that he feels are right, irrespective of the consequences. This I highly respect him for, but I don't know that I'd like to have him running a company that I had invested in.

  7. Re:Sigh by Jondor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yeah, but was the complete name not "Microsoft Windows" as opposed to "X windows" or "glass windows"?

    So the real issue here is how much "Microsoft Windows" looks alike "lindows"..

    --
    Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
  8. Re:Sigh by GregWebb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I recall, Microsoft tradermarked 'Microsoft Windows' and were explicitly told that 'Windows' would not be trademarkable. Whereas Mr. Robertson sells his product as 'LindowsOS'.

    These just aren't 'identical or confusingly similar', as would be required. MS are trying to intimidate to extend their trademark.

    --

    Greg

    (Inside a nuclear plant)
    Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

  9. Volkswagon is a trademark, windows is just a word by Secrity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IANAL and this pertains to US (maybe others). No it would probably not be OK to advertise or sell a car from a company called Yolkswagen because Volkswagon is a registered trademark. You also could not sell software named Microsloth Windows because Microsoft Windows is a trademark and there would be confusion. The question is whether Microsoft can claim a trademark on the word "windows" in the context of software. I believe that Xerox called their invention that displayed a window-like object on a screen a "window" and I believe that Apple also calls their window-like object displayed on a screen a "window" -- and they both used the term "window" prior to Microsoft trademarking and selling a product named "Microsoft Windows". Trademarking the word "windows" is the same as trademarking the word "automobile". Imagine Acme Automobile (TM) suing Smith Automobile (TM) for trademark infringment over the word "automobile".

  10. Re:Lindows should use this to their advantage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why should LindowsOS change their name?

    Pay close attention to this: they are WINNING this suit that MS initiated.

    And if they prevail in the suit, then MS will lose its Windows trademark. They'll of course appeal, but how can a company that successfully claims "Internet Explorer" is a generic term when they are sued, possibly prevail when they used a term that was clearly generic when they took it?

    Bottom line is that LindowsOS stands to gain alot more "free advertising" by keeping their name and pressing on with the case, especially if they can be billed as "David".

    One last thing, the Judge just significantly increased the amount MS will have to offer to settle this case.