wxWindows changes name

[Ben Finney]

Howdy all,

Just when we thought things were looking up on the whole "Windows as a
trademark" for something that Microsoft didn't originate in the first
place.

The wxWindows project have announced that they are changing their name
to wxWidgets, specifically to avoid problems with the Microsoft product
name.

<http://www.wxwindows.org/name.htm>

Fortunately, the name wxPython still fits with the new name for the
underlying toolkit.

 

[Tim Roberts]

Just when we thought things were looking up on the whole "Windows as a
trademark" for something that Microsoft didn't originate in the first
place.

The wxWindows project have announced that they are changing their name
to wxWidgets, specifically to avoid problems with the Microsoft product
name.

That's enough to make a guy angry. Not at Julian or Robin, but at the
bozos at Microsoft who have the unmitigated gall to suggest that ANY use of
the word "windows" could possibly have any impact on their galactic empire.

Did you hear about the teenager named Mike Rowe, who decided to call his
little company "Mike Rowe Soft"? When he registered his domain, the
Redmond lawyers came a-knocking, demanding money. Fortunately, the bad
press caused them to change their mind in this case.

Andersen Windows had better fire up their legal team.

 

[Piet van Oostrum]

TR> That's enough to make a guy angry. Not at Julian or Robin, but at the
TR> bozos at Microsoft who have the unmitigated gall to suggest that ANY use of
TR> the word "windows" could possibly have any impact on their galactic empire.

TR> Did you hear about the teenager named Mike Rowe, who decided to call his
TR> little company "Mike Rowe Soft"? When he registered his domain, the
TR> Redmond lawyers came a-knocking, demanding money. Fortunately, the bad
TR> press caused them to change their mind in this case.

So what will happen to the X Window system, often referred to as XWindows.
And what about the comp.windows.x newsgroup hierarchy?

 

[max khesin]

Pet van Oostrum wrote:

So what will happen to the X Window system, often referred to as XWindows.
And what about the comp.windows.x newsgroup hierarchy?

comp.widgets.x ? hmm..

 

[Terry Reedy]

So what will happen to the X Window system, often referred to as

XWindows.

Isn't there a consortium or something, with much more resources ($$$) to
fight than Julian and Robin have? Anyway, I have the impression (possibly
wrong) that WxWindows started out to be compatible with and a clone of and
was originally named after MS Windows, while the X Window system preceeds
MSW, so that the cases (and possible court outcomes) are different.

It is a complement to Julian and Robin that MS noticed them enough to
threaten and negotiate with them. Also that they did not just cave but
negotiated a 6 month transition period and $ for transition costs.

And what about the comp.windows.x newsgroup hierarchy?

Who are they going to sue?

Terry J. Reedy

 

[Peter Hansen]

Howdy all,

Just when we thought things were looking up on the whole "Windows as a
trademark" for something that Microsoft didn't originate in the first
place.

The wxWindows project have announced that they are changing their name
to wxWidgets, specifically to avoid problems with the Microsoft product
name.

<http://www.wxwindows.org/name.htm>

I haven't read the link (deliberately, for now) but I'd point out that the
some of the "problems" they are avoiding by doing so are the possible confusion
in the minds of potential users as to whether wxWindows is cross-platform
or not. wxWidgets might be an easier "sell" as a cross-platform GUI framework,
so in that sense it's not a bad idea.

Who really wants "windows" in their product name in this day and age anyway?

It's not like it carries connotations of reliability or good design, is it?

-Peter

 

[Ken Godee]

TR> That's enough to make a guy angry. Not at Julian or Robin, but at the
TR> bozos at Microsoft who have the unmitigated gall to suggest that ANY use of
TR> the word "windows" could possibly have any impact on their galactic empire.

TR> Did you hear about the teenager named Mike Rowe, who decided to call his
TR> little company "Mike Rowe Soft"? When he registered his domain, the
TR> Redmond lawyers came a-knocking, demanding money. Fortunately, the bad
TR> press caused them to change their mind in this case.

So what will happen to the X Window system, often referred to as XWindows.
And what about the comp.windows.x newsgroup hierarchy?

Couple points,

1. The X window systems name is not "X Windows", it is simply
'X' or 'X11' . Just alot of people wrongly call it Xwindows.

2. I'm not defending MS in anyway, but if one doesn't
defend it's trade mark it will become non defendable
and you must defend it against all, not pick and choose.
Hell, look at what Harley Davidson's done in tha last
couple of years. Trademarked/patented everything including
the sound of thier scooters and they're defending it rigorously.
Just try to open a motorcycle shop called something like "Hog Heaven" or
anything with the name "Hog" in it and see how long before
you get a letter, before the grand opening I'd bet.

 

[Terry Reedy]

I haven't read the link (deliberately, for now)

It is a straightforward one page announcement of the change with a request
that others go along and get on with coding. No rants or sordid details to
avoid;-)

but I'd point out that the
some of the "problems" they are avoiding by doing so are the possible confusion
in the minds of potential users as to whether wxWindows is cross-platform
or not. wxWidgets might be an easier "sell" as a cross-platform GUI framework,
so in that sense it's not a bad idea.

Who really wants "windows" in their product name in this day and age anyway?

It's not like it carries connotations of reliability or good design, is

it?

I agree that MS may have pushed them into making a change that is at least
neutral and possibly positive in the long run.

Terry J. Reedy

 

[Anand Pillai]

In the news article, it says that the Microsoft made a "polite request".
I dont think that they actually "threatened" Julian and Robin like they
did to that teenage boy. These guys are not teenagers you know

It looks to me more like an agreement worked out between M$ and
Julian/Robin with some apologies from the M$ lawyers pleading
with them how much they need to defend the "Windows" and "Microsoft"
namespaces from being polluted by the big bad world out there.

They started with Lindows, went to Mike Rowe, now wxWindows,
now "Where do they want to go today" ?

Someone should direct the M$ lawyers to the new M$ ad being showed
on TV everyday these days. At least that will help them to get
"next big ideas" instead of worrying about namespaces.

-Anand

 

[Paul Rubin]

In the news article, it says that the Microsoft made a "polite request".
I dont think that they actually "threatened" Julian and Robin like they
did to that teenage boy. These guys are not teenagers you know

I like the name wxWidgets a lot better than wxWindows. wxWindows
makes it sound like a Windows product. For the longest time I paid no
attention to it because I don't use Windows and I didn't realize it
was cross-platform.

 

[Paul Boddie]

For the nth time, it isn't referred to as XWindows in any official or
meaningful sense.

Isn't there a consortium or something, with much more resources ($$$) to
fight than Julian and Robin have?

Yes, it's called Sun Microsystems who used the OpenWindows name ages
ago:

http://step.polymtl.ca/~coyote/open-look/01-general/faq-doc-1.html

I guess Microsoft aren't up for yet more protracted legal action
involving Sun, so they go for the small guy instead.

[...]

It is a complement to Julian and Robin that MS noticed them enough to
threaten and negotiate with them. Also that they did not just cave but
negotiated a 6 month transition period and $ for transition costs.

Microsoft deserves no compliments whatsoever. This is just a case of a
company blatantly misusing a generic term which they've been told they
can't even enforce as a trademark in the United States, surfing
different legal systems in order to find places where they can carry
out acts reminiscent of extortion on legitimate activities and
businesses, and then bullying small outfits who can't afford to argue
for any substantial period of lawyer time.

For once, the United States is actually a beacon of sanity in all
this. There's Lindows being issued with injunctions all over the
planet for the use of a name which resembles Windows; there's the
bloke behind Mobilix being forced to change his site's name to
TuxMobil because the publishers of Asterix think they own every name
ending with "ix". The only positive thing about the former case is
that Michael Robertson seems to know enough about public relations to
make every aggressive move by Microsoft an embarrassment for them
whilst raising the profile of his own business.

So, how is it a compliment that a corporation waits several years
before jumping on an now-established project whose name doesn't really
infringe on any reasonable trademark? How does threatening behaviour
deserve any compliment whatsoever?

Paul

 

[Piet van Oostrum]

KG> 1. The X window systems name is not "X Windows", it is simply
KG> 'X' or 'X11' . Just alot of people wrongly call it Xwindows.

I know. Therefore I said "often referred to as XWindows".
But in fact that could arouse Microsofts anger, so that they also might
attack the name 'X Window System'.
By the way, I think just X or X11 isn't an official name either. And
especially X is now confusing with Mac OS X around.

KG> 2. I'm not defending MS in anyway, but if one doesn't
KG> defend it's trade mark it will become non defendable
KG> and you must defend it against all, not pick and choose.
KG> Hell, look at what Harley Davidson's done in tha last
KG> couple of years. Trademarked/patented everything including
KG> the sound of thier scooters and they're defending it rigorously.
KG> Just try to open a motorcycle shop called something like "Hog Heaven" or
KG> anything with the name "Hog" in it and see how long before
KG> you get a letter, before the grand opening I'd bet.

The point is that "Windows" isn't a trademark, or at least shouldn't be
because it's too generic. "MS Windows" or "Microsoft Windows", OK.
The same was the case with DOS: many people called MS-DOS just "DOS",
although there were other DOSses around.

I think they shouldn't be allowed to hijack the name "Windows". And neither
"Word" or "Office" for that matter.

 

[Thomas Heller]

The point is that "Windows" isn't a trademark, or at least shouldn't be
because it's too generic. "MS Windows" or "Microsoft Windows", OK.
The same was the case with DOS: many people called MS-DOS just "DOS",
although there were other DOSses around.

I think they shouldn't be allowed to hijack the name "Windows". And neither
"Word" or "Office" for that matter.

MS isn't alone in doeing this. Here in germany, we have the case that
the 'Telekom' is trying to hijack both the letter 'T' and the color
magenta.

Strange times...

Thomas

 

[Terry Reedy]

"Terry Reedy" <[email protected]> wrote in message

I guess Microsoft aren't up for yet more protracted legal action
involving Sun, so they go for the small guy instead.
Exactly


Microsoft deserves no compliments whatsoever. .....
So, how is it a compliment that a corporation waits several years
before jumping on an now-established project whose name doesn't really
infringe on any reasonable trademark? How does threatening behaviour
deserve any compliment whatsoever?

It does not and I did not and I do not see how you could think so from my
praising Julian and Robin.

Terry J. Reedy

 

[Asun Friere]

The point is that "Windows" isn't a trademark, or at least shouldn't be
because it's too generic. "MS Windows" or "Microsoft Windows", OK.
The same was the case with DOS: many people called MS-DOS just "DOS",
although there were other DOSses around.

I think they shouldn't be allowed to hijack the name "Windows". And neither
"Word" or "Office" for that matter.

I think you misuderstand the concept of 'genericity' as it applies to
trademark law (though I should stress I don't have my law degree from
a US institution, so there might be some differences there). Perhaps
I'm misreading you, but you seem to imply that because a word is in
common use it cannot function as a trademark. This is not so.

Generally a trademark must be (in the terminology of my jurisdicition)
'sufficiently adapted to distinguish' the product from other products
in its class. The test is whether other vendors of that product would
want to use that term in regard to that product. Eg if you are
selling fish the term 'ocean' wouldn't be sufficiently adapted to
distinguish, but the term 'door' might be (ie you shouldn't be able to
trademark 'Ocean Fish(tm),' but 'Door Fish(tm)' should be fine.)
Similarly you /shouldn't/ be able to trademark 'Digital Computers(tm)'
(Aha!), but 'Gateway Computers(tm)' would seem to be OK. It is
arguable that 'Windows' is sufficiently adapted to distinguish one
operating system from another, certainly it is far better than 'Disk
Operating System,' sans the 'MS-.'

Additionally you have to consider the special protection afforded to
'well known brands' under the IP annexes to the WTO treaty, which will
work very nicely in M$'s favour.

A trademark becomes 'generic' on the other hand, when a trademark
enters into the language to such an extent that it cannot function as
a trademark any longer. Arguable the word 'Hoover' (verb and noun),
for vacuum cleaner, or vacuuming, in the UK, has become generic.
Meaning that theoretically (I wouldn't try it), any manufacturery
could produce a 'hoover.' The fear of genericity explains why Xerox
launched a big campaign to introduce the word 'photocopying' (instead
of 'xeroxing'), and indeed this gem from Adobe:
http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html#photoshop

 

[Anand Pillai]

Is this a sign that the corporation is getting panicky?
It normally happens to a company when they get panicky
that they tend to focus on side-issues.

Microsoft never used to spend on TV ads much AFAIK. Now
they are doing it... I wonder what is happening in Redmond.

-Anand

For the nth time, it isn't referred to as XWindows in any official or
meaningful sense.

Isn't there a consortium or something, with much more resources ($$$) to
fight than Julian and Robin have?

Yes, it's called Sun Microsystems who used the OpenWindows name ages
ago:

http://step.polymtl.ca/~coyote/open-look/01-general/faq-doc-1.html

I guess Microsoft aren't up for yet more protracted legal action
involving Sun, so they go for the small guy instead.

[...]

It is a complement to Julian and Robin that MS noticed them enough to
threaten and negotiate with them. Also that they did not just cave but
negotiated a 6 month transition period and $ for transition costs.

Microsoft deserves no compliments whatsoever. This is just a case of a
company blatantly misusing a generic term which they've been told they
can't even enforce as a trademark in the United States, surfing
different legal systems in order to find places where they can carry
out acts reminiscent of extortion on legitimate activities and
businesses, and then bullying small outfits who can't afford to argue
for any substantial period of lawyer time.

For once, the United States is actually a beacon of sanity in all
this. There's Lindows being issued with injunctions all over the
planet for the use of a name which resembles Windows; there's the
bloke behind Mobilix being forced to change his site's name to
TuxMobil because the publishers of Asterix think they own every name
ending with "ix". The only positive thing about the former case is
that Michael Robertson seems to know enough about public relations to
make every aggressive move by Microsoft an embarrassment for them
whilst raising the profile of his own business.

So, how is it a compliment that a corporation waits several years
before jumping on an now-established project whose name doesn't really
infringe on any reasonable trademark? How does threatening behaviour
deserve any compliment whatsoever?

Paul

 

[Piet van Oostrum]

(e-mail address removed) (Asun Friere) (AF) wrote:

AF> I think you misuderstand the concept of 'genericity' as it applies to
AF> trademark law (though I should stress I don't have my law degree from
AF> a US institution, so there might be some differences there). Perhaps
AF> I'm misreading you, but you seem to imply that because a word is in
AF> common use it cannot function as a trademark. This is not so.

What I meant is that the word 'Windows' as a generic term (not as a
supposed trademark) was already in use before and during MS's use.

AF> Generally a trademark must be (in the terminology of my jurisdicition)
AF> 'sufficiently adapted to distinguish' the product from other products
AF> in its class. The test is whether other vendors of that product would
AF> want to use that term in regard to that product. Eg if you are
AF> selling fish the term 'ocean' wouldn't be sufficiently adapted to
AF> distinguish, but the term 'door' might be (ie you shouldn't be able to
AF> trademark 'Ocean Fish(tm),' but 'Door Fish(tm)' should be fine.)
AF> Similarly you /shouldn't/ be able to trademark 'Digital Computers(tm)'
AF> (Aha!), but 'Gateway Computers(tm)' would seem to be OK. It is
AF> arguable that 'Windows' is sufficiently adapted to distinguish one
AF> operating system from another, certainly it is far better than 'Disk
AF> Operating System,' sans the 'MS-.'

I think 'Windows' and 'Word' are in the same league as 'Ocean' for fish.

 

[Paul Boddie]

[Microsoft to be complimented?]

It does not and I did not and I do not see how you could think so from my
praising Julian and Robin.

Apologies for that misinterpretation. But then, you seem to suggest
that merit seems to be measured by how much Microsoft wants to haul
you into court. ;-)

However, I recognise your point and also regard Julian and Robin's
work highly.

Paul

 

[JanC]

Anyway, I have the impression (possibly
wrong) that WxWindows started out to be compatible with and a clone of
and was originally named after MS Windows, while the X Window system
preceeds MSW, so that the cases (and possible court outcomes) are
different.

wxWindows started as a cross platform C++ GUI library for "_W_indows" and
the "_X_ Window System". That's where the "w" & "x" come from.

 

[Greg Ewing (using news.cis.dfn.de)]

The fear of genericity explains why Xerox
launched a big campaign to introduce the word 'photocopying' (instead
of 'xeroxing')

Aha! So we should all start using the term "windowing" to
mean the act of using a computer (of any brand) with a GUI,
and promote the use of this term at every chance we get...