Slashdot Mirror
Rupert Murdoch Claims To Own the 'Sky' In 'Skype'
Crudely_Indecent writes "Not content to own just news stories, Rupert Murdoch is now going after individual words! His BSkyB is fighting a legal battle with Skype, claiming that it owns the 'Sky' in 'Skype.' From the article: 'A spokesman for Sky confirmed that the company has been involved in a "five-year dispute with Skype" over trademark applications filed by the telecomms company. These are, the spokesman added: "including, but not limited to, television-related goods and services."'"
That's one aspect, but in this case Sky is eponymous, sort of like Windows is. So MS could trademark Microsoft Windows XP, but not Windows. Sky by itself can't be trademarked as it already has a meaning which in this case is irrelevant because only a ham fisted fascist like Murdoch would actually even consider those to be confusing.
You'd think that would solve things... but have you ever met his son?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8227915.stm
Same evil, just younger.
What are you sorry about? This is Slashdot.
You're confusing trademarks with patents. Trademarks are to prevent people from fraudulently claiming to be affiliated with a business. For example, lets pretend you started a successful, well respected business named 'Haedrian's Home Improvements' and trademark the name. If I try to cash in on your success by setting up a similar business named "Haeadrian's Home Improvements" then you could sue me for trademark infringement. It's to prevent me from ruining your business's reputation by doing shitty work for customers who aren't smart enough to realize that There's an extra A in my business's name and it's not the same company as yours. It doesn't matter if either of us invented anything.
I hope Sky win, and then the Ilse of Skye can then sue Sky for all its worth (after all, the Isle of Skye was around first!)
Thats the only reason I got sky, i though I would get a share in the island!
very good. for non-speakers of French, merde means crap.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
but noone says "Sky" anymore, especially after they started calling it BSkyB themselves.
They refer to themselves as Sky all the time, in their own advertising. Ask anybody in the UK or Ireland who BSkyB is and you'll probably get nothing but a blank stare from 3/4 of them. They're known as Sky to the general public, they're referred to as Sky in rival advertising (e.g. not available on Sky!).
apparently the E.U. thinks so. The courts ruled in his favor. http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/41108-skype-vs-sky-whats-in-a-name/
There's an old Goon Show where they trademark the word 'Help!' and they go around pushing people into canals...
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
Infringing a Trademark - Passing your product off as someone elses, or connected to someone elses
Infringing Copyright - Copying a complete or partial work without the artists permission
Infringing Patent - Using a design for an invention without paying the patentor
Trademarks don't protect inventors they protect company image
Copyright doesn't protect inventors, it protects artists works ...
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Sort of. Money is certainly an issue, but so is his conservative agenda. His "genius" is in turning a healthy profit by spreading his message, instead of *spending* money to do the same. Of course, that's not a completely new strategy; he just mastered it in the realm of television by hoisting a tabloid-style news channel under the banner of legitimate news. True, the FOX television network is (or was) known for its "racy" content relative to its competitors, but fun and games end where the news begins. The strategy of any network affiliate is to draw in viewers with the entertainment, then keep them around for the news. In the case of FOX, however, the local affiliates are more and more resembling syndicated broadcasters for the FOX News Channel. Outfoxed has a fairly factual description, albeit presented in a rather hysterical fashion.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I think their point is to tie up resources, time and money by finding every way to make lawsuits.
He also owns the company that sued Al Franken for "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right". It was laughed out of court because the title was obvious parody. I wonder if they don't have slightly different intentions. For example, I may lose the case, but you still have to pay legal fees, and devote time and resources to dealing both with the court battle and the public relations repercussions...OR...you can pay me to make this go away.