Slashdot Mirror


Excel Registered as Trademark, 19 Years Late

unassimilatible writes "In a snafu even better than forgetting to renew the Hotmail.com domain, it seems that Microsoft was a little late in registering 'Excel' as a trademark - 19 years late, to be exact. While MS claims it is protected by the common law of trademark, it may have abandoned the right to enforce the mark, as Savvysoft has been using the mark openly and conspicuously with TurboExcel for some time. TurboExcel, of course, runs on Linux, and MS just sent Savvysoft a cease-and-desist letter to stop using the mark. Apparently, 'Word' and 'Office' are also not registered marks of MS, but being generic terms, MS might have a lot more trouble trying to claim them as marks, as happened in the Lindows kerfuffle."

250 comments

  1. Standard by mirko · · Score: 0

    Excel has become a defacto standardf, having other soft bearing its name as a part of theirs is advertising.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:Standard by JPriest · · Score: 1

      See also my site, GNUarts. Just be happy I am advertising for you.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  2. Jurisdictional shopping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    I am sure Microsoft can find an ignorant judge somewhere in the world who believes their trademarks are valid even when contrary to actual law, and get an injunction from such a judge before anyone even knows a case had been filed there, much like they did to Lindows.

    1. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Talking about ignorance... it is a matter of fact that you can have a perfectly valid trademark without ever registering it. It is sufficient to use the mark in your trade, and registering only helps in resolving disputes.

    2. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by mordors9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This all goes back to the modern golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules and M$ has more gold than most countries. If they come after you for trademark/copyright infringement if you are right, they will still keep you tied up in court for years and bankrupt you if they can.

    3. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is this really true? From what I understand, that is the case with copyright, but not trademarks. Perhaps someone with some legal expertise can clarify, but from my understanding, a lack of a vigorous defense of a registered trademark is enough to lose it, much less not registering it in the first place.

    4. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by aster_ken · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are correct. Only copyright law acts the way your parent poster describes.

    5. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Vigorous defense is different from registering the trademark. It is quite possible to defend and even sue on the basis of an unregistered trademark. See this informative message later on in this discussion.

      I'm sure you have seen trademarks followed by the letters TM. That's an unregistered trademark, as opposed to a registered one that is indicated by an R in a circle.

    6. Re:Jurisdictional shopping by sepluv · · Score: 1

      The parent post does not seem to relate to the grandparent at all.

      It is correct, but the grandparent never mentioned registration. Who modded this up?

      (BTW, registration also helps by turning round the burden of proof to some extent too which is handy if for instance you got your trademark by bribing the patent office--not that I can think of any company who would do that, of course.)

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  3. Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They made a point of saying that Word and Office are generic terms, but so is excel! It's a perfectly normal word too, so why is it different when it comes to trademarking??

    1. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Arngautr · · Score: 2, Funny
      Yup.

      So's a kerfuffle.

    2. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      why is it different when it comes to trademarking??

      The government determines this using a complicated formula which involves how frequently the word is used in the language, how many points it's worth in Scrabble, the would-be trademark holder's political contribution budget, and whether or not George W. Bush is able to pronounce the word correctly.

    3. Re:Excel is a real word too! by krymsin01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So is Gateway. I'd like to see you try to start selling your own Gateway branded computers, though.

      --
      stuff
    4. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has to do with the non-obviousness of the mark to product or service being sold. For example, you aren't going to be able to trademark "The Food Store" for your grocery, but might be able to do so for a restaurant.

    5. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like www.apple.com or www.orange.com or ... or... and ... and ...

    6. Re:Excel is a real word too! by fireboy1919 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but if you were going to pick the most generic one-word name for a word processor you could think of, what would it be?

      How about for an office suite?

      And a spreadsheet program? "Spreadsheet" is what springs to my mind.

      When you use a word that is not normally used in a particular frame of reference, you can't trademark it. This is not the case for Excel.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    7. Re:Excel is a real word too! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The important thing in trademark law is whether the word is in common usage in the domain of the product. Word is obviously common in the domain of word processors, since it is simply half of the name of the product type. The same is true of Office / office suites. A spreadsheet called Sheet would be similarly difficult to defend. Excel, however, is not a generic term, and so a spreadsheet called TurboExcel could be accused of attempting to pass off their product as being affiliated with Microsoft Excel.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re:Excel is a real word too! by farmhick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So is Gateway. I'd like to see you try to start selling your own Gateway branded computers, though.


      Sure, I will just add on a modifier so that is isn't exactly Gateway. Like MyGateway, Lateway, or Gateway2000.

      --
      I have to stop wasting so much time reading Slashdot. It's interfering with my crystal meth addiction.
    9. Re:Excel is a real word too! by antifoidulus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just a question about trademarks, so although I cannot sell gateway branded computers, could I sell gateway branded pancakes? Are trademarks valid only in the industry they were registered for?

    10. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Jason+R · · Score: 1

      I think what you meant (correct me if I'm wrong) is that if you use a word that's not normally used in that context then you can trademark it. So Excel can be trademarked, but Office can't.

    11. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes.

    12. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hi-ho the derry-o, the farmer's got a Dell?

    13. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From your sig I can see this is an issue that is close to your heart...

    14. Re:Excel is a real word too! by SnapShot · · Score: 1

      The problem is that, unlike "TurboExcel", "TurboSpread" is actually a registered trademark of the Mazoola Margarine Company. Or maybe it's the XXX Porn Distribitor Inc., I'm not sure.

      --
      Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
    15. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Nacon74 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The important thing in trademark law is whether the word is in common usage in the domain of the product.
      Wouldn`t this also be true for Windows? A window is a pretty common word for describing the... uhm... windows used in a GUI.
    16. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, MS nucular has nothing on me!

    17. Re:Excel is a real word too! by cfulmer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Standard disclaimer: IANAL (yet):

      There's a spectrum of protectability, from generic to descriptive to fanciful. So, you can't trademark the word "Soap" when applied to, well, soap. "Ivory soap," however, is more fanciful. And, you can use "Soap" when applied to something other than soap, like say photo cleaning software -- then it's more fanciful.

      "Word" when applied to a word processor and "Office" when applied to an office suite are on the more generic/descriptive side of it. "Windows" had a hard time because it was generic -- "X-windows" and the idea of "Windowing operating environments" had already been around for a while.

      "Excel," on the other hand, does not have any relation to spreadsheets, making it more fanciful. With respect to spreadsheets, "Excel" is not generic at all, but may become so -- "Aspirin" used to be a trademark of Bayer Corp (and still is in Europe, I believe), but they failed to protect it in the US and lost their right to it.

      Should note that these words do not disappear from the english language just because somebody trademarks them -- people can still use words like "Office" and "Windows" to talk about, well, offices and windows. And, in fact, somebody could conceivably use those words to describe some other product. Look at "Delta" for example -- it's an airline, a faucet manufacturer and a power tool maker. SAS, similarly, is an airline and a software company. The touchstone is customer confusion -- if a customer would be confused by your use of a mark, that's a pretty good indication that you're infringing.

    18. Re:Excel is a real word too! by dapic · · Score: 1

      So is "sun". Duh!

    19. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is not just if it's a generic word, the problem is if it's a trademark, or just a description. "Word" and "Office" both describe the product at least as much as they name it, whereas "Excel" you can't say the same of.

    20. Re:Excel is a real word too! by fatphil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "X-windows" had not been around officially under that name at all. The "X Window System" had, of course. _Colloqially_ people have been calling it X-Windows, of course. I do, even though I know its trademarked name, which is clumsy.

      Aspirin was wrenched off Bayer as part of post-war reparations. Nothing to do with them not protecting it.

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    21. Re:Excel is a real word too! by newnerdyuser · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Thank you for the Slashdot page rendering bug fix for Firefox.

    22. Re:Excel is a real word too! by gosand · · Score: 1
      So is Gateway. I'd like to see you try to start selling your own Gateway branded computers, though.


      As is Dell.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    23. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the submitter doesn't know how to excel ;-)

    24. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      The important thing in trademark law is whether the word is in common usage in the domain of the product.

      Hmmmm, Is "excel" in common usage in the domain of computer software?

    25. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      AFAIK, Microsoft doesn't sell a word processor called "Word". It sells a word processor called "Microsoft Word" and that's trademarked.

      IIRC, That's because someone already had a PC word processor called "Word", so Microsoft trademarked "Microsoft Word" instead.

      I challenge you to find a piece of Microsoft official documentation that refers to Microsoft's word processor as "Word" instead of "Microsoft Word".

    26. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      Anyone can trademark a word in the dictionary in a certain field of trade as long as that word does not describe a type of product in that field (in which case case it is a generic term). In most jurisdictions, if a word is or ever has been a generic term in any language it can never be registered (unless you bribe the patent office--see "windows" below).

      "Excel" is not a generic term because it does not describe the type of product. "Excel" has nothing to do with spreadsheets.

      "Word" has a lot to do with word processors; "office" has a lot to do with office suites and "windows" has a lot to do with windows systems.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    27. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      Yes (in all jurisdictions).

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    28. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, the "windows" trademark is technically invalid becuase it is a generic term and there is loads of prior art (DECWindows, original Emacs, &c). Microsoft have almost admitted this and the judge implied it in MS v. Lindows (which is why MS payed Lindows lots to get off their backs). Even if this was not true Microsoft have technically lost the trademark through lack of enforcement.

      (Actually it is worse than that because the highest court of appeal for trademarks in the US declared that "windows" is and always will be unregisterable then the US gov and Microsoft did something which has been censored in Lindows's evidence by the judge resulting in it being registered.)

      Incidentally, until recently (I don't think now) the UK patent office listed on their w3s the _specific_ field that the the trademark holder wished to register for and "windows" was listed as been registered to MS in the generic category window(ing) systems.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    29. Re:Excel is a real word too! by syrion · · Score: 1
      Let's step outside the boundaries of the tech sector for a moment. On my bookshelf, I see books by:
      • Penguin
      • Bantam
      • Aspect
      • Vintage
      I have a copy of The New Yorker here; let's look through some of the ads.
      • Lands' End
      • Fujifilm
      • The Clearing
      • Sideways
      • Fox
      • Bookmarks and "The Dial Press"
      • Waterworks
      • SentientJet
      • Hippie
      In addition, you have some other, possibly more familiar brands:
      • Ford
      • Dodge
      • Mercury
      • ...
      It goes on and on. All of these are words, and they are trademarked. I don't see DaimlerChrysler suing you when you say you "dodged a bullet," and Penguin Putnam doesn't sue the Discovery Channel very often for infringement.
    30. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1
      because it was generic
      Windows still is; #1 rule of trademark law (in all jurisdictions): a term can never lose its genericness.

      (If at any point in history a term has been generic it is always generic, in the eyes opf the law, forever.)

      Also, the word "windows" is still used in a generic sense.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    31. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      It has been known as XWindows prior to the registration of the trademark by Microsoft, so the grandparent's argument still stands. Also, there were other operating systems predating MS called Windows (e.g.: DECWindows) and the term had been used generically (e.g.: "windows system") in the industry since at least the 1950's (e.g.: original Emacs).

      >>I do, even though I know its trademarked name, which is clumsy<<

      I would not describe it as clumsy. You can call it what you like unless you are trading (in which case you have to bare in mind TMs that may conflict with tradenames you use*) and X-Windows is the normal name used by people.

      * not that MS's TM is valid anyway.

      Re: Aspirin. You may be right, but a TM _can_ be lost through lack of protection (as would be the case with "windows" if MS did not technically have the TM in the first place because of the prior art and it being a generic term).

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    32. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1
      Further to my previous points on parent (IANAL):
      There's a spectrum of protectability
      Not that I know of, but maybe this is true in US. (I'm in UK.) AFAIK, there is a spectrum but not of protectability; protectability is binary depending on a certain cut-off point along said spectrum.
      With respect to spreadsheets, "Excel" is not generic at all, but may become so
      AFAICC, this would be the current situation with regard to windows (as MS have continually ignored concurrent use since their trademark application (1992/1993)) if it were not for the fact that (as the MS v. Lindows judge implied) MS's trademark is technically invalid anyway due to it being a generic term and ~50 years of prior art.

      Regarding the last paragraph: It is normal for trademarks to be registered on the same word in different fields (as trademarks only apply to a pretty narrow field). Also, deliberately confusing customers would be illegal anyway (even if not even an unregistered trademark was involved), so trademarks (esp. registered) offer slightly more protection than that (where, for example, I think the defendant is assumed to be violating and must prove otherwise and where any usage of the trademark in a tradename is a violation even if tradename uses additional text to make it clear to customers they are different products--however describing the prduct as like another would of course be OK because that would not be using it as a tradename.)

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    33. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      You cannot do that if a Gateway is a registered TM as you are still using it in a tradename. (Using the name without a modifier would probably be passing off anyway and illegal even if there was no trademark.)

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    34. Re:Excel is a real word too! by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      Hmmmm, Is "excel" in common usage in the domain of computer software?

      Yes, as the shirt-size of programmers.

    35. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Jad+LaFields · · Score: 3, Informative

      As the others said, yes you could. The exception is for extremely popular, strong brands, ones that are so big that using the trademark in other industries still could conceivably confuse customers. For example, you might get into trouble if you started sold Coca-Cola potato chips or Microsoft condoms (the prophylactic you can trust!).

      --
      [SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
    36. Re:Excel is a real word too! by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point (and are wrong about why they can't use "Word").
      The reason that Microsoft can't trademark "Word" as a word processor is because it's a word that is part of the subject matter. Similarly, if they made a math learning program called "Math," for example, they couldn't trademark the name. They could trademark "Microsoft Math," but that's just silly since they've already got a trademark on Microsoft in the software area, so any use of it in making a product name would already be illegal.

      On the other hand, they can trademark the name "Excel" because spreadsheets have nothing to do with the word "Excel."

      For this reason, also, MS's use of the name "Windows" for their windowing operating system is questionable, and they may eventually lose a court fight over the ownership of their copyright. It's the risk that you run when you pick a generic name (is it too generic to be a trademark?)

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    37. Re:Excel is a real word too! by 2old2rockNroll · · Score: 1

      IIRC, That's because someone already had a PC word processor called "Word", so Microsoft trademarked "Microsoft Word" instead.

      Given that logic, Microsoft should not be rallying the lawyers to attack someone making a product called TurboExcel.

    38. Re:Excel is a real word too! by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
      There is a slight difference. Gateway while a trademark is also a company name. Excel is a product. I think the law gives more weight to company names than products.

      Although there is precedent for defense of product names, usually the plaintiff already has a trademark. Even then a judge has to weigh the circumstances. For example, Apple released OS 9 after Microware trademarked OS-9. Microware sued Apple, but a judge found in favor of Apple because both systems worked on different platforms (Microware: embedded systems, Apple: desktop computers) and customers were unlikely to confuse the two.

      In this case, MS does not have a trademark and "excel" is a common word. This is the same argument that the tried when they wanted to trademark "Windows". They were turned down because the term was generic in both the real world and the computing world. Thus the names Windows 95, Windows 98, were born. MS can fight it but after 19 years, the first question the judge might ask is why they waited so long.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    39. Re:Excel is a real word too! by mdfst13 · · Score: 1

      "Re: Aspirin. You may be right"

      Bayer lost Aspirin to Sterling Drug after WW1. It was owned by Sterling Drug when it became a generic term. So both are right. Aspirin was a genericized trademark, but that's not how Bayer lost it.

      More examples of genericized trademarks.

    40. Re:Excel is a real word too! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Yes, the "windows" trademark is technically invalid becuase it is a generic term and there is loads of prior art"

      Don't forget that 'Windows' is the term describing what the end user sees (i.e. a desktop metaphor), not what the developer sees. I'm not defending MS or trying to dispute your point, but I did at least want to point out that distinction. "Windows" is very much a marketing term intended to make people more comfortable with computers.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    41. Re:Excel is a real word too! by dickrichardv8 · · Score: 1

      Same thought popped into my head too. "Ha!"

    42. Re:Excel is a real word too! by dickrichardv8 · · Score: 1

      Local mom and pop businesses have the same trademarks with no problem unless they get big enough to overlap. How many "Country Kitchen's" resturants have you seen across the nation?

    43. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm confused - where did it say that they were going after TurboExcel?

    44. Re:Excel is a real word too! by ahknight · · Score: 1

      More like DoubleExcel.

    45. Re:Excel is a real word too! by squidsoup · · Score: 1

      So would Gateway!

    46. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      ...which is precisely the reason why it is untrademarkable.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    47. Re:Excel is a real word too! by DoctorFrog · · Score: 2, Funny

      Given the ongoing problems they've had with security leaks, I don't think Microsoft has to worry about anyone in that particular market ripping off their good name.

    48. Re:Excel is a real word too! by 2old2rockNroll · · Score: 1

      where did it say that they were going after TurboExcel?

      From TA: "TurboExcel, of course, runs on Linux, and MS just sent Savvysoft a cease-and-desist letter to stop using the mark."

    49. Re:Excel is a real word too! by fatphil · · Score: 1

      It's important to note that I was only partly right about the bit I was right about. The company was divided, and the trademarks were treated differently on either side of the pond. My comment only applied to the US side.

      Nice second link, thanks.
      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    50. Re:Excel is a real word too! by Aeiri · · Score: 1

      Just because something is illegal doesn't make it impossible to do.

    51. Re:Excel is a real word too! by sepluv · · Score: 1

      But you knew what I meant which means what I said made perfect sense. Rarely (if ever) is anything truly 100% impossible (wrt to laws of physics) and for that reason the word "cannot" does not, in general usage, mean that.

      Using it to mean "within the bounds of the law" is quite common (and was clearly, given the context, what I meant), but actually less common than laxer meanings such as "cannot be bothered" or "within the bounds of being polite to all the parties involved".

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  4. Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I start shipping my specially branded "Excel toilet paper" next week.

    1. Re:Too Late by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Funny
      I start shipping my specially branded "Excel toilet paper" next week.

      The great Ilparazo will be unhappy! Excel is a secret agent! Not toilet paper!

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Excel toilet paper" ...Now with spreadsheets for absorbency.

    3. Re:Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it lined?

      Can you drag your... erm... "formula" across a row or column of cells?

    4. Re:Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I start shipping my specially branded "Excel toilet paper" next week.

      Boss: "I don't understand. Our sales are high at the beginning of the fiscal year, but they eventually become brown around Q3..."

      Worker: "Uh...I guess this would be a bad time to mention that we're running low on bathroom supplies for the office..."

    5. Re:Too Late by geminidomino · · Score: 2, Funny

      You haven't seen how he treats Excel, have you? I think GP *IS* Ilparazo.

    6. Re:Too Late by Lurkey+Turkey · · Score: 2, Funny
      I start shipping my specially branded "Excel toilet paper" next week.

      I'm sure you are flushed with excitement!

    7. Re:Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Ilpalazzo - Il Palazzo, Excel and Hyatt are all hotels.

    8. Re:Too Late by epsalon · · Score: 1

      I start shipping my specially branded "Excel toilet paper" next week.

      So you'll make an Excel speadshit!

    9. Re:Too Late by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Then there's the translation into japanese to consider.

    10. Re:Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, was the rest of your post in Japanese? I didn't notice.

    11. Re:Too Late by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      No, silly AC, but given the character has a given name that is the "translation" (translocution? trans-something-or-other) which turns it into what I typed. The manga it comes from IS Japanese, after all.

  5. Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Since when isn't excel a "generic term"?

    1. Re:Uhhh by JPriest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When the "generic term" also happens to be referring to spreadsheets.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    2. Re:Uhhh by fireman+sam · · Score: 1

      When you are talking about a Microsoft product. More specifically when it is suffixed with 'ent'

      --
      it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
    3. Re:Uhhh by fishbot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sadly, this is the way language is. People soon start using proper nouns as nouns, as is the case with Hoover, Biro.

      The one that really irritates me is when people take a 'powerpoint' in to a meeting. IT'S A PRESENTATION! The bizarre thing in the last company I worked for is that they were never referred to as presentations, always as powerpoints, even though the presentation software was OpenOffice Impress!

      Still, at least we don't 'send an outlook'...

    4. Re:Uhhh by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      People soon start using proper nouns as nouns, as is the case with Hoover, Biro.

      It happened to the Walkman too - hardly anyone says 'personal stereo' - and it's happening to the iPod. In common usage, 'iPod' is beginning to refer to any hard-disk mp3 player. I've got an iHP-140, another guy I know has a Karma, and a lot of people have actual Apple machines, but 'iPod' is becoming a generic term for any of them.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    5. Re:Uhhh by mhotchin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because we *all* know that common words can't be used as trademarks! I mean, if that was allowed, then someone would do something really crazy, like name a computer company after something common, perhaps a fruit!

      "Orange Computer, Inc."

      Come on people, get with the program. Trademarks are for a specific field, all that is required is that the term not already have a well known meaning *in that field*.

      Until Excel (the spreadsheet) came along, the word 'excel' was not understood as the name of any particular piece of software. So, perfectly trademarkable.

    6. Re:Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there's a company called Orange Micro, which was originally an Apple reseller.

    7. Re:Uhhh by Secrity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This could be a Good thing. Companies can lose trademarks if they become part of common language. The Linoleum trademark was lost this way and Kleenex almost lost their trademark. An interesting situation is that in Canada, the name "Aspirin" is a tradmark and the common name is "ASA". In the US, the name "ASA" is a tradmark and the common name is "aspirin". I wonder if the trademark "Fridgidaire" could have been lost because at one time everybody was calling a refrigerator (reguardless of it's maker) a "frigidaire".

    8. Re:Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know Xerox is mortally afraid of this phenomenon, for obvious resons.

    9. Re:Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting list. Better than any I've googled.

      Could you xerox a copy for me so I can fedex it to my boss.

    10. Re:Uhhh by starnix · · Score: 1

      "'iPod' is beginning to refer to any hard-disk mp3 player. I've got an iHP-140, another guy I know has a Karma, and a lot of people have actual Apple machines, but 'iPod' is becoming a generic term for any of them."

      Ummm, No it's not....

      The term that's become generic is "MP3 Player" because whether it plays WMA's, OGG's, or ACC's it is still called an MP3 player. You did it yourself in the post. A more fitting term would be Digital audio player. But nothing I've seen or heard has shown me that 'Ipod' is becoming a generic term.

      I can't wait until the digital audio, digital video players come out. DV/DA player? Hmmm, maybe not....

    11. Re:Uhhh by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Hmm. Maybe it's a localised thing, but certainly people I know generally refer to the device I own as an iPod, even though it wasn't made by Apple.

      You're certainly quite right about mp3, though: that has certainly become a generic term for any digital compressed music. Perhaps it's the Fraunhofer Institute that should be worrying about its trademarks...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    12. Re:Uhhh by belmolis · · Score: 1

      I've had this happen when I wasn't even using presentation software, much less Powerpoint. I gave a talk last year at the AAAS meeting in Seattle. I just used a little shell script with a sequence of calls to xpdf and xv. (You should have seen the looks of confusion on many people in the audience as I booted up Linux with the projector on. They had never seen anything other than MS Windows and couldn't figure out what it was.) Several people afterward referred to my "powerpoint".

    13. Re:Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "ASA" is a trademark? Hmm. One obviously can't trademark "acetylsalycilic acid", and ASA is just an initialism of that - I'm surprised it's trademarkable.

    14. Re:Uhhh by sepluv · · Score: 1

      Since the existence of the word (because it does not refer to a specific field of products and is subjective).

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    15. Re:Uhhh by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      My favorite is when people use the word "Adobe" to refer to "Photoshop."

      "Oh yeah, I touched-up that image using Adobe."
      "Adobe what?"
      "Adobe. To touch-up images."
      "You mean Adobe Acrobat? Adobe Photoshop? Adobe Illustrator? Adobe ImageReady?"
      "No, the one that does images."

    16. Re:Uhhh by fishbot · · Score: 1

      Or when they use the word Photoshop to refer to any image manipulation software!

      "Yeah, I photoshopped that"
      "Oh yeah, what did you use?"
      "Paintshop Pro"
      "Oh"

  6. Hyundai Excel by arbi · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's worth noting that Hyundai made a car line called Excel back in 1985. I'm not sure which came first, the spreadsheet or the car.

    1. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which came first, the cock or the chicken?

    2. Re:Hyundai Excel by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Informative

      It doesn't matter, trademarks are only valid for the particular industry. It's domain names where there are problems with collisions.

      (By the way, they still make the Excel -- but they renamed it "Accent" in 1995)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do they make a car where you don't polish knobs in?

    4. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm not sure that car Excelled at anything.

    5. Re:Hyundai Excel by arbi · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that car Excelled at anything
      It Excelled in price at the time.

    6. Re:Hyundai Excel by ColdGrits · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Lotus made their Lotus Excel from 1982 to 1992, making that even older than your Hyundai :-) http://fp.arcnet.f9.co.uk/excel.htm

      Of course, neither the existence of the Lotus Excel nor the Hyundai Excel makes the blindest bit of difference to whether or not MS can trademark Excel the spreadsheet, because they are completely different industries - nobody is going to confuse the two...

      --
      People should not be afraid of their governments - Governments should be afraid of their people.
    7. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And I can't think of any car that would better represent the build quality, performance, and reliability of Microsoft's software in general.

      (It's cheap, I know, but so was the car)

    8. Re:Hyundai Excel by farmhick · · Score: 1

      No, the Lotus SmartSuite had a spreadsheet program named 123. And we were still buying it in the mid 90s in the military.

      --
      I have to stop wasting so much time reading Slashdot. It's interfering with my crystal meth addiction.
    9. Re:Hyundai Excel by arbi · · Score: 1

      You know it's funny that you mentioned the Lotus Excel (82-92) because when MS made Excel back in 1985 the #1 spreadsheet company at the time was called Lotus!

    10. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's a car and not a spreadsheet

    11. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmmm I could have sworn 123 was a spreadsheet. If it was a car then that explains why I had trouble with some of the formulae.

    12. Re:Hyundai Excel by arbi · · Score: 1

      No, the Lotus SmartSuite had a spreadsheet program named 123. And we were still buying it in the mid 90s in the military.

      Actually he was talking about the car.

      This Brief History of Spreadsheets might be of interest to other readers. It talks about Visicalc, Lotus 1-2-3, and MS Excel.

    13. Re:Hyundai Excel by nathanh · · Score: 1
      By the way, they still make the Excel -- but they renamed it "Accent" in 1995

      It's still officially named the Hyundai Excel in Australia.

    14. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That explains why they called their disk browser Explorer. Even Ford's high-end luxury Explorers were ez-break plastic pieces of shit.

    15. Re:Hyundai Excel by ColdGrits · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I did find that kinda amusing too :-)
      Glad I'm not the only one who thought it.

      --
      People should not be afraid of their governments - Governments should be afraid of their people.
    16. Re:Hyundai Excel by Richard+W.M.+Jones · · Score: 4, Funny

      (By the way, they still make the Excel -- but they renamed it "Accent" in 1995)

      <cheapshot>

      Because they didn't want the name associated with crashes?

      </cheapshot>

      Rich.

    17. Re:Hyundai Excel by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      LOL! Wow, somebody didn't diss Hyundai for once. Thanks!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    18. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've owned one of each (Excel and Accent) and they don't even come close to resembling each other. Did you find that info on a M$ site?

    19. Re:Hyundai Excel by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      No. I found it on Hyundaiperformance.com. They don't resemble each other because Hyundai is improving their quality so fast -- I have a 2003 Accent, and it's a better car than my dad's Chevy Astro, let alone an Excel!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    20. Re:Hyundai Excel by ksheff · · Score: 1

      I had an Excel and I still have a Mitsubishi Precis, which is the same car w/ a different name. They are great little cars that can take a lot of abuse.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    21. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, then it would be named Yugo. Excels were kick ass little cars.

    22. Re:Hyundai Excel by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know -- I have an Accent. But I've never heard of the Mitsubishi Precis. Did they sell it in the US?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    23. Re:Hyundai Excel by IIH · · Score: 1
      It doesn't matter, trademarks are only valid for the particular industry.

      Not always! Visa (The CC company) won a case against someone who were trying to introduce Visa condoms (A pun on visa being a "permit to enter")

      --
      Exigo spamos et dona ferentes
    24. Re:Hyundai Excel by sconeu · · Score: 1

      No, they were trying to lose the Rodney King association! :)

      I still want to know how he modified the thing, if he was going as fast as the cops said he was. The cops said that he was going 115. Back in '91, you were lucky if you could get an Excel to go 65 on the freeway!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    25. Re:Hyundai Excel by rbaf · · Score: 1
      It doesn't matter, trademarks are only valid for the particular industry.

      I challenge you to market any product, no matter what industry, under the name of Coca~Cola.

    26. Re:Hyundai Excel by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      At this point Coca-Cola makes more than just soda; they make* clothing and toys and wallpaper and fund concerts and run a museum and ten million other things, so I'd be hard pressed to find an industry where there isn't a product with "Coca~Cola(TM)" written on it.

      That aside, yes, I admit that the system goes to hell when the party holding the trade mark has that much power, even if Coca~Cola really did only make soda -- but my statement holds in principle!

      *"make" defined loosely here; technically they don't even make bottles of Coke -- only syrup.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    27. Re:Hyundai Excel by Vombatus · · Score: 1

      It's still officially named the Hyundai Excel in Australia.

      Not so... I think you will find it very difficult to walk into an Australian car showroom and purchase a new Hyundai Excel. You will, however, have no problem with a brand new Accent (since at least 2000, when I looked at purchasing one) Move along, nothing to see here

      --
      This sig is intentionally blank
    28. Re:Hyundai Excel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but they didn't ever formerly sell Yugos in my country (though Australia has a <100 car import tax break so some people managed to buy them, usually after left->right hand drive conversion) so the Excel got the whole 'cheapest car' rap during the time.

    29. Re:Hyundai Excel by rbaf · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with Cola-Cola printing their name on a mug or a towel for branding reasons. They're not in the mug/towel business I can tell you that, but of course they are in the business of branding their products any way they like it. When you see a towel with a big Coca-Cola logo, you don't think about towels or a company that makes/sells towels, you think about the most popular soft drink on the planet :-) A friend of mine collects mouse pads and I can tell you that nearly none of the companies he's got a mouse pad from have registered their trademark in the "mouse pad making" industry. The fact is, Coca-Cola trademarked their brand on every possible industry, and that's why you cannot build, say, networking hardware under the name Coca-Cola (and I'd be surprised if I see an ethernet card with the name Coca-Cola printed on it :-) Now, what Coca-Cola has done, not every company can afford, but you can file for a trademark on any industry in order to protect your brand, you're not limited to what you actually make/sell.

    30. Re:Hyundai Excel by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  7. standardf? by tpgp · · Score: 2, Funny
    I was going to comment on standardf - but:

    Excel has become a defacto standardf, having other soft bearing its name as a part of theirs is advertising.

    The rest of your comment makes no sense at all. Are you a robot?
    --
    My pics.
    1. Re:standardf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The rest of your comment makes no sense at all. Are you a robot?

      Why do you say that?

    2. Re:standardf? by eSims · · Score: 1

      Great... now Alice is posting to Slashdot... Might as well make her an Editor... we'd see less dupes! :-p

      --
      I .sig therefore I am!
    3. Re:standardf? by the+real+darkskye · · Score: 1

      Alice? ALICE? Who TF is Alice? - Smokey

      --
      Music is everybody's possession.
      It's only publishers who think that people own it.
      Fuck Beta
      ~John Lenno
    4. Re:standardf? by mapinguari · · Score: 1
    5. Re:standardf? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1
      Great... now Alice is posting to Slashdot... Might as well make her an Editor... we'd see less dupes! :-p

      I agree, Alice would be quite an improvement over the current Editor, Eliza, who just repeats everything.

    6. Re:standardf? by mirko · · Score: 1
      No sense ?
      Forgot your grammar lessons ?

      let's analyse the sentence, mmmkay ?
      1. Excel has become a defacto standard,

      2. having
        The fact there is
      3. other soft
      4. bearing its name as a part of theirs
        Which name contains the word "Excel"
      5. is advertising.
        makes it more famous.


      So, tell me how this was not making any sense ?
      Unless you meant to be pedantic, of course...
      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
  8. Trademarks are for usage by konekoniku · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not a lawyer, but IIRC trademarks do not cover words, but instead cover the specific usage of words, logos, or even (in a few rare cases). So the fact that "Word," "Office," or "Excel" are real words really don't have a bearing on the case, as long as Microsoft can demonstrate to the court's satisfaction that those terms in relation to computer software are generally associated with Microsoft's products (which, in my opinion, would be a true assertion).

    1. Re:Trademarks are for usage by gspr · · Score: 1

      Since a significant portion of the world's computers are used for word processing and other office usage, I don't see how these words are any less general and common in the computer world than in the rest of the world.

    2. Re:Trademarks are for usage by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's just like the 800 pound gorilla to take anything it wants, like the common name "windows" that was used to describe GUIs when microsoft was only selling DOS.

      Knowing their track record, expect them to deploy more mediocre products with names like "air" "rock" "sky" and bolt them onto their operating system so everyone will have to have a copy.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    3. Re:Trademarks are for usage by konekoniku · · Score: 1

      But if someone tells you to type this up in Word, I'm sure you'd have a pretty good idea what they mean.

    4. Re:Trademarks are for usage by grd000 · · Score: 1

      Do you think that had Microsoft Bob been successful, they would have tried to trademark it as well? -G

    5. Re:Trademarks are for usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sure, I would go immediately to my WORD processor.

      which could be WordPerfect, or even OpenOffice Writer. As another poster pointed out, around his office presentations are called "PowerPoints" even though they only use OpenOffice Impress to create/display them.

      I think if anything, you may have shown that the term 'Word' has become generic in the same way Kleenex or Xerox has.

      rho

    6. Re:Trademarks are for usage by konekoniku · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but if "Bob" had somehow (god forbid) become synonymous, in the semi-intelligent software world, with Microsoft's creation, then they would have had the right to trademark it.

    7. Re:Trademarks are for usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wordperfect has used the term "office" for years. On my computer, wordperfect created a directory "office"; Microsoft created a directory (in the way bad old days of W95) as "MSOffice".

    8. Re:Trademarks are for usage by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      You mean like "Lunar" and "Aero".

    9. Re:Trademarks are for usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well in the case of "word" and "office" those are pretty generic terms...

      WordPerfect, WordStar, AbiWord...

      StarOffice, OpenOffice, KOffice...

    10. Re:Trademarks are for usage by Examancer2 · · Score: 1

      Although it could be argued that the terms 'office' and 'word', in relation to a computer, are typically interpretted as meaning microsoft's productivity software, it really doesn't matter because they aren't even trying to trademark those words... they are registering an existing trademark for Excel and trying to enforce it against TurboExcel.

      Its virtually impossible to argue that the word "Excel" in relation to productivity software means anything other than Microsoft Excel. They will have no problem registering the trademark. The real question is whether or not Savvysoft should be allowed to continue distrubuting their spreadsheet conversion tool under the name TurboExcel. Some would argue that they do not infringe on the trademark because they are not in direct competition with Excel. TurboExcel is a conversion tool, not a spreadsheet program. Of course others argue that even though TurboExcel might not be competing directly with Excel, it is unfairly biggybacking on the coat-tails of Microsoft's marketing muscle by using the word Excel in the name of the product. It will be an interesting outcome.

    11. Re:Trademarks are for usage by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      They could have and probably were going to trademark it regardless. The problem for a trademark is when a trademark becomes synonymous with *every* product of that type and then gets taken away.

    12. Re:Trademarks are for usage by Catiline · · Score: 1
      Word up, my man! Yo-yo, you can't just astroturf a trademark into common usage!

      I mean, nobody has trademarks on allen wrenches or tarmac, Spandex, or Polaroid....

  9. Someone should check . . . by Aurelfell · · Score: 2, Funny

    . . . if they ever registered 'Microsoft'.

    1. Re:Someone should check . . . by Sykil · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft isn't a trademark; it's the company. Windows, however, is a trademark of Microsoft.

    2. Re:Someone should check . . . by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I recall reading in the DirectX SDK documentation that Natural® is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation. A quick search told me that this trademark notice was the only occurrence of the word `Natural' in the entire document.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Someone should check . . . by MxTxL · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, Microsoft is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation.

    4. Re:Someone should check . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So to whom is "Microsoft Corporation" registered to?

    5. Re:Someone should check . . . by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      Isn't Micro Soft that japanese company that invented the SHIFT-JIS coding used for japanese text?

  10. A few more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    ExCel

    excelairways

    excelsports

    blackexcel

    Excel Canada

    Excel Software

    Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 5.2).

    1. Re:A few more... by chickens · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not forgetting Excel Saga...

      Hail Ilpalazzo!

  11. Have a look at the trademark list... by Biomechanical · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And tell me that's not a case of a egotistical marketing think-tank.
    [Link from news.com.com article] http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.m icrosoft.com%2Flibrary%2Ftoolbar%2F3.0%2Ftrademark s%2Fen-us.mspx&siteId=3&oId=2100-1012-5449348&ontI d=7343&lop=nl.ex

    Second on the list: Active Accessibility.

    How does Active Accessibility become a trademark? It's two common english words that could be used to describe anything.

    My stairs have Active Accessibility. My bicycle has Active Accessibility. My television has Active Accessibility.

    I can understand the need for a business to have recognisable trademarks. You don't want people to be chatting and one person says,

    `I use Dogs Bollocks 2002. It's the best.'

    And the other person thinks he's talking about a separate competitors product with the same name.

    What I don't understand though is this apparent need companies have to register plain english (or whatever their native tongue is) words without any sort of company recognition built into the trademark.

    Would it not be better to have, `MS Active Accessibility' instead of plain `Active Accessibility' simply for the fact that it would possibly negate any confusion over whether I mean Microsoft's Active Accessibility or my stair's Active Accessibility?

    And what about the poor bugger named Tex Murphy? Does he get into trouble any time his name comes up on the `Net along with something to do with games?

    --
    His name is Robert Paulsen...
    1. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or the girl Nina?

    2. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. When someone says to you "Active Accessibility" is it meaningless for the most part. That becomes a mark when someone invests in attaching the word or phrase to their product or service. What does Apple mean? A piece of fruit? Or do you associate with computers?

    3. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by MMMDI · · Score: 2, Funny

      Would it not be better to have, `MS Active Accessibility' instead of plain `Active Accessibility' simply for the fact that it would possibly negate any confusion over whether I mean Microsoft's Active Accessibility or my stair's Active Accessibility?

      MS Active Accessibility? Are you referring to MicroSoft Active Accessibility, or My Stair's Active Accessibility?

    4. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by Biomechanical · · Score: 1

      MS Active Accessibility? Are you referring to MicroSoft Active Accessibility, or My Stair's Active Accessibility?

      {Chuckle} Didn't notice that when I was writing. :)

      --
      His name is Robert Paulsen...
    5. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by tirnacopu · · Score: 1

      Well, actually I would be delighted to pop in a conversation with something like "I'm a former MS AA"..

    6. Re:Have a look at the trademark list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does Active Accessibility become a trademark? It's two common english words that could be used to describe anything.

      My stairs have Active Accessibility. My bicycle has Active Accessibility. My television has Active Accessibility.


      What does that mean? What is "Active Accessibility" in the context of a bicycle? You would never use the phrase in normal conversation, therefore it is exactly the sort of thing that's ideal for trademarking.

  12. Perhaps they should start . . . by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...their forum-shopping in korea?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  13. The character 'e' by gCGBD · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I recall reading somewhere a couple of years ago (here on slashdot, I think) that Microsoft had trademarked the lower case letter 'e' however.

    --

    O=='=++
    1. Re:The character 'e' by Terri416 · · Score: 1

      I think you're referring to the E Technologies Associates -v- IBM case.

    2. Re:The character 'e' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stupid thing is that the 'e' looks almost exactly like the old Enix (now Square Enix) logo. Look at any of their games from 1995-96 to see it, such as Illusion of Gaia or Terranigma.

    3. Re:The character 'e' by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      Brilliant. And then they sued Nethack Devteam for associating blue "e" with slowdown, general annoyance, and the fact that it can be destroyed from distance. The Devteam won, because it had been in use long before Internet Explorer was conceived, and in recent times, it was also considered parody.

      Or something.

    4. Re:The character 'e' by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Intel holds a trademark for the letter "i".

      http://www.rcollins.org/Trademarks/

    5. Re:The character 'e' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel holds a trademark for the letter "i".

      Why aren't they sueing Apple, then?

  14. And if so, what are your powers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you use them for good or for awesome?

  15. This isn't right.... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...I remember that someone else had that trademark "Excel" back then and that's why it was always "Microsoft Excel" never just "Excel." It wasn't that MS was sloppy; someone already had it.

    1. Re:This isn't right.... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Then perhaps the other company has since lost it, and that's why MS are applying for it now?

    2. Re:This isn't right.... by bob+beta · · Score: 1

      Who was it that had the trademark 'Excel'?

      Can you remember?

      If you can't, it wasn't a very defendable trademark, was it?

    3. Re:This isn't right.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Manufacturer's Hanover Bank had a computer banking application called Excel.

    4. Re:This isn't right.... by brix · · Score: 1

      I know for sure that was the case with Microsoft Word, since "Samna Word" predated it by several years. Samna Corporation went on to create Ami Pro, which Lotus purchased in 1991. Then Lotus renamed Ami Pro to "Word Pro" in 1995 around the same time as IBM purchased them (the name change was already established before the buyout though).

      Back then, the conventional wisdom was that you couldn't trademark common-use terms, so the trademarks were cited (if not registered) on "Samna Word" and "Microsoft Word." Of course, that conventional wisdom went out the door when Microsoft trademarked and enforced the generic term "Windows."

    5. Re:This isn't right.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember noticing the conflict with "Excel" the telecommunications firm that used Multi-Level Marketing and which I had a friend who resold their long distance services. Dunno which came first of course, and the domain (software vs telcom services) are arguably distinct.

  16. No worries! Problem solved! by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Time to rename Pathetic Writer to "Excel Lingo" and one of the TuxRacer clones to "Excel Racer". And so on.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  17. I'd be careful... by spdt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft has been doing that for 19 years.

    1. Re:I'd be careful... by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      19 years?

      I don't recall Excel in like.... !

    2. Re:I'd be careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it came out on the Mac first.

    3. Re:I'd be careful... by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and it comes with shit already attached to it.

  18. Sending an 'outlook' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ravens (group in sets of four, three together, one at altitude) always send an outlook (syn. lookout). 'Tomorrow you can expect cooling, clearing weather as a the earlier mentioned cold fromt continued to move South.' There, I have just sent an outlook to all reading this.

  19. Magic 8 ball says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Still, at least we don't 'send an outlook'...


    My Magic-8 ball says "Outlook not good"!

  20. Don't worry /. ... by unixbugs · · Score: 0

    theyll be going through a shift change in Redmond soon, so we should have a good posting here on this one.

    What has this world come to? I feel like I cant speak without getting sued for it, but Im going to anyway.

    Excel Excel Excel, Hyundai Excel, Novell Excel, Microsoft Word Excel, The word "Excel", Excel-linux, Excel-latte, Excel-lente, Excel the Smell, Excel-Perfect, The Excel Shell, I Excel, You Excel, We all Sell Out for Excel.

    Now the word should be completely meaningless. Makes me wonder how a judge can actually sit there with their eyes open in a case like this.

    --
    You are about to give someone a piece of your mind, something which you can ill afford...
    1. Re:Don't worry /. ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      simple, the amount of money you BRIBE the judge with is directly related to the way he favor's your case.

      MS has lots of money and will help the judge in his campain funding next term if they get a good outcome.

      typical business, and remember... Judges were lawyers so they are certianly not honerable.

    2. Re:Don't worry /. ... by Examancer2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm all for good conspiracy theories, but this one is a bit lofty....

      First, they wouldn't just be bribing one judge... Large cases like this are generally tossed back and forth between a number of local and national courts if a settlement isn't reached before the appeals process begins. Thats a lot of judges, plus all the guys at the trademark office.

      Second, established judges usually don't do all that much campaigning. The run for retention, not against other possible judges, and their reelection usually depends upon the opinions of the laywers who have tried cases before them. This is known as a bar retention percentage. Making poor decisions (whether because of money or not) would greatly deminish a judges chance at retention, and it would be very hard for any amount of money to make up for this.

      Third, many many laywers, possibly even most of them, are very honorable. (examples... public defenders, many defense attornies, many prosecutors, the cabal of laywers at EFF and other public interest groups) What is not honorable is some of the arguments some laywers are forced to make as part of their job. Blame the problems on the perpetrators, not the laywers defending them.

      The root of the problem is that if you throw enough money and laywers at a case, even if they are on the side that may be "evil" in the eyes of the public, they will be able to come up with some pretty convincing arguments. If the other side doesn't have enough laywers and money to refute these arguments there isn't much a judge can do. Plus, on the issue of Excel being a trademark, its pretty hard to argue against microsoft on this one. If you say "Excel" in relation to a computer to anyone in the world (who is at least a little familiar with computers) they will know exactly what you are talking about. TurboExcel, being a spreadsheet related utility, may in fact be infriging on this trademark... but we'll have to see how that case turns out.

      One last thing... I do think the fact that the DoJ stopped pursuing microsoft right after Bush came into office is rather fishy... but thats the Prez and attorney general's call (John Ashcroft), not any judges.

  21. Which raises the question by Moth7 · · Score: 1

    Is the natural logarithm a legal entity and can it be sued? ;-)

    1. Re:Which raises the question by sepluv · · Score: 1

      It can be patented anyway and as Microsoft has patented zeroes and ones, all your base are belong to Microsoft (quite literally) ;-) .

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  22. Actually it was IBM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:Actually it was IBM... by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      OK, let's take a step way back a minute. All the "e" business started with the killer app, e-mail, which excelled at bringing access to people's words in locations where powerpoints were available. The "e" in e-mail stands for electronic.

      Now, some geeks, myself included, will no doubt look at the old 486 backup DNS box in the corner struggling valiantly to serve one DNS hit an hour and may well see in their mind's eye an octogenarian hamster on its wheel plodding along to keep the disk turning, but apart from this I have yet to *ever* see a mechanical server. The whole damned issue is moot IMHO.

      The world has gone crazy over what bits of one's original right to speak or use any word now belongs to corporations. Soon, we'll have to invent a new language just to communicate without getting sued.

      Joking apart, this seems like the new land-grab. Perhaps I should register hello as a trademark. No, wait, some stupid magazine beat me to it...

      Hello (TM) world!

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  23. ... and don't forget by server_wench · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about Access?

    I used to sit at a help desk. One morning someone called and said they were having a problem with Microsoft Excess.

    My answer? "Don't we all?"

    PS - It did turn out to be an Excel question.

  24. Half truths in the story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    using the mark openly and conspicuously with TurboExcel for some time

    Microsoft filed in May. SavvySoft introduced TurboExcel in June. So, yes, it has been "openly and conspicuously" using the Excel brand "for some time", like the story post claims.

    But the gutless faggot who wrote the article summary neglected to mention that "some time" really means one month AFTER Microsoft filed trademark.

    Honestly, the story summary is just pure heat. Would you trust anything the author of this post has to say? I sure wouldn't. It's 100% pure bullshit propaganda.

    Before you mod me down, realize that I'm not saying that Microsoft should be awarded a trademark for Excel. (I think it's too general a term, plus they waited 19 years, blah blah blah.) What I am saying, however, is that the story poster sucks large, hairy donkey balls for being such a dick wad. That's a subtle difference, you see.

    1. Re:Half truths in the story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey this is slashdot, you just described all the /. editors and about 80% of the story submitters.

      Or maybe the editors just accept the sucky submissions.

      Whatever, you get the idea.

    2. Re:Half truths in the story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You may have a point, but you should be modded down for your language.

      It's not funny, and it does not make you look bigger. Just quit the cursing all right?

      Thanks.

    3. Re:Half truths in the story? by back_pages · · Score: 1
      realize that I'm not saying that Microsoft should be awarded a trademark for Excel. (I think it's too general a term, plus they waited 19 years, blah blah blah.)

      Uh, alright. While your opinion is that Microsoft shouldn't get a trademark for the reasons you've listed, my understanding is that the law holds an opinion quite different from yours. I know, I know, that's an insignificant detail around here, but it is peculiar that you would trash the author for failing to point out the release date of TurboExcel while completely steamrolling the quaint notions of law and how a trademark is actually issued.

      But hey, what do I know. I'm just observing.

  25. RTFA Dude.... by ayjay29 · · Score: 1

    "In a snafu even better than forgetting to renew the Hotmail.com domain,"

    Links to the stroy:

    "Microsoft was busy covering up an almighty cock-up last night after forgetting to renew its hotmail.co.uk domain name."

    --
    Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
    1. Re:RTFA Dude.... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      I think the original article was referring to the incident of 1999 where Microsoft forgot to renew the registration of passport.com domain, which obviously also made hotmail.com inaccessible.

      Some Slashdotter then paid the domain renewal and soon the site was back up =)

  26. Microsoft is correct on this, however by rfc1394 · · Score: 4, Informative

    While some countries have a rule that ownership of a mark comes only by registration, in the U.S. at least, ownership comes only by use. (There are limited exceptions for registration prior to use.) Note that my discussion here only deals with Federal registration, each state has state trademark registration with their own rules which generally are similar.

    A party that uses a unique word, device (an image or picture), phrase, sound or color exclusively to identify specific goods or services has the right to exclusively use that mark whether or not they register it. If the mark is truly distinctive they can sue others who use the same or deceptively similar marks even if they do not register the mark.

    There are generally two classes of marks, strong marks and weak marks. Strong marks are words that are created and symbols that are so obviously tied to the issuer that even use in an unrelated field can be stopped, such as if someone other than the actual owner started to sell vacuum cleaners under the name Kodak, or sold computer disks under the name Exxon.

    Weak marks are marks that generally only protect the product as used by its owner, and not for other goods. The term 'Acme' is a very weak mark, and if someone else was using the same mark unless it is on identical goods or services there are no grounds to go after someone else using even the identical mark. Which is why the people making shirts and the people making staples can both use the term 'Arrow' and neither is infringing on the other.

    Most trademarks and servicemarks have varying degrees of being strong or weak depending on how well the mark has been policed, that is, the owner has made an effort to stop others from using the same mark either to refer to the product regardless of the manufacturer ("generic"). The terms 'aspirin', 'escalator', 'laundromat' and 'celophane' lost trademark status because of the manufacturer's failure to adequately police the mark against people using it as a generic term for the product in question. (Note that 'Aspirin' is still a trademark of Bayer in some other countries for salycilic acid.)

    Ownership of a mark comes through use and one has the right to stop use of a deceptively similar mark on the same goods or services if the mark is not a weak mark. If the mark is extremely strong, as I indicated, it can even protect against use for other products and services as well. But ownership comes through use of a mark irregardless of registration.

    Registration of a mark grants certain additional benefits such as presumption of validity and notice to others (since registered marks are published in the Trademark Register.) Once a mark has been registered continuously for five years it can acquire incontestible status.

    The fact that MS has failed to register the mark 'Excel' for many years does not in any way weaken any rights they may have in the mark nor does it excuse anyone else's misuse of the mark. What does weaken their rights or excuse others use is the failure by Microsoft to police their mark and stop any known use of the same or deceptively similar marks to theirs.

    The issue is also likelihood of confusion. Unless the general customer who would buy Excel might be confused into thinking TurboExcel was produced by the same company, it doesn't matter how much MS complains or doesn't like it, there is no misuse and Microsoft has no grounds to stop them. M$ would be better off doing what it did to Lindows and pay this company to change the name unless it knows the company can't afford or won't continue to defend the name, then it should probably engage in as much protracted legislation as possible.

    --
    The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
    1. Re:Microsoft is correct on this, however by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The terms 'aspirin', 'escalator', 'laundromat' and 'celophane' lost trademark status because of the manufacturer's failure to adequately police the mark against people using it as a generic term for the product in question. (Note that 'Aspirin' is still a trademark of Bayer in some other countries for salycilic acid.)

      Interesting thing about Bayer's trademark for Aspirin: they were forced to give it up to France Britain, Russia, and the US as part of the reparations stipulated in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War I. So it wasn't really lack of enforcement that lost them the trademark, it was losing a war.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  27. Trademarks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't savvysoft just get TurboExcel as a registered trademark? Doesn't Borland's history of using Turbo* act as a precident?

  28. Gateway.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Gateway' was originally called 'Gateway2000'. Somewhere around the year 2000, they decided that '2000' was out of date, so they started pounding the ISP that owned gateway.com with frivilous lawsuits until they gave up the domain.

  29. Revised dictionary entry... by Qool · · Score: 1
    excel
    • v. be exceptionally good at an activity or subject.
    • TRADEMARK. spreadsheet application, a part of the MS Office suite. All occurences of this word are now the sole property of Microsoft. Oh wait...
    Other revisions to follow: word, office, window, notepad, horn (don't ask)...
  30. How close does it need to be? by stwrtpj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's a question for anyone out there with any knowledge in this area: how close does a name need to be to a trademark to constitute infingement? Here in Colorado, the primary electrical utility company for much of the state is Xcel Energy. "Xcel" is not spelled the same, but does the fact that it sounds exactly alike and is only one letter off mean anything from the perspective of the law? Does it mean anything that it's a totally different industry (and hence little chance it would be confused with a Microsoft product)?

    --
    Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
    1. Re:How close does it need to be? by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it does matter that they are in a different industry (category).

    2. Re:How close does it need to be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its judged by the "reasonable person" standard. Would a reasonable person confuse Xcel (Enery) with (Microsoft) Excel? Probably not.

    3. Re:How close does it need to be? by ikkonoishi · · Score: 1

      Excel = Apple
      TurboExcel = Apple
      Xcel Energy = Orange

      You were correct in thinking that the industry matters.

    4. Re:How close does it need to be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does? Then explain why Mr. Uzi Nissan couldn't use http://www.nissan.com/ to house his computer business' online presence.

  31. Not ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    find an ignorant judge

    kickbacks come to mind...

    twoslice

  32. What's the big deal? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't see what the big deal is. Why is MS even bothering? Nobody's going to confuse "Turbo Excel" with "Microsoft Excel" - nobody that *uses* Office or Windows, anyway.

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    1. Re:What's the big deal? by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1

      They have armies of lawyers sitting around the offices. Their job is making life hell for the competition -- any competition. Sending out a C&D letter is riskfree. Best possible result: competition decides to change the name, which costs them time and money. Worst possible result: competition laughs it off, and you can decide whether or not to take further steps later.

    2. Re:What's the big deal? by nacturation · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't see what the big deal is. Why is MS even bothering? Nobody's going to confuse "Turbo Excel" with "Microsoft Excel" - nobody that *uses* Office or Windows, anyway.

      The big deal is that if they don't enforce their trademark, they could lose it. Just like how aspirin is now a generic term in the US but a trademark everywhere else. If that were to happen, anyone could start calling their spreadsheet software Excel.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:What's the big deal? by smash · · Score: 1
      The big deal is that if they don't enforce their trademark, they could lose it. Just like how aspirin is now a generic term in the US but a trademark everywhere else. If that were to happen, anyone could start calling their spreadsheet software Excel.
      However, as per the article, they don't actually own the trademark, so there's no way to lose it anyway.

      People have been able to call their spreadsheet "Excel" for 19 years already :D

      smash.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    4. Re:What's the big deal? by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      More importantly, I believe they've already *lost* the trademark in the public view. In contrast to the Kleenex company wants you to refer to their product as Kleenex brand tissues, and Lego would prefer you to know their major product as Lego brand building blocks (or some variationt here of), Microsoft has never bothered pointing out that Excel is a spreadsheet package of some form. Why does it matter? Well, I do customer support and people using Lotus 1-2-3 refer to it as their "Lotus Excel" program, because "Excel" means "Spreadsheet" to them. Microsoft must be thrilled, except that if "Excel" is a generic word for a product, it can't be trademarked.

      Oops.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  33. First hand experience with trademarks is painful by amichalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can say from first hand experience that trademark issues are so painful you will wish you were dead.

    I just left a company that was launching a new product. Marketing had me investigate the availability of several domain names. I gave thema report of what was available. Weeks later, they told me they had registered a couple trademarks that corresponded with a domain and would I register the domain name. Well what do you know, the domain was now registered by someone else. (This became my fault.)

    We sued the company for trademark infringement since we owned the trademark.

    Long story short, we spend a year and thousands of dollars just to eventually drop the case and go with a different URL.

    Trademarks are hell.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  34. Wait... by torstenvl · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't this make the Excel trademark invalid, because of prior art? I know prior art is usually a patent issue, but it seems like it would apply to trademarks too -- if a smaller company's business also depends on a brand that would have been a trademark violation, then by enforcing the trademark you are in effect actively doing what trademarks are supposed to passively stop. If it is invalid, someone should hurry up and go make a 'Word' and 'Office' -- though 'Office' for an office suite and 'Word' for a word processor seem too generic to be granted trademark for them in the first place, and even if trademarks were granted for those names I doubt that any judge would uphold them.

  35. Gateway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is Gateway. I'd like to see you try to start selling your own Gateway branded computers, though.

    Only if you want your sales to plummet and everyone to ridicule your product.

  36. Retard /. Law Commentators by smack.addict · · Score: 3, Informative

    Look at all the retards commenting on trademark law.

    Your mark is a trademark as long as you treat it as a trademark. You don't need to register it, but registering it enables you certain powers.

    The only problems Microsoft has are
    a) with the generic nature of the term Excel
    b) that they had not sent cease and desist letters earlier

    Unlike copyright, failure to enforce a trademark is the same as giving up a trademark.

    Unlike patent law, prior existence of other examples does not itself render the mark invalid.

    1. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by SecretSqaure · · Score: 1

      Looks like they forgot to put the postage on a *lot* of cease and desist letters. Go here: http://www.ozgrid.com/Services/ExcelAdd-insPage.ht m (there's a page 2 and 3, as well) to see a slew of spreadsheet products from lots of different companies with Excel or XL in their name. And then check out Microsoft's own site: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/marketplace/defa ult.aspx under "Analysis Tools" to see no less than 15 different products from other companies with Excel in their name. Microsoft actually encourages you to get these other products by advertising them on their site. Seems like a pretty big problem to me.

    2. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by SecretSqaure · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Looks like they forgot to put the postage on a *lot* of cease and desist letters. Go here: http://www.ozgrid.com/Services/ExcelAdd-insPage.ht m (there's a page 2 and 3, as well) to see a slew of spreadsheet products from lots of different companies with Excel or XL in their name. And then check out Microsoft's own site: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/marketplace/defa ult.aspx under "Analysis Tools" to see no less than 15 different products from other companies with Excel in their name. Microsoft actually encourages you to get these other products by advertising them on their site. Seems like a pretty big problem to me.

    3. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by theLOUDroom · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Unlike patent law, prior existence of other examples does not itself render the mark invalid.

      Actually it does.

      If a term is already being used to describe something you can't suddenly claim it to be your trademark.

      For instance, you can't decide you want to make Beer (tm) beer.
      If someone can show examples of where your trademark was already an industry standard term for the product/service/whatever you stand an extremely good chance of losing it.

      This is why Microsoft settled with Lindows.
      If they had let the case continue, they stood a very good chance of losing since "Windows" was already common computer terminology.

      Although the terminology used is not identical, both patents and trademark require "uniqueness". You can't just claim rights to something that wasn't your idea.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    4. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by smack.addict · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are not at all talking about the same thing. "Prior art" in patent law automatically does a blow to your patent (assuming it is the same thing).

      The existence of someone else using your trademark before you is not in itself problematic for a trademark holder.

      It depends on the context of the so-called "prior art", including industry and scope of exposure.

      Trademark law does not require uniqueness.

    5. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      "You are not at all talking about the same thing. "Prior art" in patent law automatically does a blow to your patent (assuming it is the same thing)."

      For certain values of "automatically", which could include decades of litigation and millions of dollars.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    6. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by theLOUDroom · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are not at all talking about the same thing.

      Legally, they're called differnet things but practially, it's the same concept:
      You can't claim exclusive rights to something you didn't create.

      If you want to patent the use of technique X in field Y, you better be the first person to use it.
      If you want to trademark word X in field Y, there better not be anyone else using it.

      "Prior art" in patent law automatically does a blow to your patent (assuming it is the same thing).

      In the same sense that the common useage of a term can blow your trademark.

      Trademark law does not require uniqueness.

      It does WITHIN CONSTRAINTS just like patent law.
      If your trademark isn't unique when you pick it's then your trademark itself becomes a deliberate attempt to confuse the consumer, they very thing trademark law is supposed to prevent.

      You don't have to be the absolute first person to use every concept in your patent, nor do you have to be the first to use your trademark, but it DOES have to be unique. If someone else is using "your" trademark before you, in a reasonably similar field, the court is not going to protect it.
      Try starting a company called "Harley Davidson Motorcycles" for example.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    7. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by smack.addict · · Score: 1
      If you want to patent the use of technique X in field Y, you better be the first person to use it. If you want to trademark word X in field Y, there better not be anyone else using it.

      The key difference being that in patent law, there is no "in field Y" clause.

    8. Re:Retard /. Law Commentators by smack.addict · · Score: 1

      Oh, yeah.

      And for trademark, it is word X in field Y in region Z.

  37. Re: That weird 'o' by kawauso-kun · · Score: 1

    Maybe you're thinking of that weird chunked-out 'o'?

  38. Your tax dollars at useful work. by abb3w · · Score: 1
    Who was it that had the trademark 'Excel'?

    The US Patent and Trademark Office maintains searchable databases of both patents and trademarks. The earliest Excel I see is from 1925, serial number 71215931, a footware trademark owned by BF Goodrich. There's another (72419485) dating from 1972 in current use for "CHAINS AND MORE SPECIFICALLY ROLLER CHAINS" by what seems to be the Jeffery Chain corporation. Around the time that M$ was starting to put together their cute-and-fuzzy little office suite, Hyundai (aka Hyunda) were using Excel (73511599) as the name for a car model.

    There's only so many phoneme combinations to go around; a certain amount of overlap is necessary. You'd have to ask a lawyer -- and specifically, a trademark specialist -- to find out if the theory that the failure to register for trademark protection this long results in abandonment of enforcement rights.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  39. Someone should check URLs... by abb3w · · Score: 1

    FWIW, USPTO.gov search sessions expire, so the given link is broken. The earliest "Microsoft" trademark is serial number 73236080.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  40. you should have registered every doman you present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    (This became my fault)

    It was your fault. If the domain names were open, you should have registered them for one year even if you didn't need them. If the name was good enough to waste management's time with, you should have registered it. The meeting times along dwarf the cost of the domain names. You were being penny pincher, pound foolish.

  41. Excel - noun - To do or be better than; surpass. by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1
    Since some people seem to be missing the point about it being a proper word :).

    I guess that's MS Marketing dollars at work

  42. Wait, you know the author is gay? by eldalonde · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why do people have to use the word fag or faggot? No matter what you think of homosexuality you shouldn't use offensive terms like that to describe it (or worse in this case not even describing it but simply using the term to indicate stupidity). It's just as bad as racism and offensive racist words.

    1. Re:Wait, you know the author is gay? by multipartmixed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Personally, I thought he meant to imply that the author was a dumb as a bundle of sticks.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    2. Re:Wait, you know the author is gay? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      Use of the words "fag" "faggot" "queer" "nigger" etc. are stupid flags, they make it much easier to identify posts written by stupid people without having to go back and read their post history to realize they are complete morons.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    3. Re:Wait, you know the author is gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad that stupid person's post was more intelligent and insightful than your's will ever be.

    4. Re:Wait, you know the author is gay? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Too bad that stupid person's post was more intelligent and insightful than your's will ever be.

      If you want to insult the intelligence of the person you're replying to, learn how to use apostrophes correctly first.

  43. iPod is successful because its a generic name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People hear "iPod" in the media 50 times more often than the name of any other MP3 player due to Apple's massive marketing efforts. It's a much catchier name than any other MP3 player.

    So people go to the store and ask for an "iPod" when they want an MP3 Player.

    iPod is the leader in MP3 player sales are not due to its design, technological simplicity, etc. Those are all great of course, but people buy iPod because "iPod" is the only name they can remember for "MP3 Player" when they get to the store.

  44. Aspirin = salicylic acid? by robw810 · · Score: 1

    Actually, aspirin is acetylsalicylic acid, not just salicylic acid...

    1. Re:Aspirin = salicylic acid? by KennethE · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's from spirea, the latin name for one of the plants from witch spirea acid i extracted.
      Later it was found out that spirea acid was in fact identical to salicylic acid wich was extracted from various trees in the salix family.

  45. Re:Excel - noun - To do or be better than; surpass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since some people seem to be missing the point about it being a proper word :).

    What point? The fact that it's a "proper word" is completely irrelevant, as the word in question is not directly connected to any generic description of the product.

  46. Re:Excel is a real word too... and a chewing gum! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Excel-erate your breath

    Wouldn't Wrigley (I think) have something to say about this, or is there no context because chewing gum and computers are not related?

  47. Re:Someone should check URLs... by jtmas83 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I clicked on the link, saw the word "expired" and about fainted thinking that the "Microsoft" trademark expired.

  48. Re:Excel - noun - To do or be better than; surpass by sepluv · · Score: 1

    and some people seem to troll...

    --
    Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
    [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  49. So what about Kerfuffle? by Excen · · Score: 0

    Because you know Dubya's gonna wreck Kerfuffle. . .

    --
    "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
  50. Re:you should have registered every doman you pres by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love your insight into this situation and applaud your quick thinking as to the right course of action. I can tell just from your post that you know exactly what to do in every situation and would never allow any mistakes to occur. Next time I need to place blame I will consult with you to determine who acted wrongly.

  51. Excel Communications by Fussen · · Score: 1

    I have a friend who "realized" the power of Excel Communications. For those of you who don't know about this yet, Excel Com is one of those pseudo-pyramid systems that somehow stays legal. The whole cult cheering business system freaked me out.. but I had always wondered why Microsoft wasn't chasing these weirdos down with a firestick.

    Heh now I know why.

    Excelerate your breath.

  52. And there I was thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Microsoft' was a description of Bill Gates' little bill...

  53. kerfuffle? by Sarcastic+Assassin · · Score: 1

    Kerfuffle? Someone's been watching too much Whose Line is it Anyway.

  54. And Yet I'm Compelled to Ask by ilyanep · · Score: 1

    horn? MS Horn -- eh...

    --
    ~Ilyanep
    To get message, take amount of carrier pigeons at each stage mod 2. Then decode binary.
  55. Do you have random power interruptions? by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    If you don't have at least one power failure every two weeks, then there is no way Xcel Energy is going to be confused for a Microsoft product...

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  56. Re:First hand experience with trademarks is painfu by guard952 · · Score: 1

    My company bought out hundreds (or thousands) of urls just to avoid that possibility before deciding which one to go for

  57. Can I register my name as a trademark? by hadaso · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > ... lack of a vigorous defense of a registered trademark is enough
    > to lose it, much less not registering it in the first place.

    I wonder to what extent having my name registered in my passport and other official documents (birth certificate etc.) can be considered a defence for my using it for identification or network presence. Can I register my own name as a trademark for the purpose of network presence? E.G. for protecting my personal domain if and when some company decides to use it in their product? Or in case some company I don't know about already uses it? I would really like to know if anyone tried something of this sort, or if this makes legal sense at all. Do rich corporations have an advantage over individuals in using names?

    The cited story (http://news.com.com/Microsoft+registers+trademark --19+years+late/2100-1012_3-5449348.html?tag=nefd. top) mentions the case of MikeRoweSoft.com, formerly owned by teenager Mike Rowe, who managed to negotiate a bit more than the $10 bucks reimbursement offered by MicroSoft for the domain. Now perhaps Mike Rowe's parents should have known better when registering the name Mike Rowe in their son's birth certificate in the early 90's or late 80's, as MicroSoft was already a well known name, and they perhaps should have taken into account the possibility that said son would perhaps one day decide to go into the software business (and what if Mike Rowe decided to sell facial tissue online? Would MicroSoft have a case then. Just kidding...)

    Uzi Nissan's last name is a common Hebrew last name, derived from the name of the month in the Hebrew calendar, probably dating more than 3000 years. He registered the domain Nissan.com for use with his comuter related business around 1995, when the internet was still focused around computers, and long before Nissan motors showed any interest in network presence. Nissan Motors didn't manage to get the domain. But they did manage to deprive Uzi Nissan's use of the domain (http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:JH0zQdYEQ04J :www.nissan.com/+Nissan+computers&hl=en). In that case Uzi Nissan did have the right to use the trademark Nissan as it was not used in anything that has to do with the automotive industry (Actually he was even able to reproduse evidence that he already used the name Nissan in an automobile spare parts business in the 70's, and did business with Nissan motors that prefered to identify itself as Datsun, and did nothing about his use of his last name in his automobile-related business back then). All this didn't help him to retain use of his domain. Apparently he was not rich enough. Perhaps he can still use it for email...

    Anyway, back to my original thought: can a name be registered as a trademark for the purpose of network presence? I use the name hadaso in many places for identification: in email accounts, in online forums, in my own domain. It is derived from my last name plus initial. I invested hundreds, perhaps thousands of hours of my life creating content thast is scattered around the web, mainly in open forums, discussion lists, talkbacks, Wikis etc., and almost all of them identify me using either my nickname (hadaso) or my full name. So I would like to protect my investment, and know that I will not be prevented in the future from freely using it. If posting on online forums was a business I could register the Trademark. Perhaps I can do it anyway (in what way? In which countries? Would it be of any use in real life? it didn't help Uzi Nissan that did register the Nissan trademark, though a bit late, like MS's registration of Excel®). To what extent is my "name already protected by something called common law trademark", a sort of protection that Excel® apparently enjoys according to the cited story?

    The TurboExcel case mentioned seems clearcut to me: obviously it refers to MicroSoft's product, and no TradeMark protection is needed to see that. I'd bet that eve

  58. This just in... by 10100 · · Score: 0

    ...Microsoft has copyrighted the term 'computer'.