The Digital Divas vs. Microsoft 36
Founded in 1997, the Digital Divas have grown to a membership of 71 women around the world. In addition to championing copyright enforcement, they also provide a free, member-written digital newsletter that provides Web-design help and advice.
In April, Microsoft launched a Web site at Digitaldiva.com that features a woman named Stacy Elliott giving advice to women on how to use the Internet and computer technology. This is all very corporate, and is not the community effort set up by the Digital Divas. For example, Microsoft provides marketing information on their target audience right off of the Digital Diva site.
The Digital Divas aren't rolling in cash. Thankfully, the lawyers at Moses & Singer wrote a pro bono cease and desist letter to Microsoft, but Microsoft's site still remains up and active.
Dana Whitmire, founder and 'Fearless Leader' of the Digital Divas, is mad as hell. "The whole thing makes me very angry, and it's frustrating. We've worked very hard to build a sound reputation and a good group, and I think we've done a good job. It's extremely infuriating that Microsoft comes along and takes the name with their power, money and PR machine behind them and the possibility that they can just run over us and undo everything we've done."
At first glance, it seems as if the problem could be purely accidental. However, research into the Digital Divas name shows a staggering number of Web sites and resources run by members of the Digital Divas. So, Dana, what are the chances that this could be a simple mistake? "We feel the chances are virtually nil. If anyone searched any search engine, there is no possible way they they could not have found us. We've grown steadily, and this is something that we've done with just elbow grease, pure and simple. It's all been very grassroots. We don't have a big publicity machine behind us. This has been the individual members pouring heart and soul into it."
Microsoft has responded to the cease and desist letter sent by the Digital Divas, informing the Divas that they didn't feel that 'Digital Diva' was a trademarkable term, according to Digital Diva and Attorney Faith Kaminski. "Our response to them has been showing them that we've had continuous use of the name dating from 1997, and it includes printouts from Network Solutions, and E-mails dating back to November of 1997."
Meanwhile, Microsoft is stepping up the appearance schedule of Stacy Elliott, their own Digital Diva. The 'original' Divas are angry not only for the alleged trademark violation, but also because of the way in which Stacy Elliott presents herself, and the name Digital Diva. Stacy Elliot's recent interview at siliconvalley.com got the Divas in an uproar. "She's just continuing her stance that women are such idiots when it comes to computers, that we're so afraid of them," Dana said in an interview yesterday, "It's really, really, condescending. ... The damage that we're suffering is that damage to our reputation. Our reputation is not for being a bunch of women who are idiots about computers. Our reputation is being people who are very computer-savvy, and this woman is trashing that by going around saying 'I'm a Digital Diva, and all women are morons.'"
Remember, it costs nothing to join the Digital Divas. It's a free organization. There's not a lot of money lying around to support a legal fight. Dana Whitmire has a day job. The organization exists because of the goodwill and volunteerism of talented people, not as the fruit of a vast payroll account. The good news is that Friends of Ed, Ltd., a division of Wrox Press, is publishing 'The Digital Divas Design Guide,' a real-world book with Web-design advice. Wrox Press heard about the legal issues that the Divas are involved in, and offered them a $10,000 advance to pay for legal fees. Moses & Singer agreed to match that amount with services, and will be fighting for the Divas all the way up through a preliminary injunction hearing against Microsoft.
Well, what's next? The Digital Divas have written back to Microsoft with a mountain of evidence that they've been around since 1997, and expect to see a response from Microsoft by noon today, Wednesday, May 31st. Thanks to the dynamic nature of the Web, expect to see this story updated with new information about this legal battle.
Trademark, not copyright, critical to web success. (Score:1)
In the age where a photo or HTML or metallica song can be replicated and shared with less effort than getting up to grab a beer from the fridge, the ticket to making content profitable on the web is marketing. You create a unique service, and you market the hell out of it. A well developed brand is infinitely more valuable than the "rights" to the content associated with that brand.
So while getting all indignant about "theft" and "abuse" and "piracy" (read: sharing), and organizing pointless excercises in corporate snottiness with the Gray Day, the Digital Divas have got a lesson on how profoundly things have changed.
The only intellectiual property worth a damn in the digital age is the trademark. Good thing it's also the only one still reasonably defensible in court. Go, Divas, go!
SoupIsGood Food
SHow up at the presentations (Score:1)
Oh no ... (bit OT) (Score:1)
Honestly, could you please leave that? Noone is going to sue you for anything you are going to post here. This abbreviation is so - so *anal*
Thanks
tom
--
Re:MSFT Hypocrites? (Score:1)
-jon (IANAL, YMMV, etc.)
I wonder what NOW would say? (Score:1)
We knew MS was monopolistic. Who'da thought they were misogynists too. (Insert giggle: But then, it was Melinda French Gates who was the product manager and head cheerleader behind Microsoft BOB. Perhaps BillG, et all are nothing short of narrow stereotypers.)
Digital Divas would do well to get a major 'cause' group behind them (like NOW), but the groups that are going to get behind DD on the gender grounds have already been tuned out (rightly or wrongly) by the 'male majority'. Is there any way to raise issues touching gender without whining?
Re:Doing extactly the wrong thing (Score:1)
Hey! Don't be doggin' my boys.
--
then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel is just a freight train coming your way
Objectivity (Score:1)
<RANT>
Why is it that when the Big Guy (tm) steals or takes advantage of the little guy's (or gal's in this case) copyright/trademark/domain/etc that
</RANT>
/ME waits for the karma to take a diva
---
Meet the Borg^H^H^H^HMSFT Diva (Score:1)
A couple of the items listed mention an "O Magazine Event".
Now, is that Oprah's new magazine or is it the "O" magazine that caters to the sado-masochist crowd?
Either way, I want to show up with a whip and a ball gag.
k.
MSN Project, Day 132: Anticipating the arrival of the saucers, we put on our Nikes and eat the applesauce.
New spokeswoman!!! (Score:1)
"Thinking makes my brain hurt!"
"Don't ask me: I'm just a girl"
Sign of the times (Score:1)
There was a time when patents, copyrights, and trademarks protected originators. Today, I see more companies take the actuarial approach of "can we cost justify the violation?". The larger you are the more certain the answer is yes.
This is by no means a Microsoft only issue. We have seen cases lately of corporations taking web sites, ISPs and individuals to court on extremely questionable cases. Why? Because they cannot afford the cost of litigation, regardless of being right.
At one point reform was suppose to provide the individual protection by forcing costs to the loser. This has failed because winning cannot be accomplished without the revenue now tied up in litegation.
I hope they win, but I am almost certain they cannot afford to. The deck is certainly stacked against them.
let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Anyone with some extra clues lying around, send them to Redmond -- there's apparently a shortage up there...
Live by the sword, die by the sword (Score:1)
Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net [mailto]) - AOL IM: MicroBerto
Re:Microsoft (Score:1)
What happens when Microsoft decides linux isnt a trademarkable name and releases NT6.0 under the name Microsoft Linux?
Wouldn't that get shortened to MSUX? Let 'em have it :)
Microsoft (Score:1)
You can't even sell a t-shirt with the likeness of billgates or any comment about microsoft without getting in huge trouble. But if you have a name or anything else microsoft wants, bend over and prepare yourself for the rod and shaft of microsoft!
I hope the DOJ blows this company into a million peices. Die'ns too good for 'em.
A World without microsofts 'inovation' is like a world where we skipped midevil times and kept up with scientific progress straight from Roman times till today.
NightHawk
Re:MSFT Hypocrites? (Score:1)
It seems to me that 'bookshelf' is a much more general term than 'Digital Diva'. Is MSFT being hypocritical?
Can we assume this is a rhetorical question? After all, this is the same company that tried to claim that "Internet Explorer" is a generic, non-trademarkable term. (Somebody else had the trademark first, in case you're wondering why Microsoft would want to claim that.)
Big Bullies (Score:1)
-----
Perhaps... (Score:1)
someone should register microsofts.com if it hasn't been done already. Let's face it, if having an extra s is ok, how about microssoft.com and various other alternatives. Might lend a bit of weight to the argument.
"But your honour, Microsoft claim the domain microssoft.com infringes their trade mark although it is spelt differently. However they also claim that digitaldiva.com and digitaldivas.com are sufficiently different. Please let us know which case is valid."
Re:Hey... I know a girl named Stacy Elliott! (Score:1)
___
A requirement of creativity is that it contributes
to change. Creativity keeps the creator alive.
Oh, the irony. (Score:1)
Well, that would be terrible. The logical solution to this is, whenever you find something cool, take a copy & pass it around, so more people can experience it...
you can help by participating in the struggle against the ever growing copyright infringement that exists on today?s Web.
... oh. So the good stuff should be subject to the whim and convenience of its creators. Or their lawyers. Great.
Bring on the Anticybersquatting Act! (Score:1)
It would be great to see this law used as a means of freedom, not oppression of 2600. [2600.com]
-- LoonXTall
Digital Diva is *not* trademarkable? (Score:1)
Yeah, well, neither is 'Internet Explorer'.
Take that, Bill, you feculant little dork.
Historical Perspective (Score:1)
Why Expect A Reply Now? (Score:2)
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
etoy and etoys? (Score:2)
Championing copyright enforcement (Score:2)
--
rant rant rant (Score:2)
And, the 'greyday' thing makes me ill. If every page on the web was plain and grey with nothing but content, well, we'd have a super-fast, zero bullshit, banner ad-free resource from which to draw. Gee, that would sure suck, wouldn't it?
At some point, people have to realize that equality means equality - working together as equals, not apart as 'equals.' Espousing 'women can do it just as well as, or better than men' is not a stance of equality, it is a stance of separation. I'm sorry we've had a male-dominated society for the last 6,000 or so years, I realize it sucks - get over it, your short-sighted approach is not helping.
Thanks.
--
blue
no more websites or software? (Score:2)
they posit if we keep taking licensed software lightly,
the programmers will soon stop writing,
both software and web pages.
anyone here get paid for their website?
how about open source software,
free by nature.
i say if no one listens to licenses,
and for some reason companies stop creating,
all we'll have is open source, free software.
this sound bad to anyone?
-tk
Correct the links please (Score:2)
http://www.digitaldivas.com/gol/images/letter.g
The link in the article was cut and paste from the Digital Diva's site and won't work except for there.
Microsoft sounds like an airhead (Score:2)
"You don't even need to download drivers when plugging a USB device into your CPU."
This jargon was as common as asking someone for an aspirin or to pass the salt. After that first meeting, I needed the aspirin - what a headache!
And the tech tips get worse:
6.This is a hard one for most of us - but you really must make sure you read and follow the product directions carefully to make sure you set it up properly. Taking the time to review the instructions the first time will save you many headaches later on. (I promise!)
No wonder there is an uproar. If this was a parody site I'd understand. I don't think too many women would take this air-headed rubbish for very long before going off and getting better information from somewhere else.
Doing extactly the wrong thing (Score:2)
About this trademark hassle, how many times does it have to be pointed out that if you want to create a defendable TM you should create some nonsense word like Kleenex or Xerox instead of combining two common words like digital and diva. Even Metallica knows that much.
They'd get a lot more sympathy if they focused on the real problem of corporate bully vs. independant users instead of treading on the very hotly debated ground of copyrights.
MSFT Hypocrites? (Score:2)
I vaguely remember hearing about a similar case several years ago, where the tables were turned. MSFT was suing another company for using the word 'Bookshelf' in their software title, for infringing on MSFT's Bookshelf Encyclopedia software. Can anyone confirm this?
It seems to me that 'bookshelf' is a much more general term than 'Digital Diva'. Is MSFT being hypocritical?
Female web designers (Score:2)
I hope Digitaldivas can influence a lot more of the teenagers and kids to kick open notepad, get over to webmonkey and start creating.
Email Stacy, asking her for her thoughts (Score:2)
These women most certainly have a case... (Score:2)
Too bad. (Score:2)
Now they're just exposed for the thugs they are.
tcd004
Here's my Microsoft Parody [lostbrain.com], where's yours?
The Sweet Irony! (Score:2)