Microsoft’s decision to call the next version of its OS Vista might have a raised a few smiles last week but one Redmond resident is less than impressed. The boss of Vista, a software and services company for small businesses is considering taking legal action against the software giant.
So let’s get this straight. The company Vista has nothing to do with Microsoft and whose product is not an operating system.
It’s like Kraft suing a home builder for calling his house style “Ranch” when Kraft has a “Ranch” salad dressing. Yes the dressing will eventually reside within the house, but I don’t think you’re going to get too many confused people chipping away at their homes to put on their salad!
In other words, we would like some more money so let’s confuse a non-issue to get some.
Pathetic
No it’s not… I believe the Kraft Ranch bottle even has a picture of a ranch on it!
It’d be more like Kraft suing a Dairy company for shipping a Ranch Milk; that is if Kraft owned a trademark on the word Ranch and I’m sure they do not.
I just hope this all bombs out but gets Microsoft to pick a better name…
Nope, but both companies make solutions for ecommerce and “MS Vista” is an ecommerce able OS, specially in their server versions.
The existence of conflict in the trademarks is possible, let the court decide.
btw: “Ranch” also got “Windows”
or not?
So let’s get this straight. The company Vista has nothing to do with Microsoft and whose product is not an operating system.
It’s like Kraft suing a home builder for calling his house style “Ranch” when Kraft has a “Ranch” salad dressing. Yes the dressing will eventually reside within the house, but I don’t think you’re going to get too many confused people chipping away at their homes to put on their salad!
In other words, we would like some more money so let’s confuse a non-issue to get some.
Pathetic
Anything for a quick buck…
So Linspire didn’t have to change their branch name from Lindows into Linspire after all?
Sorry ’bout that. IE hung when I posted and I didn’t think the post got through.
Lindows was an operating system. Windows is an operating system. Therefore, that is an issue.
Ah, but Lindows and Windows aren’t the same word either
.
Let’s drop back one level of abstraction. Both Vista’s are software products.
Technically, Windows Vista and Vista aren’t the same either. Granted, Windows Vista will be called Vista for short, as Windows XP is commonly referred to as just XP. But Microsoft didn’t register XP or Vista, they registered Windows XP and Windows Vista.
That’s a good point actually. However, after winning the Lindows battle: They deserve it
.
It all worked out for the better though, Lindows was a stupid name.
You could come up with a metric showing X Windows is closer to Windows than Lindows.
Look at the shiny legal system we have for sale!
Justice can be expensive though–relatively tight supply.
You could come up with a metric showing X Windows is closer to Windows than Lindows.
Except there’s no product named “X Windows”; it’s “X Window System” (no “s” in the second word), or “X” or “X11” for short.
Windows is software, Vista is software. Therefore, that is an issue.
Ah, but Lindows and Windows aren’t the same word either
.
Let’s drop back one level of abstraction. Both Vista’s are software products.
Thought so.
I think I’m going to be ill.
Since regular English language words and phrases can be totally secured for commerical purposes by our own system of trademarking, this is a logical result. ‘Windows’ is just another example. M$ is just looking to distance themselves from a swiss-cheese like past with regards to security and related and to become more attractive to those who have thought of OS X and Linux as a viable replacement.
Firebird was a database and it was considered a faux pas to have a Firebird browser. There is also the Vista open source software for managing healthcare.
I think Microsoft is wrong to take this name and I also think people that say this is only about money to reconsider..
Thanks,
GerardM
What happens when all the names are taken? I think trade marks, patents, and the like have their place, but can also easily get out of hand.
Remember that Futurama with the poplers, where all the possible product names but two were taken and that is how the poplers got their name. Is that kind of future supposed to appeal to any companies that make products and then have to name them? I don’t think so.
If M$ can sue Mike Row Soft Inc. for it’s name, then Vista has a damn good case, if you ask me.
Besides, the name ‘Vista’ sux a-hole anyhow. I mean really – Vista – could you get any less creative, M$?
Microsoft didn’t sue him, they threatened and he turned coward. They’d probably have lost that suit, but I believe it was over domain squatting not trademark law: Which AFAICT is a lot younger law and therefore a lot easier for judges to interpret as they go (READ: make up as they go).
First, Mike Row was basically just a kid, and second, he was actually a programmer named Mike Row.
Microsoft’s attack dog lawyer also did the same to the great cross-platform toolkit wxWindows, which is now wxWidgets.
Vista is also using the “offense is the best defense” addage. MS is rigorously defends its trademarks and if Vista doesn’t defend their name now, they may loose it to MS in the future.
There’s a company I believe in Austrailia that is called Vista Windows ( http://www.vistawindows.com.au/ ) and then there’s the Vista Window Company ( http://www.vistawindowco.com/ ) in Ohio, no they do not make software, but actual windows…if anyone has a right to sue it would be these companies!
Fucking Microseft with their stupid proprietary shit. Most people don’t realise the damage those assholes have done to the PC and all the companies they’ve forced out of business. Fuck them.
All I can say, regardless of the actual legaleze of it all is that Microsoft has played this game with little tiny outfits…so it’s somewhat gratifying to see a smaller outfit play the Microsoft game back in their face.
I think it’s great that the marketing department has already gone wild on the Vista name and now might have to start over!
Call me a conservative old kooge, but what’s wrong with calling it Windows NT 6.0? Or Mac OS X 4 instead of “Tiger”. This way one can look at software product family and immediately know something of the lineage. All of this codenaming stuff is fine for behind closed doors, but doesn’t it seem just a bit gimmicky when it’s splashed all over the main website?
Ok, I suppose I can live with codenames if “uname” or equivalent reports the codename – otherwise please don’t confuse me with more than one way to refer to a software product…
I agree with the numerical naming system, I don’t expect others to share my appreciation for it, but I like knowing what software I’m running and I especially like it when the number is actually the year it came out (not one year ahead as is the current trend).
Windows 2006 doesn’t sound bad to me, and if Windows XP were called Windows 2001 that would be ok, but I have to admit that even numers sould better so some exceptions should be possible 🙂 .
This is kinda the price you pay for using a common word as a name. Longhorn was a better name.
Oh yeah, let’s not forget some guy has claimed Stealth as his trademark, and harrasses various companies about it. He even got some companies to pay up for it.
http://www.hypocritae.com/?ART=170
Seeing as how the name Vista was REALLY REALLY lame to beginwith, maybe microsoft can just use longhorn seeing as how everyone knows it as that to begin with.
seriously, vista sounds sooo stupid
what is going to happen. Microsoft will buy out Vista, and that will be that. They are not going to throw away a Billion dollar advertizing campaign they have allready planned for a few million dollars Vista might be worth.
As for Lindows, it was never decided in courts. Microsoft was loosing and decided to pay Lindows up to rename their product… Lindows took it since they needed money and Robertson wanted a return on his investment.
As for Lindows, it was never decided in courts. Microsoft was loosing and decided to pay Lindows up to rename their product… Lindows took it since they needed money and Robertson wanted a return on his investment.
Lindows lost in the Benelux, Sweden and Finland.
http://news.com.com/2100-7343_3-5172859.html
Oh boy, the Microsoft fan boys are out in force as well! I’m starting to wonder if anyone other than Sun and Microsoft fanboys are actually reading osnews.com anymore. But anyways, I’ll digress.
It’s funny, all you whinging bastards, saying “Oh poor Microsoft etc.”. Where the bloody hell where you when Microsoft was doing exactly the same thing to other companies? mmm? Was it OK for Microsoft to do it, but not have it done to them? mmm? Two faced, idiotic hypocrites. Microsoft deserves what it gets, you play with the fire long enough and you’ll get burnt. I hope Microsoft gets burnt real bad, real soon.
If the US ever got a real government, and a real legal system, Microsoft would be in trouble, but as it stands now, Microsoft just bribes anyone of importance to do its bidding. Pretty sad. Sure, you can mod me down, but that doesn’t change the truth of the matter, and you all know that, you goody two shoes, Microsoft loving, “I’m so patriotic, I’m blind” hypocrites.
Dave
Amen
If Lindows / Windows is an issue, then Vista / Windows Vista should be an issue too. Period.
“If Lindows / Windows is an issue, then Vista / Windows Vista should be an issue too. Period.”
That’s just bias against microsoft, if someone started making “Land Lover” 4WD vehicles no one would find strange if Land Rover sued. What about Bercedes-Menz, or Phord…
Wall told the Seattle Times: “We’re going to consider our options and talk to them.” Wall owns vista.com along with the name.
“Considering” … “talking to them” … give this guy his payoff already so everybody can move on. Some people have no shame if they see the chance to make a quick buck.
“Considering” … “talking to them” … give this guy his payoff already so everybody can move on. Some people have no shame if they see the chance to make a quick buck.
As Microsoft has screwed so many companies over, isn’t it fair that what goes around comes around?
At the very least, any company with the name “Vista” in their product line will get bumped off the top 10 (20-30?) from Google, that could be devestating to some companies who only have a web presence.
At the very least, any company with the name “Vista” in their product line will get bumped off the top 10 (20-30?) from Google, that could be devestating to some companies who only have a web presence.
Yeah, that was one of the complaints that mail-order company Tiger Direct had against Apple with Mac OS X 10.4 “Tiger”.
Guess what? Your Google page ranking is not a right. It’s not even a privilege. It’s simply a function of some complicated algorithms in a cluster of machines at a Google datacentre. I can’t see any judge issuing a ruling except for “sucks to be you”.
The basis for your argument is that his argument was to make page rankings a right. But that wasn’t his argument. His argument was:
Trademark exists to provide recognition. Searches are a manifestation of recognition. This will hurt recognition on google; therefore this damages a form of name recognition.
There’s some truth to your point; but your argument is entirely crap.
That’s all there is to it. If Windows Vista “hides” the other vista, then the trademark owners have been financially damaged and could sue…
The article headline is pretty sensationalist. How you get “Microsoft faces court over Vista” from “We’re going to consider our options and talk to them.” is beyond me. I know that the headline was just ripped from the register, but still, OSNews should know better.
vista is now back to longhorn
http://dubiousprofundity.com/article.php/20050725183126362
they are both patents under software.. im sure theres some loop hole microsoft has found
i would think that the name windows vista will more than triple the interest in vista software.
its a huge marketing wonderful thing for them
I’m kinda torn on the issue.
Yes, Vista is a software company, and so is Microsoft.
However, it’s a product called WindowsVista, not a a software company called Vista.
Also, Vista works very well as a name for a Windows release. Windows is a vista into your computing world for digital photography, music, the internet, etc… Of course, none of you choose to see at as the way it was probably intended.
What an idiot. Have you not read the comments from the linux and Mac fanbois or are you selective in your reading.
Anyway. What companies did Microsoft do it to. Lindows? Hmmm. An OS company that runs Windows software. You wouldn’t see MS having a problem with that name would you.
Mike Roe Soft? You can’t see the similarity can you? Mike Roe could have kept that name but he accepted Microsofts money to give them the name.
Vista is looking for one of these bribes. That’s all. So would I. It’s worth a try and I would do it too if I had a name remotely similar. If Vista does the same business then Microsoft then of course they should win. If they don’t then they should keep trying in the law. They could get rich. It seems like a lottery over there.
When did this become slashdot? One of the whole reasons I come here is to not have to wade through the endless horde of pointless crap like links to “The Register”
I rather like a lot of the register articles. They’re rarely well researched, always misquoted, and usually not very important but damn’t they aren’t the typical line towed by every other outlet.
Besides, they always make for fun discussions.
What seperates this from slashdot is:
a.) It’s only about software.
b.) There’s a finite number of users (there is with slashdot too, but you’d never know it if you didn’t spend all day there).
Quote: “What an idiot. Have you not read the comments from the linux and Mac fanbois or are you selective in your reading. ”
No, maybe you are an idiot. Firstly, Windows is a common word. A common English word. It should not be trademarkable – period.
Secondly, Lindows and Windows are two different words, two different things. Microsoft did not win the case in the US, far from it. Lindows did what most companies do – they have $4 million for legal expenses, Microsoft has 40 Billion. Who do you think will go bust first? It isn’t about who’s legally right, it’s about who’ll survive the legal system long enough to win by default of having money still left in the bank. The few countries that the US won a decision on the matter in (Denmark and Holland if memory serves me correct) were blind idiots. If memory serves me correct, Microsoft tried the same deal in Spain and had the case thrown out of court in no polite manner. I think that says a lot.
Microsoft has a very long history of screwing other companies over. Screwing it’s users over. As I said in my previous post, but I’ll reiterate it her for yourself, if the US government and legal system wasn’t all fucked up, Microsoft would have been punished a long time ago and would have learnt not to be a predatory beast. Sadly, it appears that your system of “justice” can’t really do anything right. I mean 3 years, and SCO still hasn’t produced a *single* piece of code, and the case is still allowed to go on? Please. That’s idiocy. In fact, idiocy is too nice a comment. It’s much worse than idiocy.
Mike Roe Soft also rolled over due to lack of legal funds. This is the problem of HUGE companies versus tiny companies or individuals, and it’s a fundamental reason why software patents are bad. If we actually got rid of software patents, copyrights and trademarks the world would be a lot better place.
Oh and get an account you lazy sod.
Dave
If you check on Vista, you’ll find:
“Vista, which operates a small business internet interchange, is actually based in Microsoft’s home town of Redmond. It was started in May 2000 by John Wall, the founder of Wall Data and an erstwhile investor in SCO.”
Okay, how’s this for paranoid: MS deliberately picks a name it KNOWS will conflict with an existing product. Big fuss – court case threatened – MS pays big money to settle out of court for use of name. Sounds okay… so far. Turns out conflicting product is backed by an investor in SCO who turns around and “reinvests” the settlement money in SCO. SCO is now flush for another couple years of litigation instead of going bankrupt like they were about to.
No, I agree with you.
This is exactly like Microsoft to do a thing like this.
But then maybe I’m just paranoid too. Or call me critical.
In my opinion the concerns of the Vista company aren’t very valid, but your analogy is very inacurate and doesn’t put things into the proper perspective.
Microsoft makes software, and even operating systems are software so that includes Windows too. Vista makes software but not operating systems, their concerns are not unfounded, but are also not serious enough to merit a court case. Microsoft and Windows are well known names, but this is the first time I’ve heard of a company called Vista, I think if there’s going to be any confusion it’ll be limited to people who don’t even know how to use a computer.
I Totally agree with Vista position. Who knows if this knew operating system be MS will be other ME. Vista does not need that label.