MicroSoft: 'Lindows' violates our trademark

[bubaslubas]

M$ has chosen Linux has their new enemy, after realizing that Apple was unbeatable in matters that count, i.e. OS performance, stability and easiness to use. While it is true that Windows XP is fairly better than 2000 Pro and a huge leap from the disgusting WinME, M$'s attempts to force the consumer to buy upgrades, patches and subscribe to MSN's internet services are absolutely unacceptable. I have been in this forum before defending XP; I maintain most of my argumentation, but have to add that XP's biggest problem is M$'s aggressive-offensive marketing. Windows Media Player simply sucks, that MP3 ripping restrictions are an offense to the costumer. The "Shop For Music Online" item in Explorer is also pukable. The index.dat and ntuser.dat files, which keep track of EVERY website and folder we open, delete or copy, are outrageous.

No wonder people are starting to turn to alternatives that are not intrusive or abusive.

Linux is a very good alternative, and should pose a serious threat to Windows in the next couple of years. That's why they are so afraid of it. While I still think Windows beats Linux in many issues, it's pleasing to see that Tux's house is evolving at lightspeed. Macs are already far superior to M$, so hopefully they will lose significant market share in the next couple of years - who knows, they might start doing some good OSs!

[voidmain]

Bubbleass, is that really you?  Or is someone impersonating you like they did me?  It almost sounds like you're starting to emerge from the dark side.  

[bubaslubas]

It IS me, all right - I was never on the dark side, I was perfectly aware of such issues, I just didn't realize how deep they were.

[voidmain]

The funny thing is, Microsoft does not own the trademark "Windows".  They only own the trademark  "Microsoft Windows". Are they trying to say that people could confuse the term "Lindows" or "Lindows.com" with "Microsoft Windows"?

And what is Microsoft trying to say by this? Are they saying that Lindows needs to change their name because it may help provide a small amount of competition for the software giant monopoly? Isn't that exactly the courts' objective (at least on the surface, even if they really don't give a shit because they have much stock in MS)?

If MS is successful in beating "Lindows" and "Lindows.com" then MIT should sue MS for infringing on "XWindows" which was out *long* before "Microsoft Windows".  I don't see how Microsoft could have a case here.  They *only* want to stomp Linux in any way they can. Just like in the old story, "David" will win in the end (referring to Linux as David, not Lindows, the founder of Lindows is "no" David, but he should win this suit).

[ January 18, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[bcortens]

connetix virtual pc(not sure how to spell it off hand)

allows me to run all the pc apps i want on my Mac and you don't see M$ suing them for it?

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Ben:
connetix virtual pc(not sure how to spell it off hand) allows me to run all the pc apps i want on my Mac and you don't see M$ suing them for it?

Well, the lawsuit with "Lindows" is because of the name sounding too much like "Microsoft Windows" (apparently they believe potential MS users are brainless, which is true I guess), not because of the apps it runs. If you believe that I have some swamp land.  Now that doesn't mean Microsoft wont sue them for some other reason in the future depending on which way the wind is blowing.  They have to keep those lawyers busy, they're paying them well.

[ January 19, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[BoogerHead]

Oh shit, I just realized that "Bimbos" kinda sounds like Windows.  Maybe all the blonde bimbos out there should be sued too!  We will have to come up with a different name for the bimbos...perhaps...well we must be Politically correct here...hmmm...women.

[SpeeDFreaK]

Something that bothers me about this whole thing... M$ is coming out with a new box that plays xbox games and does a whole bunch of other net related stuff. Last time I checked it was the HomeStation or something like that. If that's what it is, couldn't sony sue for confusion between names if we play by M$'s rules?

[voidmain]

If you haven't noticed, with MS it's "Do as I say, not as I do".  They do one thing, then sue someone else for doing the exact same thing.  I can't believe people still use their shit.

[Calum]

All the gringos in the world better watch out too!

This was bound to happen sooner or later though, M$ has been trying for years to get a solid grip on something to do with Linux, but being so ethereal and nonentitic as Linux is, it has been hard for them. (how can you sue a company that doesn't actually exist?)
So you can imagine the day when some press monitor guy leapt up from his chair, knocking his tray of sedatives to the floor and ambled along the corridor wiping the drool from his mouth. "Lord Gates!, Lord Gates!" i can almost hear him cry, "At last, Master, we can sue those dastardly Linux mongrels!" As he stood there, panting with excitement, i can imagine Gates slowly, but slowly, swivelling in his padded armchair with that evil/dopey grin on his face "Excellent." he would have said, "Release the hounds!"

BTW, wasn't XWindows actually called "X" and NOT "XWindows"? I thought it was called X because it was an upgrade from its parent program which was called "W". The name "XWindows" was attributed to it later as, sadly, people thought of windows whenever they saw any GUI.

[Calum]

And something else too! i'm sure there are many programs out there which emulate windows in a Linux environment and M$ has never kicked up a stink till now. Maybe they think there aren't enough people using linux to worry about it...  

[voidmain]

Nope, it's been XWindows as long as I can remember, which is longer than there has been a Microsoft Windows. And sure, Wine, Win4Lin, etc have been around for a while but they have no case for that, which is why they are quibling on the Lindows name and not what it does (even though we know the *real* reason is because of what it does).

[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[Calum]

My source re: X not XWindows is the book 'Rebel Code' by Glyn Moody
reviews can be found here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738203335/102-6975599-1390561
and here:
http://www.scs.leeds.ac.uk/wylug/reviews/rebel_code.html

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Calum:
My source re: X not XWindows is the book 'Rebel Code' by Glyn Moody
reviews can be found here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738203335/102-6975599-1390561
and here:
http://www.scs.leeds.ac.uk/wylug/reviews/rebel_code.html

I don't have that book, which looks like a book for Linux and there is nothing I could find in the links you mention that back up what you say.  I used to have the full set of O'Reilly books on Xwindows programming (took up an entire shelf). Remember Xwindows was around long before Linux came on the scene.  As long as I can remember it was commonly referred to "Xwindows", but "X" or "X11" for short, but I don't claim to have the best memory.  The first document I found on a quick search on Xwindows history is:

http://campus.champlain.edu/faculty/rogate/cis233f/Unix-Lec3.htm

states:
   

quote:


Xwindows History

Xwindows standard was developed at MIT in early 1980s
It spread similar to UNIX. It was implemented by different companies and individuals using different computers and having different needs.
New releases overseen by a consortium of companies (IBM, DEC, MIT)
Standard left out rules for user interface
Fosters interoperability between different types of computers (different models of mainframes, minicomputers, PCs).
Standard is maintained today by the Xconsoritium (a group of manufacturers)
Current version: X11 Release 6

However, looking over the legal page on www.xfree.org, specifically: http://www.xfree86.org/current/LICENSE2.html#3

states that "X Window System" is a trademark of X Consortium, Inc which took over the Xwindows project from MIT. I didn't do a trademark search to see the date that was registered but that could easily be done. I clearly remember everyone referring to it as "Xwindows" before MS Windows came out, and almost every official document I see the word "Xwindows" used in has a "TM" next to that name referring to MIT.

How can we get a difinitive answer on this? Anyone know anyone who worked on the project at MIT?

[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[voidmain]

After a little more research I am leaning toward thinking that the "official" trademark is "X Window System". Now I have a problem even with that.  I have searched and searched tess on http://www.uspto.gov and I can't find any trace of any of it. Lot's of "Windows XP", "Microsoft Windows", "Microsoft <insert any common word here>", but nothing to do with "Xwindows", "X Window System", "X11", etc.  Just where the hell did they register their trademark??  I'm a novice in this area if you can't tell.