Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows Vista Faces Lawsuits

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the expensive-view dept.

WindozeSux writes "When tech company Vista discovered the title for the new Windows Operating System version, company founder John Wall was not amused. John Wall may take this to court because he knows of how protective Microsoft is over their trademarks. From the article: 'A Microsoft spokesman said the company chose Vista from a list developed by the Windows team, based on attributes of the new software. Among its primary selling points are new tools for searching and viewing the contents of a PC; communications features; and a lighter desktop appearance with transparent objects.'"

13 of 509 comments (clear)

  1. Preemptive strike... by jmcmunn · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Sue for the name, or be sued I guess. Sounds like they have a case for the trademark being theirs as a name, but these cases always seem silly to me. Clearly "Windows Vista" is not the same as "Vista" the software company. It's doubtful anyone is going to confuse them.

    On the other hand, you damn well bet if I happened to own a company by the name of the up-and-coming Windows OS, I would be making sure my name was EVERYWHERE right about the time the new OS came out. Hell, I'd even offer to sell them the name for $500 million or something, make it worth my time.

    1. Re:Preemptive strike... by RoadkillBunny · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clearly "Windows Vista" is not the same as "Vista" the software company.

      Neighter is Microsoft Windows and Lindows.

      --
      Cheers,
      RoadkillBunny
    2. Re:Preemptive strike... by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clearly "Windows Vista" is not the same as "Vista" the software company.

      That will be Microsoft's position right up until such time as Windows Vista is large enough to be the dominant name in the industry, and then they'll just turn around and sue him for infringing on their Windows Vista trademark.

    3. Re:Preemptive strike... by jmcmunn · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Yes, but Lindows was created (the idea and name) in order to woo current Windows owners into switching to an OS that sounds similar and is hyped as being easy to use etc...

      Lindows was something created after Windows, and was meant to use the name to draw customers. There is a clear diference here. Vista is an existing company with (as I understand) an entirely different product in a non-competing market.

      (oh, and I have nothing against Lindows at all, it is just not a valid argument IMHO)

    4. Re:Preemptive strike... by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except if "Vista" the software company ever puts out a piece of software and writes in big letters "Vista Flabbledygooker" on the box, it becomes potentially confusing. And it's going to be especially annoying if they have to write in nearly-as-big letters, "Not Windows(TM) Vista compatible" to keep from getting billions of angry letters.

    5. Re:Preemptive strike... by surprise_audit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But also, if Vista has already trademarked their name, they *have* to defend it, or lose it.

    6. Re:Preemptive strike... by toddbu · · Score: 4, Insightful
      ... an entirely different product in a non-competing market

      My understanding is that "a different market" means where there is no confusion on the part of a consumer or that there is no damage to the brand. I think that Vista could easily make the case that their brand will be damaged. Imagine calling a prospective client and introducing yourself as a software company called "Vista". If the prospective client knows about Windows Vista, what will be their reaction? Whether it's positive, neutral, or negative, there's clearly brand confusion. This isn't like Microsoft Windows or Microsoft Money where you're prefixing a common word with the company name to create a new brand. If Vista is a trademarked name for any type of software, I think Microsoft has a long uphill battle.

      --
      If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
  2. I think.. by SocialEngineer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MS deserves to be sued for picking such an un-attractive name for an OS. :P

    Windows 2000? Yeah, that works. XP? Sure. ME? Not great, but it is better than "Vista". How many people are going to actually know what "Vista" means, anyway? I'd put 20 on people thinking that the newest incarnation of Windows is some spanish distribution.

    --
    "Better to be vulgar than non-existent" -Bev Henson
    1. Re:I think.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But, Joe Public is a completely uneducated moron.

    2. Re:I think.. by Eric604 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Y'know, it's not Microsoft's fault for assuming that Joe Public isn't some completely uneducated _moron_ who doesn't know the basic vocabulary of the english language.

      They don't have to assume anything, only stick to the facts. Like usually ms is assuming too much and ignoring the facts.

  3. I don't blame him by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Right now, the name can be changed without Microsoft caring too much. If it gets to release time, there is no way in hell Microsoft will change the name. They'll just throw lawyers at him until he gives in. If it doesn't work in the USA, they'll harass him in other countries.

    Right now, he's got a clear advantage. If he makes every move to completely stop their use of the mark 'Vista' (as opposed to licensing it to them or something), then they'll probably change the name sharpish. But if he shows any sign of weakness, they'll just steamroller him into submission.

  4. Re:BAM! by MonkeyOfRage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does anyone think this will stop Microsoft from pulling similar stunts?

    Stop them? It'll reinforce the value of pulling the stunt first.

  5. Re:Don't they know about www.uspto.gov? by nathanmace · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe because Microsoft doesn't care?

    --
    I'm very responsible, when ever something goes wrong they always say I'm responsible.