These frivolous news comes from fellow news web site, windowsxp.nu, which is one of the well known sites for Windows-related news on the web (traffic-wise seems to be similar to OSNews, around 90,000 page views per day). Microsoft sent a legal threat to Steven Bink to hand over the site before Dec 19th, otherwise they will respond legally. Microsoft has taken a similar hard line against other similar Web sites in the past; in 1998, the company demanded that Paul Thurrott should change the name of the ‘Windows SuperSite’ to ‘SuperSite for Windows’, and Active Windows was forced to change its name to ActiveWin. Read more for a short editorial on the subject.Our Take: It is not an intelligent tactic to go against your last standing friends MS. Especially when they work hard to promote your own products, for fun, for free. Just think if Linus, who owns the copyright/trademark for the word “Linux”, goes after all these web sites that carry that name! A disaster for the “marketing” of the OS.
There are even a whole dozen sites that their name consists from the words “apple” and “Mac”. And don’t tell me that “windows” is not as a common word as “apple”. Because it is. At least Apple only goes after people who use their icons or their window manager and widget look on their own OSes. Not on web sites… Hehe…
I think I know what this is about. Possibly, they are afraid that plain users will think that sites that start with the word “windows” or “windowsxp” are MS official sites. Personally, I don’t think that people are that stupid. And if Microsoft thinks that, then they are really underestimate their own customers. And at the end of the day, why now? Why did they do this legal move now, and not 18 months ago, when the site started?
Microsoft says that it owns two trademarks on the name Windows, and it never gave Bink authority to use its names, logos, and other graphics on his Web site. Well, this is stupid. Each individual can’t always have a direct contact at Microsoft and ask if they can use this or that logo or graphic! Think OSNews without the little icon for each story! How would we know exactly for which OS or product we are talking each time? Logos are there so people can recognize things easier. And web sites, magazines etc. should be using them. It is for everyone’s best. So why Mr Bink should have had a special license for these?
You know what that reminds me? It reminds me of Prince, the pop star. A few years back he decided to stop calling himself “Prince” and he demanded all media to also do the same. He said that his new name would be this:
[yes, “nothing”. Microsoft is being as silly in this matter.]
…what Microsoft’s audience is, i.e. stupid users. It’s also good to know that the fools are killing their own free PR department.
Keep it up M$, go after anyone trying to help you as that’l make it *A LOY* easier for all us M$-haters!
“dont bite the hand that feeds you” ;D
Actually, I think Microsoft is trying to establish a legal precedent after losing their trademark battle with Lindows. Without looking it up, IIRC the judgement was to the effect that the word “Windows” was used commonly in reference to computer products, and was not uniquely identified with MS’s OS. Since then, MS has been asking software companies to change the name of products with “Windows” in the name, and now they want to prevent unauthorized web-sites from using it as well. I think what they’re trying to do is establish a precedent that “Windows” is uniquely identified with MS, as ammunition for future legal battles.
There are many from different sites and forums like windowsxp.nu that thinkt that the real reason why Microsoft is doing it now, is because that he have been known to host some alphas/betas of different MS programs. Unfortunately I can’t remember very much about it, but if I find more info I will post it.
I agree about their attempt to establish a precedent, but where does X Windows fit in?
If I recall correctly Prince changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol to escape a record contract. Wonder how many lawyer years it took to find that loop hole.
Obviously, you’ve got the Apple thing going on here, what with the MacWorld fiasco a couple of months back. But even more curious is that the EU’s antitrust action still isn’t complete. This can’t be good press in Europe, y’know?
They allow themselves too manny errors
Maybe they should sue http://www.windows.org too?
they’ve already lost, the moment they chose windows as a ™. too bad, so sad. obviously their lawyers are trying to justify their retainer
Mr Balmer says that MS needs a community behind it, something Open Source movement has.
And whenever anything like that arises, MS goes after them, suing, harashing and patronizing. Nice community.
Domain names are immune to copyright infrigement. Bink has to hand over NOTHING. Hypothetically-speaking, if I registered a domain like mcdonalds.com before McDonald’s could acquire it, I have no obligation to relinquish the domain. I can *choose* to offer to sell it to them for millions of dollars—as many people *did* prior to the WWW boom in the early to mid 90s (talk about easy & early retirement)… some still get lucky today.
Try typing in an anonymous acronym as a domain name. Most likely, if it isn’t already registered by the corresponding company, it’s registered by a company willing to sell the domain for a hefty price.
Microsoft has absolutely no right to force Bink to give up the domain.
With regard to this whole Windows(TM) issue:
“Windows” *is* a generic term, coined several years prior to Microsoft’s release of their OS. Just about every GUI-side of an OS uses what it (and its users) refers to as “Windows.” From 95 to XP, X-windows to MacOS/OSX, BeOS to Amiga, etc.—we *ALL* use “Windows.” It is a Generic term.
Any term, product or trademark, used in casual conversation to refer to something by a large majority of the population becomes a *generic* term… immune to any degree of copyright infringement. The sheer number of MS Windows users, by themselves, automatically dictates the term to be generic–let alone considering MacOS, Xwindows, BeOS, etc. users.
Ever wonder where we got “ASPIRIN” from? It was Bayer, Inc.’s trademark for acetylsalicylic acid. In the United States, because of its widespread use throughout households everywhere, the term lost its trademark status. Still today, you see companies insisting people refer to their products by a generic term rather than a product name. Kimberly-Clark, for example, wants people to call their tissue product “Kleenex® Tissues” rather than just “Kleenex®,” as many do. Same goes for the Xerox Corporation; they even went on an advertising campaign a few years back to ensure that people use the term “photocopy” instead of “xerox®.”
What Microsoft is trying to do is claim rights to a term that was coined prior to its inception. That’s like me coming out with a brand of Television and calling the product “TV”… and then trying to sue anyone who refers to their product as a “TV”—or, furthermore, anyone who infringes on my trademark (i.e. “As Seen on TV”).
…Microsoft is full of shit; they already own and control just about EVERYTHING. If they’re allowed to bypass the law and walk on people any more than they’ve already been allowed to, we may not be able to do anything about it down the road. A precidence must be set; not by microsoft, but by the people.
Bink—good luck. We’re all behind you.
http://www.petitiononline.com/BinkXpNU/petition-sign.html?
> we *ALL* use “Windows.” It is a Generic term.
But the domain is windowsxp.nu , and windowsXp is the name of a microsoft product not some generic term. That said i don’t agree with microsoft on this one, their lawyers are probably just trying to justify their expenses or something.
“WindowsXP” is not generic, correct. I was just side-tracking, in response to some of the other comments above regarding the validity of a “Windows” trademark.
However, WindowsXP.nu is not Bink’s product… it’s just his domain name… And, fortunately, you can’t sue someone for using a domain name that shares a common name with a copyrighted/trademark product.
this isn’t news, it’s snivelling. you can’t just go around naming things by other peoples’ trade names. grow the hell up and stop pretending you’re being persecuted.
And Lindows.com thought they are the only one…
There’s no X Windows. There is X Window System, whom the “Window” in the name implies on a GUI metaphor and not a OS, unlike Lindows.com/LindowsOS whose names aren’t made to show a link with “window” as a GUI metaphor.
Plus, X Window System is in a different market as Windows. Windows is a all-round operating system, while X Window System is a, well, window system. It doesn’t even manage those windows (window managers does).
However, WindowsXP.nu is not Bink’s product… it’s just his domain name… And, fortunately, you can’t sue someone for using a domain name that shares a common name with a copyrighted/trademark product.
Actually you can. Remember how Celine Dion and her recording studio got back celinedion.com? Unless Bink can prove that windowsxp.nu doesn’t actually imply that it is in any way related to Windows XP, I don’t see where he has rights.
The reason why he didn’t even fight is because Microsoft, even if they were a small tiny company, would win. Besides, currently, Windows is still a registered trademark, it hasn’t be withdrawn. And if it is withdrawn, it is only in the USA, not European countries.
To Steven Blink: You have my empathy!I visited your website and found it very good. If I were a user of The Beast’s operating system, I would probably find it an excellent and welcome reosurce, one that would enhance my user experience.
I must admit I don’t understand the long term strategy the Beast is using. As a user of a *fringe* operating system, I fully appreciate how important an enthusiastic user community is. They are what drive the passion for a platform. And passion is what keeps them alive.
I think The Beast is playing this for short term gain, but at the expense of long term viability. Such actions only serve to show the user community in what little regard The Beast has for them.
Well, the Beast is probably trying to protect its IP. How many times have windowsxp.nu link to a URL containing internal versions of Microsoft products (especially Longhorn). How many times had it post screenshots of internal products (namely, Longhorn).
By not having “windowsxp.nu”, I doubt it would get rank #2 on Google.
I know you are reading this, F OFF. You lost your trademark, DEAL WITH IT.
-All of your customers.
Do your homework! “Windows” is not a Microsoft trademark, “Microsoft Windows” is. If they were to sue, they would lose. If these sites want to bend over and give it to Bill freely, then they get what they deserve.
Bink—good luck. We’re all behind you.