“In a case that could have forced Linux vendor Lindows to change its business name worldwide, a Netherlands court ruled this week that Lindows’ current limited use of the Lindows name does not violate Microsoft’s Windows trademark.” PC World has the story.
Judge Says Lindows Name OK
About The Author
Adam Scheinberg
Technology Executive • Web Developer • Father • Foodie • Music Snob • OS enthusiast
Follow me on Mastodon @[email protected]
Does it mean they can go back to Lindows from Linspire?
just in netherland if they want to
My god, this will get hard to follow! Lindows, Linspire and then Lindows and Microsoft will sue again so back to Linspire… blah blah blah…
No the, they still cannot rename the operating system.
It does mean the bottom of their web page can say “Linspire is a trademark of Lindows, Inc.”
They still cannot name the OS Lindows.
Well, no, the company “Lindows” can keep their name, but their products can’t be named “Lindows”. Apparently calling a company “Lindows” doesn’t infringe on the trademark, but calling a product “Lindows” does.
No, I don’t understand it either 🙂
Not exactly…
In cases of international repercutions it is normal for the courts to partially accept rules from courts of other countries.
So, it will have repercutions in other jurisditions as well (at least, they will have some cloud to move the actions in other countries in the UE to the netherlands or to the european courts).
All i can say is… Grow up M$… you have harmed your own trademark and diluted it more then anything that lindows, inc could have immagined… (that means, if there is any dilution, it was mostly made by M$ itself).
That is my opinion… and btw… i’m not a lawyer… hehehehe
A company named Lindows can produce different proucts (not only an OS) and as such can keep its name, but when produces and sells an OS, it can’t be named Lindows, because it sounds too similar to Windows (in the judge opinion, at least.)
In my opinion is strange that Windows is not considered a generic term.
Ciao,
chris
The way I’ve always looked at it is, would they have named their product Lindows if there wasn’t a competing product out there named Windows? No. Who cares if it’s a generic term. I would think a ballpark is a generic term; but what if some company came out with a new Hot Dog and named it Bawlpark Hot Dogs instead of Ballpark Hot Dog? Similar product, similar name.
In my opinion is strange that Windows is not considered a generic term.
In the Netherlands “Windows” isn’t really a generic term. The dutch term for a window is venster.
And now Winspire is going to sue Lindows….
The Mouse (Lindows) stuck its middle up in the Lion’s face. The Lion didn’t like that and is trying to bite it off.
In the US at least, windows should be thrown out as a trademark. Several OSs did and still use the term “windowing software” for their products including Apple, IBM’s OS/2, GNOME, and KDE. The first two being two of the ones that count. The latter don’t.
If people can’t figure out the difference between MS Windows and Lindows. Then MS isn’t doing a very good job of advertising. That isn’t Lindows’s fault. No matter what MS says.
In my opinion is strange that Windows is not considered a generic term.
In the Netherlands “Windows” isn’t really a generic term. The dutch term for a window is venster.
Again: in my opinion, the judge should consider that English is The Lingua Franca of business and know that windows means venster.
Ciao, chris
The dutch term for a window is venster.
Correction– the correct term is “raam”, but hey, you from Belgium, and it could be you guys south of our border use “venster”
.
Well, lets just say that I find it weird that Windows ain’t no generic term… Wasn’t Xerox the company who “invented” the GUI? Did they have “windows” yet? If they did, they might be able to sue Microsoft, so they can start working on other things again besides copy-machines
Oh wait– you ment the thing on your computer screen… Okay, that’s indeed a venster…
Feelin’ pretty stupid here :S
Microsoft wanted the courts to fine Lindows 100K Euros per day, so as to drive it out of business. This now means that the fine is not going to happen.
This also means that when the jury finds that the Windows trademark is generic, that Microsoft will not be able to sue anyone for coming out with a “Windows” product. This means that there will eventually be several different operating systems on the market that are “Windows” — but only 1 will be “Microsoft Windows”.
Microsoft has been kleenexed.
In the Netherlands “Windows” isn’t really a generic term. The dutch term for a window is venster.
Then why don’t they name it “Venster”?
The Italian term for a window is finestra.
Lindows is obviously play on Microsoft Windows. Sure you could defend that the term is generic but its still an obvious play on the name and I am sure that is probably exactly what they had in mind whe selecting a name.
The names rhyme. So customers would be confused right? And they would go into the store to pick up a copy of “Microsoft Windows”tm; but not seeing a significant difference, they’d buy Lindows instead.
Not. Not only would Microsoft not lose out on sales due to the ‘similiarity’ of the product names, Lindows would be doing itself a huge disservice in associating itself with Windows (with a capital ‘W’).
I don’t believe Lindows’ intention is to mislead customers into thinking the Linux OS will run MS Windows software. Obviously that strategy would fail on it’s own terms because they can’t deliver. Microsoft wouldn’t have to sue. Their customers would be the ones trying to sue them out of existence.
The name Lindows suggests to me simply: Linux + windowing GUI.
“In my opinion is strange that Windows is not considered a generic term.”
In Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg (the places where these court rulings apply) the official languages are: german, dutch, french, frysian. In none of these, “windows” is a generic term.
In English, and in IT sector, which both have a role in all the 3 countries one could argue it is a generic term. IIRC that was what was argued…
[i]”The name Lindows suggests to me simply: Linux + windowing GUI.”[i]
Then why didn’t they name it Lindowing GUI? I think it is a direct play on Windows and I don’t think I am stretching here.
“lindows” is obviously different than “windows”…it’s a play on “linux” & “windows” …by US law there’s enough difference not to matter.
you can’t really blame Robertson for playing the game his way. It’s a brilliant idea. Finally somebody with brass balls enough to fight MS with all their own tactics…and even “innovate” new ones! It’s fun to see some real “one-up-manship” again. After all, that’s how MS got their pile of cash…by pre-announcing look-alike software and raining on everyone else’s day in the sun! Everyone aggrees that that wasn’t illegal…so why should Lindows be?
Also, not to put too fine a point on it, but Robertson is the only manager out there pushing to cut deals with the people in the industry that matter. He’s out there trying to get a real commercial distro that can compare to windows…things like DVD playback, AOL clients, and other software that People [Windows or mac] just expect to be there on a PC. Rather than whining about “it’s not FREE” he’s out there willing to “pay the rent” to get stuff for his distro…none of the other distros are willing to do that!!! Like it or not it takes “personality” and “intrigue” to get noticed… Look at how Apple & MS compete in the same areas. After all, lots of execs buy windows because Bill is the “richest guy in the world” [so HE can’t be wrong!] not because they understand the financial or techincal issues!
lots of execs buy windows because Bill is the “richest guy in the world” [so HE can’t be wrong!]
Right, i think main fallacies for this choice are
* Crumenam (in less extend and also other reasons than you put it. For example “X is rich because of Y. When i use Y, i’ll get as rich as X”).
* Populum (standardisation, because it is tied with a new OEM computer [implies Baculum too], lack of proper / up to date knowledge on alternatives).
* Ignorantiam as fallacy is losing on the field of security because of holes in the OS. Windows is widely perceived as an insecure piece of junk though lack of knowledge on alternatives could play a role here as well, leading a sell of the Windows OS still into the hand despite the security issues.
Anyway, it is complex
simply stating there’s one fallacy only, is a statement i disagree with.
Then why didn’t they name it Lindowing GUI? I think it is a direct play on Windows and I don’t think I am stretching here.
But are you fooled by it? Do you think they are the same? Isn’t that what would have to be happening in order to seek financial damages?
My point is that if that is Lindows intention and effect, it would be counterproductive for them anyway.
“you can’t really blame Robertson for playing the game his way. It’s a brilliant idea”
I can blame him, and I do.
It was nothing more than a circus trick, and that will be the end result.
You can’t make your way thru life by just being a turd in the middle of then flow.
It reminds me of a comedian I saw on TV (wish I knew the name) talking about the crappy shoe store in his neighborhood when he was growing up.
To the salesman: “Do you have Nike?”
Response: “No, we have ‘Like-ys’. They’re just as good!”
Not only would Linux not be ‘just as good’ (in terms of equivalence of function), but brand does matter to consumers. Similiar sounding names are not fooling anyone.
Remember “ketchup”? It was considered a specific trademark for the longest period of time. As a result, competing products used the sound-alike term, “catsup”. This was perfectly legal. Just some years back, ketchup was ruled a generic word and now any company can call their product ketchup.
Windows and Lindows is the same thing. Even if Windows wasn’t generic, sound-alikes are legal (here in the US at least). Windows IS a generic term, and Lindows is close to getting that made official in a court of law. That is why MS went shopping in other countries looking for a court which would do its bidding.
Their company name was/is/whatever “Lindows.com, Inc.” they used the .com part to try to win any welcomed lawsuits imposed by microsoft.
“Who writes this stuff for him? (steve martin)”
What stuff?
“It would be very difficult for me to believe one mind could be so suppressed by such garbage.”
What garbage?
“Perhaps this is why he chose the name “Lindows”?”
Perhaps not. Circular.
“Honest to God, the follows of Lindows/Linspire need to find a new bush to pray to; worshiping this one is going to prove foolish at best.”
Straw man.
dpi: I can’t parse the above post.
ball hair
“Then why didn’t they name it Lindowing GUI?”
or Gooey Windows? YUCK
Windows may have become a generic term that most people relate to M$, but that shouldn’t mean they own it. Most of us are using a os that uses windows for it’s interface… does M$ own the right to the generic term? Now, they did trademark the name, so within the law, the name can’t be used for a similar technolgy. For normal names I don’t agree with this… To me, it’s like tradmarking the word bridge (like the Brooklyn Bridge) and then proceeding to sue all similar structures for using the term (which is blatently generic) in there name.
My company uses a technology for a new configuration of drivers (speakers) that uses an array. The technology is tradmarked using the name Unity(TM). While this word is a normal word, the company that owns that technological rights licenses this to us. We get to use the technology, they get money, and we get to design using someone eles technology… whew, this could get convoluted.
So, for me… windows is a generic term of what type of GUI, but for most it’s a MicroSnort thing… too bad Lindows should’ve been allowed to keep the name (IMHO)
Jb
How do they expect users to keep track of different names in different countries???
“MicroSnort” – this is brilliant
microsoft owns the ‘term’ windows relating to operating systems and whatever else they registered the trademark under… since we know trademarks are registered depending on category each like $300/peice…
one huge deffense was microsoft was such an abusive monopoly that people should be able to violate their rights… well.. apple successfully did this to other companies so why wouldnt microsoft… im all for protecting IP… although I really don’t like MS.. i do think their home offices in redmond is very pretty and i wish i owned them (fantasy)
No one ever seems confused about the similarities between OS X and the pretty standard gui for most unix systems (called, funnily enough, X). This could be because nearly everyone calls X something else. (XFree, XFree86, X Windows, X.org, ….) This upset long time pedants who prowl the internet ridiculing people who use the term “X Windows” (for me it was in 1994.)
Does the X Consortium own the use of the letter X?
Is MS hinting that Windows[tm??] users are dumber than Apple users. Apple users can tell the difference, but apparently Windows users are easily confused?
and “mado” means “window” in japanese, however i seriously doubt that the MS OS is called “Microsoft Mado” there. MS is simply doing what some other brands (i.e xerox, kleenex) should have done to protect brand recognition. the fact that it happens to be a common word in english should have no bearing on this. just my ~2
I think Windows shouldn’t be a trademark in English speaking countries, because “windows” (displayed on a monitor) definitely WAS a generic term before Microsoft Windows came out. That’s why I’m quite sure that Lindows will win in the US and Microsoft will lose its “Windows” trademark there. In other countries, however, Windows can be a trademark, if the language used there didn’t adopt the word “windows” before Windows came out. E.g. in German, most computer-related terms are English foreign words, e.g. Chat, Computer, Scanner, Email, Newsgroup etc. but the German word for “windows” that are displayed on a computer monitor has always been the German translation of “windows”: “Fenster”. So I think you shouldn’t be able to sell a product called “Lindows” in Germany. It’s also clear that it cannot be forbidden to call an American company “Lindows” as long as they do not sell products in Germany with that name.
linspire is a far better name for the system.
and besides WE all know it is really Lindows
Such name disputes are so ridiculous,…
The fact that in UNIX World, X-Windows is the ubiquitous “GUI” system ( … well a part of the GUI ) doesn’t prevent MS from owning the generic term ? ( Maybe they could have called it XLindows )
Microsoft seem to avoid to create new terms and “steal” essential generic terms : Window, Word, Outlook, Explorer, Money, Visual … Which makes implicit confusion, for example between “a word processor” and “the MS word processor called word”, it is probably a deliberate marketing decision. MS is actually quite good at borrowing other’s ideas and terms.
One day they will put their hands on “Computer”, “Life”, “Soul”… “Be” has already been taken ;->
( About Visual : the older-than-MS-creation UNIX vi editor stands for visual )
The term windows is generic not because of glass but because there were several operating systems that had windowing GUIs. When you looked at them you talked about clicking on the different “windows” on the screen. This was before Windows 1.0 came out. Therefore the term “windows” or “windowing” were generic terms for what you saw on screens for operating systems. Therefore the trademark should be thrown out.
Again. It has nothing to do with windows that you look from the inside of a building to the outside of a building. This is about generic _OS_ terms used when describing what you see on screen. MS was FAR from the first OS to have this. Why do you think Apple suied them about look and feel? They wouldn’t have done this if MS was first.
“X-Windows is the ubiquitous “GUI” system”
No. X Window System is the name, short name is X. See xfree86.org, the FAQ or something this is addressed there. X-Windows is a bullshit term.
In computer history yes the word “windows” is generic, its been used for guis for a long time and in that respect if M$ wants to make a big tadoo over it they should have never been allowed to trademark it. (which maybe they havn’t anyway I think the real TM is “Microsoft Windows” the 2 words together but I could be wrong there).
However, Lindows chose that name to be cocky in the first place and use it as a way of gathering publicity for themselves. A brilliant move because it worked. (Remember when they even were touting how it would run windows). It worked so well that they were able to gather enough capital to make their CNR install process work smoothly and establish themselves almost overnight as the most well known desktop Linux distro. The question though is has it made them any money? Or will the legal battle cut into their pockets so much that R&D suffers?
I think I’m 100% right on this. They knew it would cause turmoil, yet at the same time bring in the publicity they need to gather capital but once the turmoil started eating into their bank account they changed the name. They did this on purpose and so far all results they projected. The question though is in the end will it make profit or will it go down as a footnote in a business class about what not to do?
>>>Microsoft seem to avoid to create new terms and “steal” essential generic terms : Window, Word, Outlook, Explorer, Money, Visual … Which makes implicit confusion, for example between “a word processor” and “the MS word processor called word”, it is probably a deliberate marketing decision. MS is actually quite good at borrowing other’s ideas and terms.
==========
OMG! That was such a good point! I run into that all the time when I’m helping relatives out with their computer problems over the phone. “Open your office program” … “I don’t have Office” me: “…ugg I mean your word processor it should be under start_programs somewhere…” time goes by “I don’t have a program called “Start programs…”
OMG I want to just install a linux client on all their machines sometimes so they can cut to the command line and just type what I tell them. I swear they never use more than 4 programs on their entire computer anyway most of them… how do customer rep’s from big companies like Dell go through a day without pulling their hair bald I wonder sometimes?