On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 22:03 -0800, Justin Newman wrote: > You are just plain wrong. Haha...better, just clueless. > > Microsoft lost the trademark battle on Windows and had to pay off Lindows.com > $20 million to change their name: > http://www.web2journal.com/read/45613.htm > According to that MS didnt lose, but rather settled to avoid losing.
<quote> Microsoft also failed to get the US Court of Appeals to hear a rare interlocutory appeal made before the district court case had a chance to start and declare the Windows trademark valid. The district court trial, after a couple of delays, was finally supposed to start this half. Obviously Microsoft couldn't run the risk losing the Windows name and settled out-of-court, basically an admitting that Lindows had it over a barrel. ... In the settlement, Lindows throws Microsoft a bone and acknowledges the validity of the Windows trademark. </quote> Granted linspire acknowledging it means nothing, but the courts appear to have not ruled on it, only expressed some concern as to its validity, as such its still valid and has not yet been revoked by the USPTO nor the courts. In europe it appears that MS did get some victory status off it in some courts, or so says that same article. > I encourage all my competitors to infringe Gates' "Windows" and > "Microsoft" trademarks without asking his permission. > In light of that and how much it would cost to defend in court that may not be the best policy, and if it is one, advertising it so openly may not be the best. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel Belfast +44 28 9099 6461 US +1 516 687 5200 http://www.trxtel.com the phone company that pays you! _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
