Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Your Rights Online

Microsoft Forces wxWindows To Rename 91

Posted by timothy from the next-stop-is-mr-andersen dept.
Peter Millerchip writes "Apparently Microsoft have forced wxWindows, the popular cross-platform C++ GUI library, to change its name to wxWidgets over the UK trademark of the seemingly generic word 'Windows.' Hot on the heels of the MikeRoweSoft.com incident, you have to wonder if their overactive legal team will be targetting double glazing manufacturers next?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Forces wxWindows To Rename More

Microsoft Forces wxWindows To Rename

Comments Filter:

  • It's a better name anyway (Score:3, Funny)

    by ObviousGuy ( 578567 ) <ObviousGuy@hotmail.com> on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:18AM (#8349072) Homepage Journal
    Why associate with with Windows at all?

    With a little more imagination I bet they could come up with an even better name than wxWidgets.

    • Re:It's a better name anyway (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TykeClone ( 668449 ) <TykeClone@gmail.com> on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:27AM (#8349138) Homepage Journal
      Because that's what they generate - program windows.

      • Re:It's a better name anyway (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        If it were only a set of window class wrappers, I'd agree with you, but wxWindows is more like MFC which provides an OO base set of classes that contain a broad spectrum of functionality, not only windowing.
        • What would you expect in a portable Windowing system? The fact is, the concept of defining a 2D area defining a program's visible space as a window isn't something at all unique to MS Windows. Nor is MFC an original idea. It's just an extension of procedural into the OO world. Do you think X Window System should change its name too? Should Apple make sure all their docs do not use the word "window(s)" just in case? Should Open Office stop being made because there's MS Office?

          Microsoft, probably as a

  • Phew, it's hot in here (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ianoo ( 711633 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:19AM (#8349076) Journal
    I think I might have to open some wind^H^H^H^Hframed glass panes attached to hinges!

    Seriously... this trademarking of generic words is just silly. Is someone going to trademark the word "The" next, so no company name can contain it?

    • Re:Phew, it's hot in here (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jc42 ( 318812 )
      Is someone going to trademark the word "The" next, ...

      Actually, someone tried that, back in the 70's as I recall. It was the name of a new OS. The USPTO didn't accept it then. They just might today.

      So why don't you give it a try? Let us know how it works out.

      (There was also an attempt to register "English" as the name of a computer programming language. That wasn't accepted, either. It's worth another try, too. ;-)

      • Re:Phew, it's hot in here (Score:3, Informative)

        by jc42 ( 318812 )
        BTW, if you think I was just joking, google for "the THE operating system". Right now, there are 418 hits. A few are typos, but most are about the THE OS itself.

        But the attempt to register "THE" was, as I recall, reported as a bit of geek humor. Apparently the USPTO got the joke, laughed with them, and turned them down. But there's a serious question of whether their examiners would get it today.

        You might also want to google for "English programming language". There are fewer hits, and most are just
    • You may indeed. Check it out! [uncoveror.com]
    • Microsoft do, after all, have this Office(tm)(sm)(R)(C) component called Word(tm)(sm)(R)(C). There is now legally no such thing as "generic Word(tm)(sm)(R)(C)s". Nor are you allowed to have an Office(tm)(sm)(R)(C) of your own, nor are your own Works(tm)(sm)(R)(C) to Excel(tm)(sm)(R)(C) in any way. And woe betide the Publisher(tm)(sm)(R)(C) who complains. Here in Australia, we can't even plug in to a Power Point(tm)(sm)(R)(C) to run our computers to email complaints; we might have to revert to Americanisms l
  • New > Navigator Window

    surely infringes

  • This is retarded (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fredrikj ( 629833 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:26AM (#8349134) Homepage
    I can actually understand the case against Lindows to some degree, because Lindows is a name that might confuse consumers. wxWindows, however, is a tool for developers. Developers developing applications for windowing environments, people who very well know the difference between Windows(tm) and a windowing user interface. Joe Avg will never encounter the name.

    I guess X is next.
    • Oh no, x is the variable I copyrighted for use in my programs. You cannot use such an infringing name in any program of yours!
    • I agree with your argument, but if you want to refer to the Microsoft Windows OS (and don't agree that regular words that existed before the product they reffer to are trademarks) don't use the (tm) symbol to refer to that product. Just use its full name: "MS Windows", when you reffer to it, or Woe32 for short.

    • Re:This is retarded (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Craig Maloney ( 1104 ) * on Saturday February 21, 2004 @11:08AM (#8349343) Homepage
      Yes, but X is old enough that Microsoft might lose the trademark if they challenged it. :)
    • I guess X is next.

      "The X Window System" is a pretty safe name. Now if there was such a thing as "X Windows" or something like that, then there might be trouble in this insanely broken trademark system. :/

    • Re:This is retarded (Score:5, Informative)

      by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @02:13PM (#8350503) Journal
      I can actually understand the case against Lindows to some degree, because Lindows is a name that might confuse consumers. wxWindows, however, is a tool for developers.

      You'd understand it better if the Slashdot headline were not misleading.

      The Slashdot Headline reads (emphasis orthogonal's): "Microsoft Forces wxWindows To Rename", but the notice in the wxWidgets.org page says (emphasis orthogonal's) :
      After a polite request from Microsoft, and a lot of thought on our part, we have decided to change the project's name to wxWidgets.... There will be modest financial compensation, of which the residue (after fees) will be used to fund library development and tools. Contributors can submit claims to Julian Smart to compensate for time lost because of the name change.
      Now, this is not to claim that Microsoft didn't suggest they'd litigate if a voluntary change wasn't made; I'm sure that threat was at least implied, if not explicated. But the actual resolution has money going from MS-Windows to wxWidgets, not damages going from wxWindows to MS-Windows.

      So if wxWidgets is willing to call it voluntary, I'm going to take wxWidgets at its word.
    • I suspect that this is due to jealousy overy recent high profile wxWindows usage. IIRC it was on the recent mars mission. At least the screen shots accidentally on TV showed no visible MS products.

      It is stupid and assinine to change the name of the product. All the name recognition goes out with the name change. However, in the long term it will be useful for the general public to learn that there are more advanced systems than MS-Windows.

  • Prior Usage (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ianoo ( 711633 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:29AM (#8349154) Journal
    You know, long before Microsoft ever created Windows, I remember both Macintosh and the other GUI systems being described as "WIMP", or "Windows, Icons, Mouse and Pointer" systems. Surely this use of Windows represents a clear prior usage of Microsoft's supposed trademark to describe what were very similar products? Can you still trademark terms that have been used before? IANAL, but it would seem like a pretty silly idea.

    • Re:Prior Usage (Score:2, Funny)

      by mrdogi ( 82975 )
      Slightly OT, but I have a different use for WIMP, or more precisely WiMP. It's how I shorten Windows Media Player on my desktop when I'm in MS's Windows.

    • Re:Prior Usage (Score:5, Funny)

      by Mr. Piddle ( 567882 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @11:41AM (#8349497)

      Microsoft seems to be picking their battles poorly, lately. wxWindows, Xt (X Windows Toolkit), AWT (Java Abstract Window Toolkit), Sun's OpenWindows (still around to some extent), et. al. The only reason why they would single out wxWindows is that it is an interoperability toolkit, and we know just how much Microsoft loves interoperability.

      Here's an open letter to Microsoft:

      Dear Microsoft,

      Fuck you.

      Regards,
      The Free Market, Life, Liberty, and Happiness.

      • Another thing: Java AWT provides interoperability in the same spirit as wxWindows...it's too bad that Sun mopped the floor with Microsoft a while ago in court over other Java matters.

        Sun and the wxWindows project. Why is it that Microsoft goes after the little guy? Not only that, attacking wxWindows won't affect their PR to their drooling masses of Windows customers. If they had gone up against Sun's lawyers, I'd bet real money that this whole Windows trademark scam would end almost overnight.

    • Re:Prior Usage (Score:3, Informative)

      by Rysc ( 136391 )
      WIMP stands for "Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer." 'Mouse' would be redundant, given that it's the same idea as 'pointer'.
    • Can you still trademark terms that have been used before? IANAL, but it would seem like a pretty silly idea.

      In the US..generally no, you can't tradematk general terms.

      The trouble is that other countries have varying standards that let Microsoft get away with this sort of crap.

  • Office next? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Vincman ( 584156 ) <vincent.vanwylick@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:32AM (#8349175) Homepage
    ...you have to wonder if their overactive legal team will be targetting double glazing manufacturers next?
    Or Office for that matter! This whole discussion makes no sense whatsoever. Windows as a word does not infringe, unless it is accompanied by the word Microsoft.
    It's like McDonalds sueing every fastfood-place in the world for using the words Milkshake or Hamburger.

    • Re:Office next? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Dave2 Wickham ( 600202 ) *
      I'm not a trade mark lawyer, but this page [patent.gov.uk] seems to imply that there's no need for the word "Microsoft" to be used...

    • Re:Office next? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Dark Bard ( 627623 )
      McDonalds actually tried suing a Scotsman who had a family resturant named McDonalds. Turns out he was the head of the McDonald clan. Another case involved Dolby Studios suing Thomas Dolby for infringing trademark. Turns out he was born with the name and predated the Dolby trademark. Not much research or common sense is used in defending trademarks. Microsoft should absolutely fall under trademark but common use terms should not and there are plenty of court presedents reguarding this. Some one in the film

  • I hope they appeal.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by E_elven ( 600520 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:35AM (#8349192) Journal
    wxWidgets sound stupid, like something for VB toy projects.

    Legally speaking, there should be no reason wxWindows should need to change their name, because they do not compete with 'the' Windows; indeed, wxWindows uses Windows APIs -and others as well- to create display elements called 'windows' (by which name they were known when MS was still DOS.)
  • I want to register that name, but I want to make sure it doesn't any software company. Is it familiar to you?
    If yes I may chose others like MicroSCOft, ...

  • Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Captain Rotundo ( 165816 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:40AM (#8349219) Homepage
    What about X Windows? Thats clearly a common phrase (seeing as everyone says "X Windows" and the X people say its not "X Windows". What about the fact that wxWindows isn't even remotely a competing product with MS Windows. And the fact that people called multitasking GUIs windowing systems before microsoft came up with Windows.... I'm gonna go out on a linb and say thats why they called it Windows.

    I think they are just upset they don't have a cool name like "Linux" "BSD" or "OS X" :)
  • Last I checked, x-windows was older than windows. So, xerox should sue microsoft and force them to change the name from windows to something else. Whenever I talk about x-windows, most new linux users think it has something to do with Microsoft.

  • You know your project is popular enough... (Score:5, Funny)

    by ion_ ( 176174 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @10:54AM (#8349285) Homepage

    when Microsoft is going to sue you for its name.

  • Goal: Make your product name a part of everyday language

    Analogy: Vacuum cleaner; Hoover

    Reaction: Legally acknowledge (or prove as hopefully it has been done) that the word is in common use and so is not used as a valid company name or product.

    i.e. The word Windows means Windows like it always did. We have double the power here because the word wasn't invented
  • www.mikerowesoft.com now hosts something entitled "Mike Rowe Fourms". It has been a long time since I've seen the banner of a site misspell the site's name.

  • Next to go... (Score:1, Redundant)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 )
    X-Windows?

  • Common Word Trade Marks (Score:5, Interesting)

    by KilobyteKnight ( 91023 ) <bjm.midsouth@rr@com> on Saturday February 21, 2004 @11:20AM (#8349393) Homepage
    Microsoft has a habit of using generic terms as names for its products then trademarking them. I believe it purposely done for anti-competitive reasons. Had they not been declared a monopoly, it probably wouldn't be a problem. However, they were... why aren't people filing complaints about them co-opting common words?

    Mocrosoft's Naming System

    What should we call our...
    office suite: Office
    the word processor in it: Word
    disk operating system: DOS
    windowing operatind system: Windows
    flight simulator game: Flight Simulator
    media player: Media Player

    It makes you wonder if Bill Gates sues his neighbors for calling home their dog, "Come 'ere dog", since I'm sure that's what his dog is named.
    • Except originally that software was called "Productivity software" and I don't recall a successful productivity software suite before Microsoft Office 6 back in the mid-nineties. Until then, you just had to buy all the programs separate and they didn't work alike, and they sure didn't work together.

      So in that sense, calling is "office suite" is really just co-opting the brand name for the generic use, ala Kleenex. The term just didn't exist before Microsoft Office.
      • So in that sense, calling is "office suite" is really just co-opting the brand name for the generic use, ala Kleenex. The term just didn't exist before Microsoft Office.

        The term "office" did.

        Kimberly Clark didn't decide to call one of their products "tissues", they called it "Kleenex tissues" - with "Kleenex" being the registered trademark, not "tissues". Worth noting - Kleenex isn't "tissue paper". Kleenex is Kimberly Clark's "best of" product line. Their top of the line diapers are also called Kleen
        • Two points:

          1) My point was that I don't recall the term "office suite" ever being used in reference to computer software prior to the introduction of Microsoft Office 6 in the mid 90s. The introduction of this product shaped the landscape of business productivity software such that the category became known as "office suite". That is what I meant by the brand name being co-opted for the generic.

          2) A quick Google search for Kleenex turned up Kimberly-Clark's Kleenex site, and there is no mention of anythin
          • 1) Office and suite are both common terms. That's like saying it is new and original if someone puts a collar on a dog and sells it as "Dog Collar". The two terms would not have been used together before the invention of the "dog collar", but that doesn't make "Dog Collar" an innovative name.

            2) My father worked at Kimberly Clark (coincidentally enough, in the diaper plant in Memphis). I've heard it all hundreds of times. Trust me on the Kleenex thing. Huggies are in the Kleenex line. However, unlike Mi
    • Actually the name of the operating system was always "MSDOS". I also think the word processor was originally named "Microsoft Word", and the flight simulator "Microsoft Flight Simulator".

      I agree about "Office", "Windows", even if these are not the official names Microsoft certainly is trying to get them called that.

      And "Windows Media Player" (not Media Player), though somewhat in-between, is pretty bad because it covers the whole area of any program that runs on Windows and plays media.
      • So why can they threaten a small group of developers because they use "windows" name in their product? If the trademark is for "Microsoft Windows", then as far as I can see, then can't attack a product not called "wxWindows", not "Microsoft wxWindows". If it were nemd "MX Windows" or "WX Windows", maybe but still the trademark is surely for "MS Windows" or "Microsoft Windows".

        It is just not logical and that's why I hate lawyers and laws! Arrrrghhh! My head hurts!

  • Waste of time debating right or wrong (Score:3, Informative)

    by presearch ( 214913 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @11:23AM (#8349404)
    Although it may be an interesting discussion on what's fair and what's not,
    it's all a moot point. If you have enough money, you can shape the legal
    system in any way you see fit. This isn't insightful, or interesting, and
    certainly not funny. It's just the sad truth.

    Besides, anyone with enough power and money to be involved with
    the decision making in Microsoft's predatory affairs almost certainly
    has shares of MSFT in their portfolio.

    Microsoft isn't a bunch of sharks, they are the ocean we all swim in.
    Sucks, but that's how it is.

  • They did it for the money (Score:5, Insightful)

    by magnum3065 ( 410727 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @11:51AM (#8349535)
    Hmmm, tough choice: get into a legal battle to keep the name "wxWindows" and spend a lot of money, or change to "wxWidgets" and get "modest financial compensation" from Microsoft?
  • In order to head off any legal actions Home Deppt will now be selling Silicon Based Transparent Rectangles (TM).
  • Manufacturers of windows for building just might be at risk soon. There are a number of companies now selling transparent LCD displays. There are several that can be used as real windows in walls. Google for "transparent LCD display" for information. (You'll have to wade through a lot of technical details to find pretty pictures. ;-)

    So arguing that windows in walls and Windows in a computer display are different subject areas might not work much longer. It's possible right now to have a window in your

  • The headline is misleading. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Talonius ( 97106 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @01:34PM (#8350262)
    I'd like to see the correspondence with Microsoft in this case. The wxWindows, er, wxWidgets team seemed to think it was a better idea to cooperate - forcing would be to actually sue them and deliver a, what was it, 75 page explanation?

    The team would've won the trademark suit IMHO, but IANAL and the SCO case should've been about finance fraud a long time ago - so take my opinion with a grain of salt. In any case as a cross platform UI toolkit the name fits better.

    As it is perhaps this took place as a polite exchange. Especially considering that the wxWidgets team had to know the groundswell of support they would have if Microsoft DID force the issue. There's nothing wrong with a company asking someone to do something; there's only something wrong with that when they sue someone to force them to do something that's inane.

    Flamebait Disclaimer: I use Microsoft products as much in a day as I use Linux. I use what's best for the job at the time I need it done. I'm not screaming that people are being hypocrites; I'm saying that the situation might very well be completely different than what this article seems to assume.

    The only time Microsoft will truly piss me off is when they decide to go after Mono. That will have me up in arms whether it's effective or not.
    • I understand that wxWindows did this after getting an offer of compensation from Microsoft. The question is, why did Microsoft do this in the first place? It does nothing but give them bad publicity and piss people off at them even more, for what plausable purpose?

      Maybe wxWindows or even Lindows set this up as a ploy to make Microsoft look bad? But I have no idea why Microsoft is so stupid as to take the bait.

      Unless a clear explanation comes up, Microsoft has lost all my sympathy in the Lindows case. Cert
    • Especially considering that the wxWidgets team had to know the groundswell of support they would have if Microsoft DID force the issue.

      Y'know, I'm a professional developer myself, so I understand the occasional episode of swollen ego that goes with it, but let's step outside and and take a breath of reality, shall we?

      All of the world's developers, much less the tiny fraction of them that use wxWindows, couldn't create a freaking groundswell if they were pureed and pumped underground by industrial hydrau

  • If anyone bothered to read the article (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zangdesign ( 462534 ) on Saturday February 21, 2004 @01:43PM (#8350321) Journal
    they did this willingly after polite discussion - no lawsuits involved. Microsoft is also going to provide them some funding for further development and to point to their domain for a year or so.
    • If MS approached you and there was only a few of you, what would you do? Threaten to sue them when you have little money?

      Chances are they did not intend to 'infringe on MS' Windows name. Problem is that this may set a presidence. IE Whats next changing the name of X-Windows to X-widgets?

      What else, calling windows, glass doorways?

      Personally I think they should have just agreed to a statement on the web site saying if you are looking for MS Windows go here and point people to ms web site.

      This just sets

      • If they offered money and were reasonable - I'd definitely change the name. Look, by all accounts, there was no armtwisting on the part of Microsoft and apparently, Microsoft was willing to help them out some as part of the deal.

        I read that as being gracious, not brutal.

        It's starting to look like a lot of the posters here are looking for reasons to blame Microsoft. While there are a lot of problems dealing with the 800 lb. gorilla, this does not appear to be one of them.

        I think a lot of you have gotten c
        • My guess is that you don't get it. If an 800 lb gorilla, as YOU call them, offers you money to change your name, are you going to refuse, KNOWING that they sued Lin---s and made them change their name or are you going to tell them no? Your going to say okay, sure, because you can't afford the lawyers. MS does not see wxWidgets as a threat to their business. They offer a widget set as an alternative to VC++ / .net, but their market share is probably so negligible that MS just sees them as an annoyance, a
          • Yes, I remember Netscape very well. They lost. Plain and simple.

            They promised the moon and had no way of delivering it - they had a bad business model. Dig around on the web and you can find of plenty of supporting arguments (there are just as many going the other direction - but fewer of them discuss the business side).

            Yes, they did a fine and noble thing by releasing the code as they went down, snapped up by the voracious jaws of AOL, but it was pretty inevitable.

            Making your decisions based on emotion
    • .... is only measurable when both parts have the same bargaining power.

      If the strongest part asks for something and has a track record of getting what they want, one way or another (Stac Electronics) then I think willingness is not a word I would use so freely.
  • donuts?

    you have to wonder if their overactive legal team will be targetting double glazing manufacturers next
  • Beacuse this story only gets 75 replies, "Keyless Entries Fail In Las Vegas On Friday" gets around 500 in a shorter time.

    I was outraged when I read the story, apparently not everyone thinks the way I do, something has to be done. This is such a stupid thing, after Lindows renaming its product to Lin----, maybe /. users are getting used to these things but this still doesn't make them tolerable. wxWindows has nothing related to MS Windows, apart from possibility of running with it and still Microsoft's lawy

    • I think that you misquoted:

      First, they came for DRDOS, and I didn't speak up, because I didn't use DRDOS.

      Then, they came for stac, and I didn't speak up, because I didn't use stac.
      Then, they came for Netscape, and I didn't speak up, because I didn't use Netscape.
      Then, they came for Lindows, and I didn't speak up, because I didn't use Lindows.
      Then, they came for wxWindows, and I didn't speak up, because I didn't use wxWindows.
      Then, they came for me, and no one spoke up, because they didn't use me.

      ...

      Hmmm, n

    • If MS is going to be "fair" about this whole issue, they should nab these guys next:
      www.winwindows.com [winwindows.com]

  • I have "no microsoft" in my domain name. I'm not gonna say which (as it will cause the attached server to fall over) - it's got a simple html-only notice up, so it's not even worth seeing. :)

    Anyway, I believe that I'm covered under the "sucks" domain rulings. e.g. it's an expression of an opinion, not libel, and hence fine.

    Granted, IANAL and I never cease to be amazed. :-/

Slashdot Top Deals

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Close