Microsoft vs Lindows

From: Reuben Reyes <>
Date: Sat Aug 17 22:48:00 2002

Why has Micro$oft not gone after "X Windows", this looks
even closer to the actual name of Windows, but since it
is freely available they cant zero in on anybody/company.


On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Martin Marshall wrote:

> This may be a bit off topic.
> I received a forwarded message that originated from They
> are in a suit with Microsoft regarding the use of "Lindows,com".
> Microsoft is suing Lindows for trademark violation. In the message,
> Michael Robertson, with Lindows, is looking for old documentation of the
> use of the word "windows" and "windowing" prior to 1983. I can't think
> of a better resource than this list to find these references. The
> relevant part of the forwarded message is quoted below.
> Maybe some of the list members can provide the needed info to
> Martin Marshall
> ________________quote from forwarded
> message______________________________________________
> Microsoft Corp. v. Update
> Some of you have sent me email asking for an update on the battle with
> Microsoft and wanting to
> know how you can help. In case you missed it, Microsoft sued to shut
> down earlier in
> the year. It was a transparent attempt to stifle the inevitable
> competition which Linux represents.
> Their allegation was (and is) that they own the trademark for the word
> "windows," maintaining that
> no other company should be allowed to use the word "windows" -- not
> even the "indows" portion.
> Of course, there are hundreds of products and companies that use the
> word "windows" - and
> Microsoft has never filed suit against any of them. That's a huge clue
> that this suit has little to do
> with trademark confusion. (If you missed any part of the proceedings
> to date, visit
> to read the court papers and
> summaries.)
> Many people have congratulated us, prematurely, on our victory. While
> the judicial system did block
> their request to shut us down, a trial is looming for April 2003. At
> that time, the Judge (or jury) will
> decide whether Microsoft has a valid trademark for the word "windows"
> and whether the
> name is confusing. In the interim, we're moving through
> the legal process where
> Microsoft is demanding, as part of the discovery process, everything
> from our business plan to our
> list of partner companies. As you can imagine, it's challenging for a
> 39-person company to
> compete with a Goliath that has hundreds of people--just in the legal
> department alone. This is
> where we could use a bit of help from our community of Insiders and
> those on our mailing list.
> While Microsoft can outspend us with high-priced lawyers and experts,
> they cannot buy history. We
> know, of course, that the word "windows" had been used in the industry
> for years before Microsoft
> adopted it in the early 1980s for the name of its windowing interface
> product, Microsoft Windows
> 1.0. We could, however, use your help in gathering as much evidence as
> possible to show the usage
> of the words "windows", "window" and "windowing" before and after
> 1983, the date Microsoft first
> filed its trademark application. If you have magazine or newspaper
> articles, academic papers,
> journal articles, product manuals, advertisements, textbooks,
> dictionaries, or anything else that uses
> the terms, we'd like to hear from you. We'd also like to hear from
> anyone who had personal
> experience in the industry during those early years and can recall the
> history of the early
> windowing products such as Xerox's Star, VisiCorp's VisiOn, Apple's
> Lisa, Digital Research's GEM,
> Quarterdeck's DesQ, IBM's TopView, and others. Please email all your
> findings to
> As always, thanks for all your help.
> Michael Robertson
> ________________________________________________________________________________________________
Received on Sat Aug 17 2002 - 22:48:00 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:36 BST