Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Court Rules Microsoft Violated IP Rights

angry tapir writes "A Beijing court has ruled that Microsoft violated a Chinese company's intellectual property rights in a case over fonts used in past Windows operating systems. The Beijing Number One Intermediate People's Court ordered Microsoft to stop selling versions of Windows that use the Chinese fonts, including Windows XP. Microsoft plans to appeal the case. Microsoft originally licensed Zhongyi's intellectual property more than a decade ago for use in the Chinese version of Windows 95, according to Zhongyi. Zhongyi argues that agreement applied only to Windows 95, but that Microsoft continued to use the intellectual property in eight versions of Windows from Windows 98 to Windows XP. Vista and Windows 7 are not involved."

2 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. Re:A bit late? by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 4, Informative

    If the fonts are so indistinguishable should they even be copyrighted?

    In the United States, you can't copyright a font, at least, not exactly. You can copyright the name and code you used to create a font but you have no legal recourse if someone buys a copy of your font, prints it out, traces it exactly, creates an identical font and sells it under a different name. That's why you can find so many versions of what looks like the same font, often with similar names. Geneva and Helvetica (Helvetica being a name sometimes applied to Switzerland) comes immediately to mind. Futura and Avant Garde are the same, even if the names are not so obviously similar.

    --
    This ain't rocket surgery.
  2. Re:It fascinates me... by englishknnigits · · Score: 5, Informative

    Very clever, using a strawman fallacy to disprove something by wrongly claiming the other argument is a strawman. He made the obvious point that China ignores other countries IP but now seems to care about its own. That would be comparable to the US having horrible fiscal responsibility and then caring about other countries fiscal responsibility. They are the same in that they are both hypocritical, get it?