Slashdot Mirror


Ruling Clears Way For Lindows Trial

shystershep writes "Various sources are reporting that Microsoft's appeal in the Lindows trademark infringement suit was rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. At issue was the trial judge's decision [PDF link] to 'instruct a jury to consider only whether 'windows' was a generic term before November 1985, when the first version of Microsoft's Windows was released.' This is significant because a generic mark receives no trademark protection, and the ruling that the jury must make that determination based only on the use of the term before 1985 is a major blow to Microsoft."

5 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. Ghosts of Pentium? by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but Intel went through something like this when AMD and Cyrix had "486 compatible" on their labels, and Intel went to court. Judge ruled: 486 too generic, which moved Intel to start naming their processors to Pentium and the like and trade mark it so somebody couldn't claim "Pentium compatible!" without getting into trouble.

    Microsoft might be facing this themselves now. Let's face it - before 1984, the computer term "windows" existed. Everybody with a GUI called their interface a "window" and a collection of them was a set of "windows". MS might very well lose the case.

    Short run: they call future OS's by their names and actually release "MS Longhorn 2003", much like Apple has "OS 10.3 Panther". Lindows will be able to sell their product (in the US at least) under the Lindows name.

    Long run: More lawsuits between MS at Lindows anyway. Like I'm so surprised.

  2. Not much of a point by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would Microsoft have named their products Office, Word, Paint, .... Windows ... if those weren't generic terms and they weren't trying to grab the common term and associate it strictly with themselves?

  3. Great! by RelliK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now I wish they'd get smacked for "SQL Server", "Proxy Server", etc.

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
  4. Re:What it all means by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just want to clarify what you said. According to what you quoted, the ruling didn't merely allow Lindows to argue that "windows" was a generic term prior to the release of MS Windows 1.0. The ruling is against a Microsoft argument that, even if "windows" had been a generic term prior to 1985, it has become an MS term.

    The ruling says that what the jury will consider is only whether the term "windows" was generic in 1985, before Microsoft Windows 1.0, and if the jury finds that it was, then Lindows wins.

    I think this is good news, because I believe Lindows has already produced evidence that Apple and Xerox had been using the term.

  5. Lindows is trouncing them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the current jury instructions (use time period before MS' products to determine genericness) Microsoft *IS* going to lose their trademark if this goes to trial.

    This will be a great show to watch.
    I predict huge press. The ironic twist is that Microsoft brought this upon themselves! By suing Lindows, 'er Linspire - they brought into question their own trademark. Now that grenade is going to blow up in their face.

    I hope they do not pay some money to settle since that's what they've been doing recently. Because it will be great to watch Gates try to deny all the windowing systems they ripped off when they greated their product.

    Anyone also notice that Lindows doesn't care if they lose? This is playing out perfectly for them. They get a ton of press regardless and if they win they'll be in the history books. Or Microsoft will be for being so dumb to get their OWN trademark invalidated.

    It's nice to see the little guy win one.

    Lindows - DON'T SETTLE! We're counting on you.