Dell Loses Bid To Trademark "Cloud Computing"

1sockchuck writes "The USPTO has issued a 'non-final determination' refusing Dell's request to trademark the term 'cloud computing' (we discussed the application earlier), finding that the term is generic and 'therefore incapable of functioning as a source-identifier for applicant's services.' According to Data Center Knowledge, 'Dell has the option of filing a response to submit arguments to dispute the USPTO examiner's findings.'" Here is the USPTO's ruling. A week and a half ago the PTO cancelled its 'notice of allowance' for the mark, a move little remarked upon at the time.

Comments

Humanity

[bigtallmofo]

Does it make anyone else sad when they think that there are fellow members of our race that would patent breathing if they could and would idly watch people that couldn't afford to pay their licensing fees suffocate?

Re:Humanity

[timmarhy]

i've looked through my file and found you are in violation of my patent on the inhalation of air. please stop stifling innovation and pay my royalties you freedom hating commie.

Re:Humanity

[PPH]

Better yet: Patent farting and wait for them to explode.

Re:Humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

And the slashdot average for reading comprehension drops yet ANOTHER notch.

Re:Humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

that would patent breathing if they could

What part of that confuses you?

Re:Humanity

[msu320]

i've looked through my file and found you are in violation of my patent on the inhalation of air. please stop stifling innovation and pay my royalties you freedom hating commie.

"Uh, prior art." - God

Re:Humanity

[Renraku]

Maybe it'll come to that one day. Look at what Monsanto pulls. Trust me, if Monsanto had their way, they'd own all food production in the US. Then they'd jack the prices up 50x, since its been shown that we Americans have enough disposable income to be able to make it to work and back when gas prices rise 400% in two years.

1. Plant a field of GM crops.

2. Test neighbor's crops for patented GM markers.

3. Sue neighbor when nature spreads the GM genetic markers to other fields.

4. Profit, force neighbor to burn their crops.

5. Buy out their field and plant a field of GM crops, watch his neighbors get nervous.

Re:Humanity

[AuMatar]

google terms: monsanto sue neighboring field

results:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/PSchmeiser_Monsanto.html

Googling for the litigant (Percy Schmeiser) brings multiple sources for the lawsuit, including wikipedia

too bad

[schnikies79]

If they got it, no one else could use this worthless buzzword. Now everyone has a chance to launch cloud computing on the web 2.0 while hyping it in the blogosphere.

*Sigh*

Re:too bad

[Nefarious Wheel]

Cloud Computing? You mean they wanted to be *that* closely sssociated with vaporware?

Re:too bad

[Robert1]

Just wait till cloud computing supplants networking as everybody's favorite buzzword:

"Hey Bob, yeah, I'm just cloudin' with some clients, be with you in a sec."

"We have an impressive cloud infrastructure and our services can allow anyone to become more cloudy."

It's going to happen! :(

And of course, we can't forget the groan worthy puns from news agencies "Cloudy days ahead for Dell!" - ugh.

Re:too bad

[Koiu Lpoi]

Sorry if I'm "out of the loop", but what exactly IS "cloud computing"? I keep hearing this term to describe several (seemingly) unrelated projects, and I'd like it if somebody could break it down, or if that's impossible, just say "it's the latest buzzword, and means about as much in the real world as 'synergy'".

Re:too bad

[Koiu Lpoi]

That's true, why is it that only journalists have held steadfastly on to the pun, while everyone else has let it die (except the Japanese)? Maybe I don't talk to enough newspaper-reading folks, but I find it detracts from my interest in the story when I find the title was an awful pun instead of an actual description of the news.

Re:too bad

[hack slash]

"blogosphere"

Another term as bad as "cloud computing".

Re:too bad

[Koiu Lpoi]

I'd also like to point out that the Wikipedia Page lead me on a chain from that into Web 2.0, Tag clouds, and Folksonomy. I want to know two things: Who is actually using these buzzwords in real development work, and why are all the names so stupid (especially "folksonomy")?

Re:too bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Wikipedia to the rescue: Cloud computing

In short, it is a service where apps and data are stored "in the cloud" -- the cloud refers to the symbol used in diagrams to depict a network you have no knowledge nor control of the technology. Kinda like a black box, but very buzzword-worthy and makes you look cool. For example, Apple's Mobile Me is a cloud computing. It stores web 2.0 apps that you use to sync your computer with other devices. You don't need to know how Mobile Me works at Apple's data center, you just need to take care the business at your end like configuring what devices you want to connect to the cloud. You can push data from your computer to the cloud back to your iPhone and vice versa.

Re:too bad

[something_wicked_thi]

How would you describe cloud computing in two words without using a 'worthless buzzword'?

Distributed Computing

Re:too bad

[jlarocco]

"Cloud computing" is the "web 2.0" buzzword for "Internet". It's used primarily to confuse investors and venture capitalists who remember how poorly the "... on the internet" fad turned out in the late 90s.

The other words were made up to help solidify the illusion that "cloud computing" is something new.

Re:too bad

[Miseph]

Q: How do you say 'goddamn idiot" in two words without just saying it?

A: "Anonymous Coward"

Re:too bad

[jd]

Admit it, you're just clouding the issue. :) Incidentally, a cloud is just a crowd run on LISP.

Re:too bad

[value_added]

From most of the blogs I've seen, I think "clouded thinking" would be more appropriate.

Re:too bad

[kunwon1]

I have a speech impediment, you insensitive clod!

Re:too bad

[kunwon1]

http://xkcd.com/181/

Re:too bad

[symbolset]

Uh, no. Cloud computing is a buzzword for non heirachical distributed infrastructure for services. If you have a set of nodes and any node can be any type of server, and the control of which node runs which service is part of a distributed infrastructure which self nominates nodes for running services based on some metric such as speed of storage, local need or need for offsite redundancy then you're in the cloud. Control of the cloud is yet another redundant self managed service.

Slashdot Poll

[Nymz]

Shouldn't this be a Slashdot Poll question like "What is a less generic name for Cloud Computing?"

a) Dell's Cloud Computing
b) gEverything has it, or it doesn't exist
c) Skynet's primary self awareness functions
d) Cloudboy Neal

The Scots already did this ...

[ScrewMaster]

It's called "McCloud Computing", and there's no point in copyrighting the name because there can be only one of them.

Re:The Scots already did this ...

[KGIII]

Could be worse, I'll have the mental images...

Next trademark attempt - Clod Computing

[tinrobot]

i.e. - Computing for idiots.

Re:Next trademark attempt - Clod Computing

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a clod, you insensitive... um...

WtF

[dr_turgeon]

I work for a company (a bank) that seems to apply a trade/service-mark to random word combos in at least every third or forth sentence of any marketing--even internal materials. I envisage a child claiming "mine" all the time or using a label maker ad nauseam.

A million duhs screaming out

[EdIII]

finding that the term is generic and 'therefore incapable of functioning as a source-identifier for applicant's services

Everyone on the streets had known that. Dell had known this from the START. The patent lawyers for Dell ALSO knew this. What is surprising is that the USPTO knew this.

Re:A million duhs screaming out

[hellwig]

The USPTO has a fantastic trackrecord. When Microsoft wanted to trademark their word processor with the name Word, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their new graphical OS that dispays applications in windows (a concept created by another company) Windows, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their suite of office applicatons as Office, did the USPTO let them?

Okay, ignore those examples, but at least they didn't let Trump trademark You're Fired.

But seriously, why do companies think they can trademark phrases they didn't create? Q-Tips, Kleenex, Xerox, these are creative trademarks that people easily associate with their respective products. Who the hell is gonna hear Cloud Computing and think Dell? Now, when I hear the word Dell my mind is flooded with a whole cocaphony of phrases I would rather forget (Dude, you're Getting a Dell!)

Re:A million duhs screaming out

[VGPowerlord]

The USPTO has a fantastic trackrecord. When Microsoft wanted to trademark their word processor with the name Word, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their new graphical OS that dispays applications in windows (a concept created by another company) Windows, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their suite of office applicatons as Office, did the USPTO let them?

Did you actually look up the trademarks for those?

Last I heard, the trademarks Microsoft owns are on "Microsoft Word," "Microsoft Windows," and "Microsoft Office." Why? Because Word, Windows, and Office are too generic.

Not quite so sudden

[FilterMapReduce]

This article is tagged "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense", but U.S. trademark law is typically endowed with a little more common sense (a little) than copyrights and patents, the other major areas of IP law. For example, how trademarks can only be held so long as they're actually in use. Compare this to copyrights applying for the life of the author plus seventy years; as a result, abandonware sites can and often are prevented from providing software titles years after the publishers have ever tried to make them available for a profit, or at all.

I expected that Dell would lose this ridiculous trademark bid and I'm pleased that the USPTO acted appropriately. Nonetheless, I'm sure that my fellow Slashdotters will be all too happy to expose my ignorance by providing plenty of counterexamples of trademark-related idiocy.

I can confirm this as well

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in Illinois and several friends have been threatened by Monsanto over their crops having illegal plants. They tell us that if we buy Monsanto's seed we won't have to worry about being sued, but if we don't, "something could happen, these plants can spread, and you won't be legal". They make it sound like the burden is on the farmers to ensure their crops don't "infringe" rather than Monsanto making sure their modified product can't spread.

Posting anonymously because I don't care to be sued.

Re:I can confirm this as well

[KGIII]

After having been through the area - I'll take 'legal' blame and fight that one in a heart beat. They tried that up here in Maine and got their asses handed to them. They're the makers of Round-Up and Agent Orange as I recall?

Maine doesn't have as many potato acres as Idaho but I guess we're second. They tried similar crap up in Houlton, Maine (way up north) and got tossed out on their asses. Sort of like the RIAA got tossed out. We're not a commonwealth but we seem to treat out of staters that way.

Illinois and Indiana both had strange signs marking the brand of crop they were growing, that was odd to me but then we went west. I'd never seen that before.

GM foods have a place, I think that place is in the bellies of hungry people or people who opt to eat it. My understanding is that they have things like the golden seed which will grow fricken rice in the damned near desert but it is unaffordable and doesn't germinate.

So, yeah. Post non-AC and blame it on me. Say I stole control of your PC... They can ask /. and they can give 'em my IP and they can come try that here in Maine. Potato, blueberry, and timber is all we have left. They, like the RIAA, were tossed out on their arses. I was amused.

Re:I can confirm this as well

[KGIII]

They, the seed breeders, seem to be the worst. With GM comes the desire to protect their property as they see it. This is one of the cases where I see it failing. If the fricken wind blows a seed onto your property you're guilty? WTF?

Re:I can confirm this as well

[initialE]

What needs to be done is to burn their fields preemptively. You know, just in case.

Re:I can confirm this as well

[Anonymous Coward]

If the wind blows a seed on your property and their crops begin to grow on your property, then sue them for littering, trespassing, etc since you did not authorize it. It's almost as if I had a stack of paper napkins just sitting on a picnic table, then all of a sudden a big gust of wind blows them away and blows them into the street, neighbors yards etc. Since the napkins belong to me, I could be fined for littering if I do not clean them up.

Re:In entirely unrelated news,

[VGPowerlord]

I thought it was Microsoft Cloud Server 2008.

What They Wanted

[YetAnotherBob]

I think that Dell got the ruling they wanted. This was a preemptive move. Now, they have prevented anyone else from trademarking 'cloud computing'.

A purely defensive move.

If only this worked with patents.