The United States District Court in Seattle has ruled in favor of Lindows.com Inc. ( www.lindows.com ) concerning key legal issues in the company's dispute with Microsoft over the "windows" trademark. The Court flatly rejected Microsoft's arguments today that the jury should consider the meaning of the term "windows" in its current day usage, ruling rather that the jury should focus on the timeframe prior to the release of Microsoft's Windows products, which is 1983-1985. The Court also ruled that once a word is declared generic it would continue to be generic, informing Microsoft that no amount of marketing around a generic word changes the generic state of the word.

Read more: Yahoo News.

That surprises me, I thought they were losing/lost.

Kudos to them. Yes I use M$ products.....like most of them.....but I'm all for fair competition. Just makes things better for all of us.

A bit late, but w00teh!

Now all we have to hope for is that the appeals court and supreme court feels the same...

BTW: I just can't believe I used the "word" "w00teh"... :eek:

Well, at least for the moment I don't have to put <panes of framed clear glass facilitating the viewing of the outside from within the four walls and also facilitating the sufficient airflow in the given room> in any hous I ever build.

They should have seen it coming. A window is a window. Windows are windows. How can you copyright a word like that and stop people using it?

Well, were not talking about a "window" or a peice of paper, or a tree or a dog. Were talking about the name of a program and the GUI that Microsoft created happens to just use these boxes called "windows". *Shrugs*. I don't think their really copyrighting the word windows. The thing is Lindows and Windows are both an OS and Lindows only has one letter difference. People love to capitilize on other's ideas.

I hate to say it but without doubt the creator of Lindows intention WAS to capitilize on Windows' name. You dont come up with a car called a "Kitsubishi" and not expect Mitsubishi to take you to court. Your obviously trying to make money off that name. No doubt about it.

In that respect acidosmosis, you are quite right. From a legal angle, I wonder what an appeal might bring also!

I would have ruled in Microsoft's favor because I would have took one look at the owner of Lindows and say hey man look here, you can't sit there and tell me you didnt decide on the name "Lindows" to capitilize on Windows' name. If not then you did it out of stupidity so in either case I'm ruling in Microsoft's favor.

Considering most OS these days uses windows in their GUI's it's quite hard to MS to say that they have the sole right to it...

Neither did they create the first OS which used windows in it's GUI, so that too is a moot point...

In light of this one can easily make a case that say that the Lindows name was chosen since it uses windows in it's GUI and is based on Linux...

Besides MS has a long history of using generic words for their OS'... DOS anyone? They couldn't stop anyone using the word Free-Dos PC-Dos etc., as DOS is a generic abbrevation...

So it doesn't neccessarily mean that Lindows chose the name solely to capitalize on MS Windows...

IMO MS would've been better of if they'd manage to come up with a more creative name for their OS instead of just describing what it looks like...

Wouldn't that have been too difficult for consumers? :giddy:

Well if you look at this from a judge's point of view. The FACT in the matter is, Microsoft's name was allowed to be copyrighted regardless of how generic it is. So therefore someone should not be able to capitilize off of that name. That's the whole point.

That's how the courts see it, and it's just as well really.

For instace, would it be fair for me to copyright the word "the", and then sue people for using it?