elvey
Spamassassin
join:2001-02-17
San Francisco, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
 ·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| reply to cdru
Re: How can they trade mark such a word?
I recall that Microsoft lost the case (and appeals) against Lindows (now Linspire) in the USA, but kept suing Lindows in every country in the world, one by one. They lost in about half a dozen countries in a row, and finally won in one.
Microsoft's not above SLAPP lawsuit abuse.
--
SBC is the world's second-largest SpamHaus and leads an Organized Crime Syndicate. Also see TURN.org or UCAN. |
|
nklb
Premium
join:2000-11-17
Ann Arbor, MI
clubs:
1 edit | reply to cdru
"Linspire" is the new name that is the end result of the lawsuit; the original name that provoked the suit was "Lindows"
Edit: Oops, my eyes skipped right over where you said this, sorry |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
1 edit | reply to cdru
said by cdru  :Even then, it's not 100% clear on the trademarking of Windows. Back a few years a company called Linspire came out with a Linux distribution that ran some Windows applications called Lindows. Microsoft sued because the trademarks were sufficiently similar that it could cause confusion to consumers. While the case was ultimately settled out of court before all appeals were exhausted, it was quite a ways down the path of Microsoft losing the case because Microsoft had used the term "windows" in describing the GUI prior to Windows (the product) from ever being released. Apple and Xerox had also implemented the idea and used the terminology prior to Microsoft telemarketing it as well. It would be similar to me trademarking the name Phones and then suing any company that used the derivative of that. Trademarks are used to product product name recognition in the market place. Multiple companies can own the same or similar trademark as long as the use of the trademark is in different areas and would not be commonly confused by the lay person. My company has a trade mark of "Do it Best" (the hardware store). Nike has the trade mark "Just Do It". They are fairly similar, but it's not likely someone would confuse a hardware store and a sports clothing company. Microsoft's registration for Windows is very clear. What was not clear was that Lindows was sufficiently similar to cause confusion. Microsoft losing the case would have had zero impact on it Windows mark relating to the OS.
Establishing secondary meaning trumps prior usage as a generic term. So, I can't agree with your comparison of the trademark Phones. I think you're missing the point.
This is a good primer that you can read to learn more about trademarks. »www.registeringatrademark.com/pr···rk.shtml |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to Maxo
said by Maxo :Cisco had secured the patent for the name 10 years ago. Source Actually a company called InfoGear that Cisco bought had secured the trademark. |
|
GilbertMark
Premium
join:2001-05-02
Gilbert, AZ
·Cox HSI
| reply to Warez_Zealot
said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? Cisco should have this trademark reviewed than rejected... iPhone is not a common word you will not find it in a dictionary.
--
Got a V3 or a V3i or an L7? Want to get the most out of them? Check out my sites »hacktheV3.com and »hacktheV3i.com and »hacktheL7.com
|
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| reply to Goober
Even then, it's not 100% clear on the trademarking of Windows. Back a few years a company called Linspire came out with a Linux distribution that ran some Windows applications called Lindows. Microsoft sued because the trademarks were sufficiently similar that it could cause confusion to consumers. While the case was ultimately settled out of court before all appeals were exhausted, it was quite a ways down the path of Microsoft losing the case because Microsoft had used the term "windows" in describing the GUI prior to Windows (the product) from ever being released. Apple and Xerox had also implemented the idea and used the terminology prior to Microsoft telemarketing it as well. It would be similar to me trademarking the name Phones and then suing any company that used the derivative of that.
Trademarks are used to product product name recognition in the market place. Multiple companies can own the same or similar trademark as long as the use of the trademark is in different areas and would not be commonly confused by the lay person. My company has a trade mark of "Do it Best" (the hardware store). Nike has the trade mark "Just Do It". They are fairly similar, but it's not likely someone would confuse a hardware store and a sports clothing company.
--
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | reply to kamm
Common words can serve as trademarks as well. You just have to establish a secondary meaning for the word. It took MS almost a dozen years to do this for their operating system. |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to Goober
Thanks for the correction. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to Maxo
It's just Windows. It took them almost 12 years before they were given a registration number for the OS.
-----------------------------------------
Word Mark WINDOWS
Goods and Services IC 009. US 038. G & S: computer programs and manuals sold as a unit; namely, graphical operating environment programs for microcomputers. FIRST USE: 19831018. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19831018
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Design Search Code
Serial Number 74090419
Filing Date August 20, 1990
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition June 21, 1994
Registration Number 1872264
Registration Date January 10, 1995
Owner (REGISTRANT) Microsoft Corporation CORPORATION DELAWARE One Microsoft Way Redmond WASHINGTON 980526399
Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)
Affidavit Text SECT 8 (6-YR). SECTION 8(10-YR) 20050407.
Renewal 1ST RENEWAL 20050407
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to Goober
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the trademarked term is "Microsoft Windows", not just "Windows" |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to Maxo
said by Maxo :Cisco had secured the
patent trademark registration for the name 10 years ago. Source |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | reply to brandon
It took Microsoft many, many years before Windows gained secondary meaning enough to be registrable. |
|
brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to kamm
said by kamm :said by brandon :said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked. Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. I'm curious about your take on the trademarked name of "windows"... I would venture to say that if Microsoft were actually selling windows (as in those things with glass in them) then they wouldn't be allowed the trademark. As it stands with Windows being completely different from the standard use of the word, it is allowed.
My opinions are often worthless however!  |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to Warez_Zealot
Cisco had secured the patent for the name 10 years ago.
Source |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to brandon
said by brandon :said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked. Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. I'm curious about your take on the trademarked name of "windows"...
--
|
|
brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS
·AT&T Southeast
1 edit | reply to Warez_Zealot
said by Warez_Zealot :That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words? How the heck is iPhone a common word? They're not trying to trademark the letter "i" nor the word "phone." "iPhone" IS a trademark, however. It's kinda like how the word "American" can't be trademarked, and the word "Idol" can't be trademarked, but you can sure believe the words "American Idol" are trademarked.
Linksys had a working telephone that has been officially launched into the market, called an iPhone, and had the trademark for the name since 2000. There is no reason why Apple should have any rights to the trademark unless Cisco grants it to them. If Apple hasn't been granted the rights to iPhone, then they can't start marketing it as such, which is what they did here. |
|
Warez_Zealot
Rural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan
| That's essentially like trademarking internet phone... or phone with an i in front of it.. Isn't there some law against trademarking common words?
Cisco should have this trademark reviewed than rejected...
--
The meek shall inherit the earth but don't forget the poor are the ones who inherit the debt. |
|
