| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft Strong Arms Windows Enthusiast | |
|
||
| Time: 00:54 EST/05:54 GMT | News Source: WinInformant | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
So True. "In the meantime, Bink is left wondering why someone who has supported Windows XP so vocally would be threatened by the company that makes the product. Microsoft has taken a similar hard line against other similar Web sites in the past; in 1998, the company demanded that I change the name of the Windows SuperSite to SuperSite for Windows, and Active Windows was forced to change its name to ActiveWin, for example. " | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 344 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:54:07 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 12/11/2002 1:31:00 AM |
|
Paul really bugs me some times.
"Microsoft is currently in danger of losing its Windows trademark, thanks to a frivolous lawsuit it filed against Lindows.com last year." FYI, it is not frivolous to enforce your trademark. If you don't enforce your marks, you lose them. The reasonable conclusion to draw is that if you go to the trouble of getting trademarks, you have just wasted a considerable amount of money if you don't plan on enforcing them. |
| #2 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 12/11/2002 2:19:06 AM |
|
Microsoft doesn't have issues with communities. It loves communities. What it doesn't like, though, are trademark infringements.
If you think Sun would do any less, you've got to be kidding. Sun and Apple and every other major corporation has a legal department whose job it is to defend trademarks (among other things). This is very standard corporate practice. I find it very hard to believe that Bink didn't expect this. |
| #3 By 7711 (12.107.81.66) at 12/11/2002 7:07:44 AM |
|
#1: exactly right. I once read that the company that makes the Frisbee disc (Wham-o, I think) has individuals on the payroll to search through the media for used of the "Frisbee" name without the little tm mark..aggressive enforcement, but then the name Aspirin is still trademarked in Canada due to successful trademark use.
Oops....Frisbee (tm) ;] |
| #4 By 1124 (165.170.128.66) at 12/11/2002 8:44:07 AM |
| #5 Unix is not a trademark owned by any one company. Apples to orange comparison. |
| #5 By 2 (24.51.234.43) at 12/11/2002 9:07:56 AM |
| I will just say that changing our name was upsetting at first, but if Bink does things correctly he can make the best of the situation. |
| #6 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/11/2002 10:34:51 AM |
|
Glad eswan said it, cause otherwise I was going to bring it up.
Lindows is sort of like selling Rolix(rather than Rolex) watches for $100 on the street corners in Hong Kong. There's only one reason you choose a name like that. And BTW, while Paul thinks the "Windows" trademark is frivolous... the "Windows XP" trademark is definately not. This issue here is based off the latter, not former. Hmm, it seems redhatlinux.com is taken, but not redhatlinux.us. Perhaps I should register that and put up a lot of anti-Linux crap. |
| #7 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/11/2002 10:51:39 AM |
|
These types of things don't serve to boost Microsoft's image. I wonder if they intend to do something with that domain name? I don't think their legal department is bored.... ;)
Interesting--if "Windows" is too general for trademarking, what about "Apple"??? |
| #8 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/11/2002 10:58:02 AM |
|
DELTA75329 -
"If you think otherwise, please seek professional help." "And what's the deal with the personal attacks? Do you think that makes you any more credible?" Good question... Would you care to enlighten us on that? As for Lindows. It seems to me that they could save everybody a lot of headaches if they changed their name. Perhaps Linderson? Seems to me that since it's just a made up name, and it's not intended to be confused with Windows that they shouldn't have any problem using a name that doesn't "accidentally" confuse itself with Windows. Obviously their choice of name was purely by accident, right? This post was edited by sodablue on Wednesday, December 11, 2002 at 10:58. |
| #9 By 1124 (165.170.128.66) at 12/11/2002 11:33:13 AM |
|
"There isn't a consumer on this earth that would purchase a Lindows-based PC and think they were getting Microsoft Windows. "
Paul, These kinds of statements are what gets people upset. HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW THIS!! I know for sure that it confuses my mother and lets not even mention my grand. If MS did what Lindows did, you would be the first on your soapbox about the evils of Microsoft. BTW, nice Inquirer title ("Microsoft Strong Arms Windows Enthusiast"). Do you write for them? |
| #10 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 12/11/2002 12:01:51 PM |
|
Delta: Actually, when the whole lawsuit came around, I asked my mother if she heard the term Lindows, would she think it was a product that was made by Microsoft, and she responded with a yes. The question is not whether or not they confuse Lindows and Windows (although that could happen), the question is whether or not people confuse Lindows as being a Microsoft product.
The fact is it's not just a made up word, it's a word that was made for the sole purpose of capitalizing off of Windows' name recognition. |
| #11 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/11/2002 12:41:48 PM |
|
BTW, if you go to the streets of Hong Kong, New York, etc. you'll find people selling fake goods. Jeans, watches and so forth that look exactly like the designer labels. But instead of saying Rolex, they'll say Rolix or something on them. Instead of saying Hilfiger they say Hillfigure and so on.
It's common practice, and their defense is that they aren't using the same name, they are just using a made-up name. Yeah it sounds similar, and yeah their product is designed to look similar, but... "honest , we're just providing an alternative!" If you can't see that you need psychological help. :-) |
| #12 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 12/11/2002 1:12:06 PM |
|
Delta: Just because people use the computer doesn't mean they know the terms... in fact, they do NOT know the terms.
Hell, I know people that are afriad of the start bar, do you honestly think they know IDE, BIOS, etc.... no, they don't. They aren't handling the computer, they just call the people who can handle it and pay them to fix it/set it up. Lindows only has name recognition among computer enthusiests, and that's ONLY because of the trial case. Lindows essentially has no name recognition at this point... and I guarentee you that any non-computer enthusiest that you ask will think that Lindows is a Microsoft product. |
| #13 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 12/11/2002 1:29:01 PM |
|
There's only one thing to be learned from all his.
The Trademark laws need work. The "Don't enforce and lose" issue has caused so much grief, and cost so much in legal $$$'s (not that the Lawyers care) that it should be re-written to allow companies to seek action against only those it feels it's necessary to seek action against. TL |
| #14 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/11/2002 2:47:55 PM |
|
#30 - Actually it's Apples and Apples. Nice try to deflect from the point, but I think you should address it directly instead. Why must this product be called Lindows? Why must bink use windowsxp.nu? The only reasons I can think of is for them to gain from the confusion relating to MS's product.
Zolk - Exactly! That's why I'm confused by this argument. It's pretty cut and dried as to why this is happening, just as it's pretty clear why Lindows is being sued. I don't understand the rational of anybody defending either case. |
| #15 By 116 (129.116.86.41) at 12/11/2002 3:07:28 PM |
|
I usually agree with Paul Thurrott but on this issue I find him to be dead wrong.
Lindows lawsuit being frivolous is a huge joke. Lindows knows exactly what they are doing... As for bink. Sorry man, but you shouldn't have registered that domain name... Hopefully its obvious to you why this isn't cool what you have done with your website. Why not just winxp.nu? Its even shorter to type@! Peace, RedAvenger |
| #16 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 12/11/2002 3:11:00 PM |
| TL, bob670, Zolk, sodablue, Red - Dead on! |
| #17 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/11/2002 4:25:44 PM |
|
"There's only one thing to be learned from all his.
The Trademark laws need work. The "Don't enforce and lose" issue has caused so much grief, and cost so much in legal $$$'s (not that the Lawyers care) that it should be re-written to allow companies to seek action against only those it feels it's necessary to seek action against." I've never heard a single company complain that enforcing trademarks is burdensome. On the other hand, faulty attempts to protect trademarks exposes the true concerns of the trademark and go a long way to determine whether or not it is valid. This is a perfect example: Microsoft has failed to attack hundreds of products with Win or Windows in their name... Meaning they in part except that it can be a generic name or are willing to have other's dilute the quality of the trademark if and only if the product doesn't challenge them. You are specifically requesting that selective enforcement be not only allowable, but the law? That's worse than someone trying to violate a trademark; the trademark holders have no responsibility to use the mark uniquely or consistently, and have the power to selectively prosecute violators? That's an oddball suggestion. Soda, I don't get your position at all: why doesn't Lindows just change it's name? Because they picked it and want it... The only reason to change it is to make Microsoft happy. That's not a very good reason. Why doesn't Microsoft withdraw its trademark and lawsuits, that would make Lindows happy. By the way, the site should lose its name; this is a case of good trademark protection. Sorry, but that's the way it is. This post was edited by sodajerk on Wednesday, December 11, 2002 at 18:11. |
| #18 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 12/11/2002 6:28:39 PM |
|
Jerky boy - "Soda, I don't get your position at all: why doesn't Lindows just change it's name? Because they picked it and want it... The only reason to change it is to make Microsoft happy. That's not a very good reason. Why doesn't Microsoft withdraw its trademark and lawsuits, that would make Lindows happy."
You don't get my position because you ignore the most critical component of my position. The only reason they choose Lindows was to create confusion with Windows. If they called it "Linderson OS" or something, it would be the same product, it would be a unique name, yet it would not create confusion with Windows. It is that confusion reason that is not desirable to Lindows, and that is the reason for the lawsuit. As to bink and windowsxp.nu, that's entirely because of the enforcement mandate for trademarks. Maybe Bink should call it windowsxptm.nu? |
| #19 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/11/2002 6:41:20 PM |
|
I ignore your "most critical component" because that's MS's problem. And you are obviously just confinign yourself to MS' blinder's again. Only reason? There's few things in this world motivated by one reason. Someone else could just as easily say the name is that way to suggest that it is Linux with a Windows compatibility layer--which it is--in which case, any name will probably attempt to capture that quality.
You are saying MS is afraid of confusion so Lindows should change. Your suggestion is also foolish--you act as if Linderson OS has the same qualities and aspects of the current name "it would be the same product, it would be a unique name, yet it would not create confusion with Windows." But it has no uniqueness, no oompf as a name, it creates no impression, nor does it suggest what it is. The idea that this is a good idea just impresses on me that Lindows is more unique and meaningful than the name Windows ever was. "As to bink and windowsxp.nu, that's entirely because of the enforcement mandate for trademarks." But are you saying there's a problem with that? Are you suggesting like Tech that a company only needs to protect a trademark when it pisses them off and at other times it's just a compliment and not a dilution? |
| #20 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 12/11/2002 8:27:57 PM |
|
jerky boy - "I ignore your "most critical component" because that's MS's problem."
Which is, of course, why they are suing. It appears that you have caught yourself up in another convoluted string of logic inescapable because of your hatred of Microsoft. "Are you suggesting like Tech that a company only needs to protect a trademark when it pisses them off and at other times it's just a compliment and not a dilution?" Pretty much, and that's sort of how the law works. If Bink had asked permission to use Windows XP, Microsoft would have either said yes or no. I guess I see this a bit like the MP3 pirates arguing how they are giving free publicity for the bands. You know, maybe Microsoft or the bands don't want the free publicity? |
| #21 By 931 (66.156.6.136) at 12/12/2002 6:53:50 AM |
|
This is wrong if MS takes this beyond a stupid letter that there required to sent inorder to claim they enforced there trademark then this is absurd...what's further absured is they dont want to fork over the couple hundred for the transfer.. lol
This dude just stick it to them for a long as possible just on principal... if this was some site that said "MS blows donkeys.." i still would not think differently.. he owns it, it's farken his.. ms was late to the game registering it.. they fing lose.. tough bananas ms. |
| #22 By 931 (66.156.6.136) at 12/12/2002 6:55:24 AM |
|
reminds me of the nissan ruling which btw nissian motors lost.
|
| #23 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/12/2002 2:38:58 PM |
|
#51 - "You're the one who brought up an irrelevant example."
That's the problem... the examples is very relevant, but you keep avoiding that issue because you are apparently afraid it may damage your logic. Perhaps you should explain why you think Lindows should use a name which is similar to Windows so as to confuse users which doesn't use Windows as part of the explanation. I'd like that, it'd be quite humorous. |
| #24 By 177578 (65.39.172.203) at 12/16/2008 3:00:01 PM |
|
Well if you are looking to get date with a wealthy rich guy or a gal then this is the way to get it. Try it and see
for yourself. Also the website gives you a way to get an elite gold membership completely free also. You can go here <a href=http://get-free-date.com/dating-rich-men/>Dating Rich Men</a> Thanks |
| #25 By 181024 (65.39.172.203) at 12/22/2008 10:11:17 PM |
|
Often it becomes really difficult for single parents to get into a date or to find a date
when they have so much responsibility and also not much time. Luckily internet can be a very good resource for parents to get a date using online dating agencies. If you are looking to get into a relationship then this is a good place to start. The best thing is once you get a adultfriendfinder membership then you can can automatically get all memberships of other sites that are offered by adult friend finder. These are all dating websites, best thing is you can get points by getting all memberships and then redeem those points to get a gold membership absolutely free. Click the link <a href=http://get-free-date.com/how-to-get-a-free-adult-friend-finder-gold-membership/>Dating Agencies For Parents</a> to read how you can get a gold membership for any of the dating sites that adult friend finder offers. Just use the points to get gold membership of any website you want. Enjoy! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 344 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:54:07 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
