I stopped doing that as soon as folks let trolls crap all over nearly every news post, but thanks anyway Mr. Touchy.
Your just repeating what has been said already. I'm not being touchy, I'm just pointing it out. I have made that mistake myself before, and was pointed it out, to which I responded: "my bad". I didn't take offense to it, cause I realized the person was right when they said it. I don't do it anymore, I try my best to read all the comments first to prevent it. Have a cuppa of something.
The same reason Apple is no longer called Apple Computers, Inc. Removing "Computers" from the name doesn't mean they no longer make computers, it means they make more than just computers. Mac OS X is already used in the iPhone and I think we will see more products (iPods, tablets, and who knows what else) using Mac OS X foundation and most importantly Xcode for developing applications. One platform and one development environment that was proven to be a success after including the iPhone SDK with Xcode.
I thought the reason why apple never trademarked "OS X" before was because it was already taken. Therefore they had to trademark "Mac OS X". Maybe the original "OS X" trademark expired (lapsed) or Apple bought it out.
I found it!
It wasn't OS X tha Apple ran into trademark violation with. It was OS-9. Which is why it's "Mac OS-9" and not just "OS-9"
Since "OS-9" was trademarkable. OS X shouldn't be a problem, if it's not already registered by some else.
Or like Microsoft trying to trademark "Windows" for their window based graphical user interface. Even though the term "window" was used at least a decade prior to describe a method of temporarily overlapping information on a two dimensional screen. "Window" was also a very vague term used by many different interface systems, graphical or text-based, but Microsoft managed to trademark it.
I think Apple may have a hard time as there is in fact already an operating system called OS-X, however I'm not sure if it is of any relevance any longer?
Being a generic word has no bearing on whether you can get a trademark on it. A trademark is just protection from some one else marketing a similar product with your brand name (trademark). However, the more generic the name is, the less protection you get from some one else using it on another product. MS can trademark "Windows" for their OS. But can't stop some one from naming their window washing business "Windows". But MS can stop a software company from naming their software "Windows". MacDonalds can not stop Apple from naming their computers "Mac". But can stop Burger King from selling a "BK Mac" hamburger.
On the other hand "Kleenex", Clorox, Lexus, ScotchTape, Bugs Bunny, Superman are not generic words. (At least they weren't when they were first coined.) They are made up names and thus are soul property of the company that trademarked them. You can not name any product or character "Kleenex", Clorox or Bugs Bunny. Even if your product or character is completely different and can't not be confused with the original.
There are actually companies and software that will come up with made up names for your product. This way a trademark will cover all use of the name on any product or service.
I just don't see how they can trademark what is essentially Operating System 10. So if I go create an OS and called Ultimate OS and start of with Ultimate OS 1, I must then skip version 10 due to trademark? Doesn't sound right.
As in regards to Windows & Microsoft. They were the first one to trademark the term and really wasn't the technical word for anything in a GUI or a computer. And I don't really think it stops anyone from calling things in another OS 'Windows' (Just like I can ask for a Kleenex, and some one give me any brand tissue). It just stops someone for using the word Windows as their company or product name in regards to computers or software.
Already dozens of software call themselves Operating Systems. In software directories and link directories they are organized under the group Operating Systems. They all have various versions.
I just don't see how they can trademark what is essentially Operating System 10. So if I go create an OS and called Ultimate OS and start of with Ultimate OS 1, I must then skip version 10 due to trademark? Doesn't sound right.
If Apple gets the trademark for "OS X". They can ultimately stop you from marketing an OS name "Ultimate OS X". The whole point of a trademark is so that consumers don't confuse a product of one company with that of another. By marketing an OS named "Ultimate OS X", consumers may confuse it with Apple's OS X. Which is already being sold and has established itself. It also keeps other companies from taking advanage of a company that has spend a lot of money advertising and establishing it's brand.
You may be able to get away with "Ultimate System 10", "Ultimate Operating System Ten", "Ultimate X Operating System" or maybe even "Ultimate OS 10". But any use of "OS X" would be out. It's not so much the meaning of each letter in O-S-X that matters as much as the image of "OS X" as a whole. Already when people see "OS X" they think Apple. Even if they don't know that the "O-S" stands for operating system and the "X" is Roman Numeral for 10, not "ex". And the trademark is for "OS X" as in "O"-"S"-"X". Exactly how it looks. Not what it means as in, "Operating System Ten". Think of it as a logo. Like the "M" that forms the golden arches of "MacDonalds".
Quote:
As in regards to Windows & Microsoft. They were the first one to trademark the term and really wasn't the technical word for anything in a GUI or a computer. And I don't really think it stops anyone from calling things in another OS 'Windows' (Just like I can ask for a Kleenex, and some one give me any brand tissue). It just stops someone for using the word Windows as their company or product name in regards to computers or software.
Already dozens of software call themselves Operating Systems. In software directories and link directories they are organized under the group Operating Systems. They all have various versions.
That's the whole point. To be first to trademark a name and establish it as a brand. The trademark keeps others from taking advantage of your hard work by naming a product similar to your's.
When you ask for a "Coke", Coca Cola don't want the waitress to bring you a Pepsi. When you ask for "Scotch Tape", 3M don't want a sales person to sell you any other brand of cellophane tape except "Scotch Tape". And when you see "OS X" on a product. Apple wants you to think of "Apple Inc.".
.... MS can trademark "Windows" for their OS. But can't stop some one from naming their window washing business "Windows". But MS can stop a software company from naming their software "Windows". ...
I guess you missed the news that day, but this issue has been litigated and Microsoft ended up paying out $24 million to Linspire. Windows is a generic term for displaying information from multiple computer programs on a single computer screen. It was in use years before Microsoft attached its name to it.
The bottomline is that Microsoft tried to enforce a bogus trademark on Windows and lost. I'm rooting for it to try to enforce a trademark on Microsoft Keyboard?.
I guess you missed the news that day, but this issue has been litigated and Microsoft ended up paying out $24 million to Linspire. Windows is a generic term for displaying information from multiple computer programs on a single computer screen. It was in use years before Microsoft attached its name to it.
The bottomline is that Microsoft tried to enforce a bogus trademark on Windows and lost. I'm rooting for it to try to enforce a trademark on Microsoft Keyboard?.
That is not what the lawsuit say. Microsoft bought out the "Lindow" trademark for $24 million so that they would not have to go to court. Microsoft did not want to risk losing their trademark on "Windows", if by chance a judge (and jury) sided with Lindow's claim that Microsoft has no rights to the "Windows" trademark.
Lindow is claiming that the word "windows" was a generic term for an operating system at the time MS got the trademark for "Windows". Thus the trademark is invalid. You can not trademark a word for a product that is a generic term for that product. Another words you can not trademark "Tissue" as a name for your toilet paper. Or "Speedster" as the name for your car company. But you can trademark the name "Tissue" for a name of an car. Or "Speedster" as a name of your toilet paper. Just because a word is generic for one product doesn't mean it's generic for another.
Microsoft did not lose their "Windows" trademark in this case. MS still holds a valid trademark on "Windows". The validity of that trademark may be on shaky grounds. But no court has taken it away yet. And the courts may rule in favor of Microsoft if some else challenges it.
As for the "Microsoft Keyboard", that's a valid trademark because "Microsoft" is part of the trademark. If Microsoft included "Microsoft" with "Windows" then there would be no question as to the validity of the trademark "Microsoft Windows". "Microsoft Windows" would not be considered a generic term for an operating system.
BTW- Microsoft is a made up word. Thus the trademark "Microsoft" is protected across any product. You can not use "Microsoft" under any condition with out Microsoft permission.
Comments
You also should read the thread before posting.
I stopped doing that as soon as folks let trolls crap all over nearly every news post, but thanks anyway Mr. Touchy.
I stopped doing that as soon as folks let trolls crap all over nearly every news post, but thanks anyway Mr. Touchy.
Your just repeating what has been said already. I'm not being touchy, I'm just pointing it out. I have made that mistake myself before, and was pointed it out, to which I responded: "my bad". I didn't take offense to it, cause I realized the person was right when they said it. I don't do it anymore, I try my best to read all the comments first to prevent it. Have a cuppa of something.
Apple Computer, Inc. uh, Apple Inc. is now pushing for the separation of Mac OS X uh OS X... doesn't this just give Psystar a new defense???
I guess Psystar will be asking for a motion to dismiss due to them not selling Macs just OS X's
Don't post a long post, when you don't even know what a patent is.
Ireland,
What is it exactly that you'd like to explain to me?
That I don't know?
Patience you say. Or Patent?
Use some, try it. Have a taste!
In other words,
eat me.
When you're finished your drink, change your screename, so your # of posts resets to zero.
(You won't appear so much the fangirl).
People with lots to say, don't learn. I suppose you haven't stopped typing enough to notice?
Have you ever seen the sky? Or just the one on your desktop?
love ya!
(U Jealous blowhard). Write something worth reading!
MO
pS now spend the evening trying to figure out what I mean....
Your bad again... Don't take offense!
iPod Touch, iPhone, Mac, AppleTV, HomeSever ( What ever that will be called )
And many other future product that will use OSX.
Like others have said. It simple means OSX will now be used on more then just computers.
iPod Touch, iPhone, Mac, AppleTV, HomeSever ( What ever that will be called )
And many other future product that will use OSX.
Nicely said.
Thank you.
I thought the reason why apple never trademarked "OS X" before was because it was already taken. Therefore they had to trademark "Mac OS X". Maybe the original "OS X" trademark expired (lapsed) or Apple bought it out.
I found it!
It wasn't OS X tha Apple ran into trademark violation with. It was OS-9. Which is why it's "Mac OS-9" and not just "OS-9"
Since "OS-9" was trademarkable. OS X shouldn't be a problem, if it's not already registered by some else.
http://www.macobserver.com/news/00/m...waresuit.shtml
Or like Microsoft trying to trademark "Windows" for their window based graphical user interface. Even though the term "window" was used at least a decade prior to describe a method of temporarily overlapping information on a two dimensional screen. "Window" was also a very vague term used by many different interface systems, graphical or text-based, but Microsoft managed to trademark it.
I think Apple may have a hard time as there is in fact already an operating system called OS-X, however I'm not sure if it is of any relevance any longer?
Being a generic word has no bearing on whether you can get a trademark on it. A trademark is just protection from some one else marketing a similar product with your brand name (trademark). However, the more generic the name is, the less protection you get from some one else using it on another product. MS can trademark "Windows" for their OS. But can't stop some one from naming their window washing business "Windows". But MS can stop a software company from naming their software "Windows". MacDonalds can not stop Apple from naming their computers "Mac". But can stop Burger King from selling a "BK Mac" hamburger.
On the other hand "Kleenex", Clorox, Lexus, ScotchTape, Bugs Bunny, Superman are not generic words. (At least they weren't when they were first coined.) They are made up names and thus are soul property of the company that trademarked them. You can not name any product or character "Kleenex", Clorox or Bugs Bunny. Even if your product or character is completely different and can't not be confused with the original.
There are actually companies and software that will come up with made up names for your product. This way a trademark will cover all use of the name on any product or service.
As in regards to Windows & Microsoft. They were the first one to trademark the term and really wasn't the technical word for anything in a GUI or a computer. And I don't really think it stops anyone from calling things in another OS 'Windows' (Just like I can ask for a Kleenex, and some one give me any brand tissue). It just stops someone for using the word Windows as their company or product name in regards to computers or software.
Already dozens of software call themselves Operating Systems. In software directories and link directories they are organized under the group Operating Systems. They all have various versions.
I just don't see how they can trademark what is essentially Operating System 10. So if I go create an OS and called Ultimate OS and start of with Ultimate OS 1, I must then skip version 10 due to trademark? Doesn't sound right.
If Apple gets the trademark for "OS X". They can ultimately stop you from marketing an OS name "Ultimate OS X". The whole point of a trademark is so that consumers don't confuse a product of one company with that of another. By marketing an OS named "Ultimate OS X", consumers may confuse it with Apple's OS X. Which is already being sold and has established itself. It also keeps other companies from taking advanage of a company that has spend a lot of money advertising and establishing it's brand.
You may be able to get away with "Ultimate System 10", "Ultimate Operating System Ten", "Ultimate X Operating System" or maybe even "Ultimate OS 10". But any use of "OS X" would be out. It's not so much the meaning of each letter in O-S-X that matters as much as the image of "OS X" as a whole. Already when people see "OS X" they think Apple. Even if they don't know that the "O-S" stands for operating system and the "X" is Roman Numeral for 10, not "ex". And the trademark is for "OS X" as in "O"-"S"-"X". Exactly how it looks. Not what it means as in, "Operating System Ten". Think of it as a logo. Like the "M" that forms the golden arches of "MacDonalds".
As in regards to Windows & Microsoft. They were the first one to trademark the term and really wasn't the technical word for anything in a GUI or a computer. And I don't really think it stops anyone from calling things in another OS 'Windows' (Just like I can ask for a Kleenex, and some one give me any brand tissue). It just stops someone for using the word Windows as their company or product name in regards to computers or software.
Already dozens of software call themselves Operating Systems. In software directories and link directories they are organized under the group Operating Systems. They all have various versions.
That's the whole point. To be first to trademark a name and establish it as a brand. The trademark keeps others from taking advantage of your hard work by naming a product similar to your's.
When you ask for a "Coke", Coca Cola don't want the waitress to bring you a Pepsi. When you ask for "Scotch Tape", 3M don't want a sales person to sell you any other brand of cellophane tape except "Scotch Tape". And when you see "OS X" on a product. Apple wants you to think of "Apple Inc.".
no, it could not just happen that way... it's just stupid cauchemar... simply not the best wake-up in the morning...
well, i see... it's because mad dancers are already at System 7... they will love `X' too
.... MS can trademark "Windows" for their OS. But can't stop some one from naming their window washing business "Windows". But MS can stop a software company from naming their software "Windows". ...
I guess you missed the news that day, but this issue has been litigated and Microsoft ended up paying out $24 million to Linspire. Windows is a generic term for displaying information from multiple computer programs on a single computer screen. It was in use years before Microsoft attached its name to it.
The bottomline is that Microsoft tried to enforce a bogus trademark on Windows and lost. I'm rooting for it to try to enforce a trademark on Microsoft Keyboard?.
I guess you missed the news that day, but this issue has been litigated and Microsoft ended up paying out $24 million to Linspire. Windows is a generic term for displaying information from multiple computer programs on a single computer screen. It was in use years before Microsoft attached its name to it.
The bottomline is that Microsoft tried to enforce a bogus trademark on Windows and lost. I'm rooting for it to try to enforce a trademark on Microsoft Keyboard?.
That is not what the lawsuit say. Microsoft bought out the "Lindow" trademark for $24 million so that they would not have to go to court. Microsoft did not want to risk losing their trademark on "Windows", if by chance a judge (and jury) sided with Lindow's claim that Microsoft has no rights to the "Windows" trademark.
Lindow is claiming that the word "windows" was a generic term for an operating system at the time MS got the trademark for "Windows". Thus the trademark is invalid. You can not trademark a word for a product that is a generic term for that product. Another words you can not trademark "Tissue" as a name for your toilet paper. Or "Speedster" as the name for your car company. But you can trademark the name "Tissue" for a name of an car. Or "Speedster" as a name of your toilet paper. Just because a word is generic for one product doesn't mean it's generic for another.
Microsoft did not lose their "Windows" trademark in this case. MS still holds a valid trademark on "Windows". The validity of that trademark may be on shaky grounds. But no court has taken it away yet. And the courts may rule in favor of Microsoft if some else challenges it.
As for the "Microsoft Keyboard", that's a valid trademark because "Microsoft" is part of the trademark. If Microsoft included "Microsoft" with "Windows" then there would be no question as to the validity of the trademark "Microsoft Windows". "Microsoft Windows" would not be considered a generic term for an operating system.
BTW- Microsoft is a made up word. Thus the trademark "Microsoft" is protected across any product. You can not use "Microsoft" under any condition with out Microsoft permission.
Ireland,
What is it exactly that you'd like to explain to me?
That I don't know?
Patience you say. Or Patent?
Use some, try it. Have a taste!
In other words,
eat me.
When you're finished your drink, change your screename, so your # of posts resets to zero.
(You won't appear so much the fangirl).
People with lots to say, don't learn. I suppose you haven't stopped typing enough to notice?
Have you ever seen the sky? Or just the one on your desktop?
love ya!
(U Jealous blowhard). Write something worth reading!
MO
pS now spend the evening trying to figure out what I mean....
Your bad again... Don't take offense!
You trying to hurt me or something, LOL. Let's be friends