Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chinese Court Rules Microsoft Violated IP Rights

Posted by kdawson on from the shut-down-the-pirated-versions-and-that-would-really-hurt dept.

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."

14 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. A bit late? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Shouldn't Zhongyi have reacted a bit sooner?

    1. Re:A bit late? by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're assuming they knew. Just because the newer versions of windows have Chinese character support doesn't mean the company automatically knows its their font being used.

      The designers assumed Microsoft must have a license, and the rest of the company thought they were using someone elses font.

    2. Re:A bit late? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So how is it a big deal then? If the fonts are so indistinguishable should they even be copyrighted?

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:A bit late? by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would contend that most fonts are indistinguishable from at least a half dozen other fonts.

      The guys over in the mac lab would probably disagree.

      I can't distinguish between all the supposed shades of blue in a large box of crayons either (or at least not without a side by side comparison).

      That's what I was getting at. Fonts can be very similar and the suits who would know about the licensing likely wouldn't know one from another without a side by side comparison. The designers would know their font at a glance but likely wouldn't know the licensing terms.

    4. Re:A bit late? by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "It's a troll case period"

      It may or may not have been a submarine case. I have already given an example as to exactly how they could have missed it. There are other scenerios.

      But it is not a troll case. Troll cases are brought by companies that do not produce anything and make their money off litigation. This is a company that produces graphics that is suing because another company improperly used their IP.

      Even if they did submarine it to let more damages accrue it still remains that they have legitimate IP, which Microsoft was aware of, and Microsoft used it without their permission.

  2. It fascinates me... by ifwm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It fascinates me that China thinks they can simultaneously not give a shit about IP in every day practice, yet still think a ruling like this will have credibility.

    1. Re:It fascinates me... by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah I had that same thought. The Chinese have as much standing to complain about IP violations as the United States has to lecture on fiscal responsibility.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:It fascinates me... by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the case is legit and the rest of the world has IP agreements with them (pretty sure they do) then this should be upheld.

      The hypocrisy of China is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

    3. Re:It fascinates me... by palegray.net · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't disagree with the premise of your argument. Companies should be held accountable for their actions.

      That said, I'd really like to see a bar graph with two values on it, one for the amount of IP theft perpetrated by US-based companies, and one for IP theft perpetrated by Chinese firms. I imagine in might look something like this.

      --
      512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
    4. Re:It fascinates me... by asdf7890 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which is why there is an IP case about Chinese fonts, but illegal copies of Windows 98 to Windows XP being sold on the streets of China for $1 a CD each. If Microsoft were a Chinese company, the Chinese government would crack down on the illegal copies, but since Microsoft is a US company, the Chinese government turns a blind eye on the illegal copies of Windows 98 to Windows XP.

      And western owned companies take a similar attitude to human rights. They won't have their people working in sweatshop conditions, as the public outcry would ruin them if legal action didn't first, but they are quite happy to deal with factories in countries further east that are run that way. Governments don't do enough about the issue because it isn't directly affecting their voters and the indirect affect on their economies and lifestyles (at least in the short-to-medium term, certainly on the scale of a political term) through cheaper products is largely positive.

      While China has no good case not to be called hypocritical on IP law enforcement and other issues, other nations have no such claim to even handed fairness in all issues either and the Chinese are likely to see (well, those who can see it, pervasive censorship will reduce the number that can) our calling their government hypocritical as, well, hypocritical....

  3. Re:Do unto others... by shaitand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do unto others is fine and dandy. Somehow I doubt ignoring IP recognition treaties is something any western nation wants done unto them.

  4. 10+ years? by markdavis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >Zhongyi argues that agreement applied only to Windows 95

    It took them over 10 years to notice their fonts were also being used in 98, 2000, xp, vista, and 7???

  5. Wow, what a ridiculous statement by ifwm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The hypocrisy of China is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

    I think pointing out the arbitrary nature of law enforcement is ALWAYS relevant to any issue regarding the law.

    There's really no way to argue otherwise.

  6. Re:Not really, andnot insightful at all by mike260 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The converse argument to that of OP would be:
    "It fascinates me that Microsoft thinks they can bug China about software theft while simultaneously stealing Chinese IP"