Slashdot Mirror
How Microsoft Takes a Name
An anonymous reader writes "According to a report in the "Seattle Post-Intelligencer," the Windows Defender name was already being used by an Australian developer, Adam Lyttle. His Windows Defender product protected Windows users from malicious Web sites. Adam Lyttle told the Post-Intelligencer's Todd Bishop that Microsoft contacted him a month ago, charging him with infringing on the Windows trademark but neglecting to mention that the software giant wanted to use the "Windows Defender" name. Lyttle subsequently signed over rights to the name to Microsoft and was "shocked" when he later learned the company intended to use the name for one of its own products. "
They didn't buy it though, they deceived him into signing it over to them. Of course, like the article says, he could have asked and the lawyers would have been legally obligated to not deceive him. But still, it is sneaky...
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
Isn't Defender already trademarked within the computer/video games arena? Maybe someone else should be suing Microsoft?
But it's kind of funny that Microsoft has to admit that its Windows product needs to be Defended in the first place...
He expected that Microsoft was acting in good faith and not threatening him because they simply wanted to take the full name outright, not merely protect the "Windows" trademark. I expect (and hope he has correspeondences in writing) that they lied to him. Microsoft does not have a trademark on "Windows". Microsoft has a trademark on Microsoft Windows.
Anyone else remember how Microsoft stole (used without permission) the Internet Explorer trademark held by another company? S.O.P.
Well, as the inevitable exploits appear for this product, I hope Windows likes being referred to as Windows Surrender. It has a nice zing to it.
this definitely is a stunning question ... what is trademarked and where do the limits go.
...
...
:p)
if i invent a glass that can display computer graphics with a simple microchip besides it, make it work as a touchpad tablet pc and install it as a window on houses. can i call my product Windows ? cause they ARE windows, the real windows (not the crappy software of a company that's name suggestes that something is small and soft), but with a little extra.
nevermind the finger marks on the glass, mommy will wash these away
and what happened to Mike Rowe ? the dude that owned mikerowesoft website ? that doesnt even apply to trademark rules because it his his freaking name (poor dude) and he can't use it ?
next thing you'll see is an indian claiming trademark on the Apache and his friend ripping off the army with Comanche
WindowsCommander->TotalCommander, WindowsDefender -> TotalDefender ? (should be on the way
I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
By Windows product, are you referring to XWindows, Microsoft Windows, the generic term of a graphical user interface?
The real problem here is that a common term has been claimed by Microsoft and people seem to accept that so easily.
Jim
Has society become so comprehensively capitalized that every act of deception or dishonesty becomes "just business" and the victim's fault?
Seriously, naïve folks have a hard time succeeding in business (myself included, unfortunately).
- chrish
He should fire his lawyer. Obviously he or she can't be worth the money.
He had the rights to the name and signed them away. He should know if he signed something away, then he had something to start with.
He could have cashed in on the name or forced Microsoft to think of something else (or to muscle someone else around).
Get paid to code OSS
From the Article:
"Redmond startup Vista.com raised similar questions when Microsoft announced plans to call the next version of its operating system Windows Vista. Microsoft defended the choice by saying the combination of "Windows" and "Vista" would avoid confusion."
How can Microsoft say that "Windows Vista" is not a voilation for using "Vista" , and at the same time say "Windows Defender" is a violaion for using "Windows"
oohh, that's right b/c they have more money.
Guess his friend hasn't been in law school long enough to hone those shark-like instincts...that clause sure smells fishy!
1) Microsoft has a trademark on "Microsoft Windows" and this mark is used in connection with computer software.
As you said, "Microsoft Windows".
2) A computer software developer using the name "Windows Defender" voluntarily handed over the name to Microsoft.
It wasn't "voluntarily", he was threatened. Makes a huge difference.
"Windows Defender" could be argued to generate confusion in the market because when it comes to the word "Windows" with respect to computer software, most of the market (ie. John Q Citizen) is going to assume that it is a Microsoft product. This is the purpose of a trademark.
IMHO it couldn't generate confusion but in any case this is irrelevent. When we say that microsoft has a trademark on "Microsoft Windows" and not merely "Windows" we mean exactly that "Windows" by itself can be freely used. If we allow an argument of the style "X Windows", for all X, cannot be used because it generates confusion then what difference does it make from having a trademerk on "Windows"? Windows is a goddamn common word.
Microsoft just didn't respect the man's right to use the name and lied to him to *make him* give the rights. Ethically (and, I guess, legally in any countries) this is fraud!
If he'd tried to keep it he would have been sued into bankruptcy and then lost by default anyway. Isn't that how MS got hold of the "Internet Explorer" product name that was already copyrighted or trademarked by someone else? http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,13417,00 .html
What makes you think he would have won, or should have won? Trademarks apply to specific trades. While "Windows" may be a general term, in the computer industry, it's a specific term. Even the abbreviation "Win" carries the implication that it relates to Microsoft Windows. It's not overly general in the computer world, it's a valid trademark, that guy was trying to use the trademark to associate himself with Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft wanted to stop him from doing so. That's exactly what trademark law is supposed to be used for.
Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As well you should - Canada (and specifically Quebec) was the largest independent French-speaking population not to surrender to Germany in WWII.
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1801
When some possessions of mine (which I had insured)were damaged in shipping, I had a difficult time getting compensation. I called a lawyer, but could not have afforded services much beyond a threatening letter. So, although I had insurance and the law on my side, I would have been unable to have it enforced because I could not afford litigation (and in fact, it probably would have just been cheaper to replace the stuff anyway). Strangely, no lawyers rushed to my aid, even though, as you claim, there is no shortage of free legal counsel around for a 22 year old college student (which I was at the time).
It is absurd to think that there are lawyers lining up to take on complicated, time consuming cases pro bono (although it is true that most law offices do pro bono work).
The inability of the underprivileged to get proper legal counsel is, I believe, on of the great faults and tragedies of our system. To suggest that there is such an abundance of legal resources that anyone who wanted to could engage in a trademark battle with a wealthy company does a terrible disservice to people who have actually dedicated themselves to providing legal aid to the needy.
And if you honestly believe that there is this great abundance of legal counsel, I implore you to volunteer with an agency dedicated to providing legal aid to the poor, or with some agency in which you routinely interact with people who cannot afford the resources to navigate the legal system. Then feel free to talk to me and all the other sheep who haven't accepted an inaccurate meme as a fact.
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://www.ccr-ny.org/
Southern Poverty Law Center (civil rights oriented)
http://www.splcenter.org/
Eric
are a total joke.
Come on.
'Windows', 'Money', 'Word', 'Project', 'DOS (Disk Operating System)', 'Digital Image', 'Publisher', 'Business Accounting'
Come on, are ANY of those terms NOT generic?
Not to mention that in the Lindows case, the U.S. case (not Australia, or Europe, or wherever), the Judge specifically told the Jury they were _only_ allowed to consider usage before the release of MS Windows in determining whether or not the term 'Windows' was generic.
Given that it could refer to X-Windows, or Windows on my House, or Windows on my Car, or Windows in Physics, I cannot imagine the term as non-generic.
Now, the phrase, "Microsoft Windows", this might be a different story. But in any court case that played out to the bitter end, I imagine that MS would be forced to disclaim any ownership of the term 'Windows' as it applies by itself.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
In school, you get sent to the office for this sort of thing.
Of course, the guy was a fool to use the word "Windows" in his product name, since sooner or later Bill would try to fuck him over for doing so.
The company that makes Windex had better watch out. Bill may want that name to brand his Ajax Web products.
Hmmm, I wonder if the Ajax (cleanser) people can sue over trademark infringement.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Complaining about US war crimes vs. Japan in WWII?
Now Google both "Shiro Ishii" and "Unit 731".
- AC