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."

28 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.

    5. 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.
    6. Re:A bit late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The legal part is correct, but the examples are wrong. Geneva is not a clone of Helvetica, and Avant Garde is not a clone of Futura.

      The former two are members of the same typographic family (the neo-grotesques), and Helvetica did much to popularize that family, becoming at one point the most popular typeface in the world. Geneva is a separate creation in the same style. The names are similar because Helvetica cemented the neo-grotesques' association with Switzerland; many later neo-grotesques were names with Swiss themes. If you want a Helvetica clone, take Arial; it has almost the same letterforms and exactly the same metrics, and was in fact designed to substitute directly for Helvetica.

      Avant Garde and Futura are likewise both in the geometric family, and Futura was likewise an early and popular example, but other than that, they are distinct. Futura has in fact been cloned as Twentieth Century, and Avant Garde as Century Gothic; both of the latter are virtually identical to the originals.

      Seriously, look at these typefaces at a decent size; they're similar in the same way that, say, Star Wars and Star Trek are.

    7. Re:A bit late? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Funny

      In any case, I would have thought Microsoft could simply use the defence that it never sells Windows in that country, since the Chinese prefer to pirate it. ;-)

  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 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?

    5. 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. Hahahahah by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A Chinese company trying to pinch Microsoft for IP theft. That's funny.

    I'm no Microsoft fanboy, but I have to wonder what minuscule percentage of Chinese Windows installations are actually using legit copies of Windows. Based on my few years of time in Beijing and being in Chinese GOVERNMENT offices where every copy of the OS and Office that I saw used a pirated license key (yes, every last one), I can't help but get a big belly laugh out of this.

    I'd type this in Chinese, but I fear that would just be piling on. :)

  4. Stop selling to China by Haxzaw · · Score: 4, Funny

    MS should just stop selling Windows in China, it isn't like anybody actually buys it over there anyway.

  5. Re:Do unto others... by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But if a serial mugger chooses the wrong victim and gets kicked to death then so be it.

    In most places, the would-be victim would then be up on a manslaughter charge, which I think is not the analogy you were shooting for. Maybe try something with cars?

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  6. Why fight it? by Reason58 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why fight it? It seems like a much cheaper solution would be for Microsoft to pay a fee for each copy of Windows sold in China.

  7. 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.

  8. 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???

    1. Re:10+ years? by prockcore · · Score: 5, Funny

      It took them over 10 years to acquire enough legit Windows licenses for their company to not be countersued.

  9. 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.

  10. Re:Do unto others... by Archr5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But it IS "done unto them" on a regular and consistent basis in China.

    the Counterfeiting industry in China pulls in 16 billion dollars a year and the government has done almost nothing about it. Now that they want to be involved in the WTO they're making some superficial efforts to "crack down" but so far it's been a pretty pitiful effort.

    The real problem is, Hardware manufacturers in the US and other countries have been enablers of this behavior for almost as long as it has existed. Some of the hardware in Ipod's is made by a knock off Chinese company that stole patents from Hitachi. Most of the world allows Norinco to sell arms and ordnance to supply their military and civilian populace despite the vast majority of Norinco's products being direct copies of American and Russian designs.

    These American companies can not expect China to take our complaints about their violation of Intellectual Property seriously if we continue to reap the benefits of cheap knockoff parts in our products increasing our profit margins.

  11. 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"

  12. I'm sure it's not irrelevant and that you're wrong by ifwm · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

    No sir, the law is based on treaties, and I strongly suspect the reciprocal application of the treaty is in fact, a requirement of the law, as it is in most such treaties.

    So, if China is NOT applying the law adequately in everyday practice, then MS may very well be ableto use that as evidence that China isn't upholding their end of the treaty.

    So, you see, it IS relevant, despite your pontification that it isn't.

  13. How are you people so TOTALLY wrong by ifwm · · Score: 3, Informative

    At least for us Americans IP is the only thing we still produce.

    Nope, you couldn't possibly be more wrong if you tried.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_States#Manufacturing

    "USA is the leading manufacturer in the world with a 2007 industrial output of US$2,696,880 millions. Main industries are petroleum, steel, motor vehicles, aerospace, telecommunications, chemicals, electronics, food processing, consumer goods, lumber, mining."

    Please educate yourself, so you're not making claims like "At least for us Americans IP is the only thing we still produce DESPITE HAVING THE LARGEST MANUFACTURING OUTPUT OF ANY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD".

    Although is it fun to repeatedly inform you people who like to pretend you know what you're talking about that you do not, in fact, have ANY idea WTF you are talking about and have just proven so.

  14. Only one thing to do by dododuh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Clearly, Microsoft MUST withdraw WIndows 98, ME, 2000, and XP from the Chinese market, and refund the purchase money paid for said products. This should not cost Microsoft very much; after all, there can't have been more than one legitimate copy of each OS sold in-country. Microsoft would then be well-placed to declare all other copies of the affected products in the PRC illegal, and use the automatic-update feature to download a deactivating code. Microsoft should also apologize profusely to the font-sourcing company for the fact that their fonts would then be completely unused, then sell lots of Windows 7 upgrades. Oh wait, they can't actually sell Windows 7 in China, since they can't afford to pay for it due to the manipulated exchange rate for the Yuan.

  15. Re:The road to future global irrelevance by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did you learn nothing from the dot-com bust? A business must earn money. If people pirate your wares and cause loses then what is the point? The Chinese Government pretends to care about copyright and patents while in actuality they care about who pays them the most to do something. By the time one endures all of the corruption, knock-offs, copying, theft, etc that goes on in China it always "just on the verge" of being profitable. Some businesses are profitable in China, but software is not among them right now and probably never will be. The Chinese are the ultimate pragmatists: inward looking, amoral, and opportunistic. I don't see that changing anytime soon.