Microsoft Sued Over Bing Trademark

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Sued Over Bing Trademark

Posted by Soulskill on Monday December 21, 2009 @01:51AM from the trademark-trolls-abound dept.

mentus writes "Bing! Information Design, a design company from Missouri, is suing Microsoft over 'intentional interference' with their trademark and claiming Microsoft had knowledge of the trademark when it relaunched its rebranded search engine. Microsoft legal representative Kevin Kutz states that he believes the case will be dismissed and that Microsoft 'always respect[s] trademarks and other people's intellectual property, and look[s] forward to the next steps in the judicial process.'"

20 of 191 comments (clear)

Trapped! by HNS-I · 2009-12-21 01:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

I wonder why people always start claiming their rights so late.

However, a trademark application for the name was not filed until May - when rumours about Microsoft's new product had already spread widely across the internet.
Microsoft, meanwhile, filed its own trademark applications for the name in March - for a variety of uses, including search engine software, interface software, advertising, telecoms and for "providing a website and website links to geographic information, map images and trip routing".
Aren't you obliged to protect your mark? Seems to me they have nothing on MS.
1. Re:Trapped! by Skapare · 2009-12-21 02:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  That's part of what makes this case potentially meaningless, in a moral sense, not a case law sense ... the fact that there are deep pockets involved and it may well be decided not on merits, but on who can throw enough money at protecting their interest.
  
  --
  now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
2. Re:Trapped! by Futile+Rhetoric · 2009-12-21 02:19 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  "Prior art" is not a trademark-related term.
3. Re:Trapped! by Rary · 2009-12-21 02:30 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I wonder why people always start claiming their rights so late.
  Because obtaining trademarks is costly and time-consuming, and because an unregistered trademarks is still a protected mark. This is a fairly small company who, until recently, probably found that an unregistered trademark was sufficient for them. Now that Microsoft has started using the name, they've decided they need to protect themselves further.
  
  Aren't you obliged to protect your mark?
  They are. They filed suit and began the process of registering their trademark. They've been using it since 2000, so they should have no problem getting the trademark, since the system is "first to use", not "first to file".
  
  --
  "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
4. Re:Trapped! by will_die · 2009-12-21 02:54 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You are required to protect your trademark but the two companies have the trademark for different items.
  THe company is sueing now because the amount of advertising Microsoft has put into the search engine Bing is causing confusion with the customers of the company that is sueing Bing. The time of the confusion is what would matter for the start of the lawsuit.
First time? by geekmux · 2009-12-21 01:59 · Score: 4, Informative

Uh, did this lawyer just fall off the turnip truck or what? Hate to tell you this Skippy Suit, but this ain't the first time Big Daddy Desktop has been in a courtroom for shit like this.
Microsoft definition of being "respectful" is cutting a check large enough to be bought out or go away.
1. Re:First time? by Z1NG · 2009-12-21 02:15 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  What makes you think the lawyer wants anything but a big check and free advertising for the company?
2. Re:First time? by Gilmoure · 2009-12-21 03:04 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  All right boys, buy him out!
  *smash, crash, crush*
  Mr. Simpson, you didn't think I got this rich by writing checks did you?
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
From TFA by ShadowRangerRIT · 2009-12-21 01:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

"...a trademark application for the name was not filed [by the plaintiff] until May - when rumours about Microsoft's new product had already spread widely across the internet."
"Microsoft, meanwhile, filed its own trademark applications for the name in March - for a variety of uses, including search engine software, interface software, advertising, telecoms and for 'providing a website and website links to geographic information, map images and trip routing'."
Says it all really. This company didn't even bother trying to establish trademark rights until two months after Microsoft, after news of the new engine had leaked. This screams trademark troll.

--
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
1. Re:From TFA by Ephemeriis · 2009-12-21 02:19 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Says it all really. This company didn't even bother trying to establish trademark rights until two months after Microsoft, after news of the new engine had leaked. This screams trademark troll.
  I know absolutely nothing about this case, so take my comments with as much salt as you feel necessary...
  But, just to play devil's advocate...
  It could also be that the company never felt the need to establish trademark rights until news of the new engine leaked. Perhaps this Bing! company was fairly unique in the area it does business in... And if anyone said Bing! they thought immediately of this company... But with Microsoft's re-branded search engine folks now think of Microsoft instead of this Bing! company.
  
  --
  "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
2. Re:From TFA by Rary · 2009-12-21 02:36 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No, it doesn't really say anything. They were a small fish happily using the trademark for the past nine years without any trouble. There was no need for them to register the mark, which is still legally protected even without registration. Trademark registration is expensive and takes years to complete, so many small companies are content to use unregistered trademarks.
  However, now that Microsoft has stepped on their turf, they've decided they need additional protection, so they began the process of registering the mark. They should have no problem getting that registration since they likely have ample proof that they've been using it for nine years (marketing materials, print advertisements, maybe some TV commercials, etc).
  
  --
  "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Different fields by l2718 · 2009-12-21 02:00 · Score: 3, Insightful

Unless they are in the search-engine business, I'm not sure they have a trademark claim even if they were first. There is little likelihood of confusion after all.
Re:bing.biz by jimicus · 2009-12-21 02:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Hmm. Microsoft got bing.com a while ago
WHOIS results for bing.com
Created on..............: 1996-01-28.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but surely all that means is someone registered it in 1996. It may have changed hands several times before being taken over by Microsoft.
But why would it be intentionally similar? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-12-21 02:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

If a business or trademark name is "deceptively or intentionally similar" to an established entity, it is technically in violation by definition.
The thing is that nobody had heard about Bing before MS. As such, MS wasn't trying to benefit from the fame that the name already had. If they began manufacturing footwear and chose Nike for their productname, I could see the motivation: Appearing to relate to an established entity in order to sell more. But creating a search engine called "Bing"? I don't think any of us had the first reaction of "Ah, like that Bing Information Designers?" but we all thought "Ah, what a stupid name. :D"
I'm not saying that MS didn't know of the company. They certainly should have researched more. But I can't understand why would they intentionally choose something deceptively similar to something that nobody had never heard of before. While MS knows that they can face anyone in court, I would assume their sizeable legal team had forced them to adopt strict and heavy processes to avoid this kind of stuff. To me this seems more like a fuckup committed by some very low level employees than anything decided by high management.
1. Re:But why would it be intentionally similar? by thisnamestoolong · 2009-12-21 02:45 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I think the reason they did not know about Bing! was because they tried to find them with Bing. Should've googled it...
  
  --
  To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
2. Re:But why would it be intentionally similar? by Stregano · 2009-12-21 02:47 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I am unsure if it is a matter of how famous the company is or how large they are.
  
  I think it is a matter of: even in whatever city they are in, now when they even do something like put something in the classifieds or whatever they do, it will say Bing and people will directly think of Microsoft's Bing.
  
  I could see that hurting business.
  
  --
  The world is how you make it
3. Re:But why would it be intentionally similar? by Gilmoure · 2009-12-21 02:56 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  But then again, Sony sued Sonny's Restaurant in Boston (I think), because people were pronouncing it 'so-nee'. Sony won.
  Ok, this might only relate tangentially to the story but I still think it's funny in a flat cat kinda' way.
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
4. Re:But why would it be intentionally similar? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-12-21 03:31 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I agree with everything except the "what a stupid name" part. When I first heard of that name for a search engine it gave me a case of the real LOLs. After all, naming it Bing Is Not Google (bing)? Hilarious! I would have thought more of the GNU crowd would by into a name like that...
Re:bing.biz by txsable · 2009-12-21 03:55 · Score: 4, Informative

Microsoft did not own bing.com until March 4, 2009 when the domain ownership changed from "Davryn Pty Ltd" in Melbourne, Australia to Microsoft. Since 2002 the name bing.com has had several owners, including some guy in Michigan, someone in Denver; Palo Alto, CA; was transferred to an Australian company in 2007 until MS bought it in 2009. So no, Microsoft does not have long-standing claims on the Bing name, at least based on their domain registration.
(Reference: Domaintools.com Whois History records).
One word by kimvette · 2009-12-21 06:03 · Score: 3, Informative

Microsoft 'always respect[s] trademarks and other people's intellectual property,

Stacker.

--
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50