Vista is not a TM, it is a spanish word...
In addition Microsoft TM on Vista is still in the application phase and hasn't been issued yet, I'm sure it's still fighting to settle all other claims agains that mark, once you see an R with a circle around next to Vista thats when you know it's said and done...
Italian word please, it come from Latin. Currently I see a small "TM", in the top right corner at the end of the word.....
It's not yet a formally registered trademark. But they're at least telling people.
It has "trademark usage", or is being actively used in commerce or so.
You're not thinking of getting vistaleouscom, are you?..
No, to achieve the same effect I should use "showy, flamboyant, ostentatious, pretentious, splashy......
Oh, we Dave's are a witty lot.. I'm still chuckling..
In any case, I'd like to point out to our "readers" that a word doesn't always have to be "registered" to have potential "TM" issues... and this is one of those cases...
VISTA is both spanish and italian, only that the spanish term is more known.
I do not think they can trademark it, or we would end up not being able to use any word in the dictionary!.
Of course, if you go and register BillGatesMicrosoftWindowVistaOperatingSystem.com you might get into trouble..
"Vista" is also the Portuguese word for "eye".
"vista" it is a trademark and has been used in commerce, for years, by a software company in washington state. http://www.techworld.com/application...fm?NewsID=4097.
Also IBM appears to own a "vista' trademark" http://www.isogon.com/partners/ibm_tivoli/index.html.
Hee is microsoft trademark statement: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/t...vistaguide.asp..
It will most likely come down to how the "TM infringing domain" is used.
But I wouldnt be suprised seeing microsoft go after vista-shoeshop.com..
Vista is an operating system and it's TM is in the software technology field. If I recall correctly (too tired to look it up), the Vista TM for the Wa co has challenged MS. But I strongly believe MS may buy (or already has bought) the TM from that company. Remember money can usually win, regardless of right or wrong. MS should not get a TM for Vista, but it will. They have the deep pockets, ALL other do not.
So if MS does acquire the TM, they will have the right to challenge anyone they feel is infringing on it. It's a hard fact of life, get used to it.
BTW- MS holds a TM for Windows.....
According to their statement, seems like they are trademarking Windows Vista all as one TM, rather than the word Vista by itself. At least that is the way I read it, as they state that the whole phrase is part of the TM.
This is the line from the statement that is most revealing:.
Never refer to the product just as Vista. Always include Windows in the product name...
That also makes the most sense for them.. why fight for the Vista TM when they can have Windows Vista so much more cheaply?..
I can't believe this thread. Did any of you bother to read the TM? It's for WINDOWS VISTA. That's like saying they can't TM "windows" because it was a word before. C'mon people read and use some sense in these things. Understanding TM law requires reading not asking ignorant questions in a forums. If you don't have an educated response here in the legal forums why bother posting?.
Another wonderful thread started by Genialnames...thanks...
I guess there is no update on this situation. I can't find anything, but I did find out something I did not know....
When MS rolled out Internet Explorer, someone else already coined the phrase for a browser. MS ended up shelling 5 million for the TM rights. But the important things here is... they got the rights. http://news.com.com/Microsoft+settle..._3-212931.html.
Here are a couple other articles on Vista.... http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...rovista23.html http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-108...=feed&subj=tr#.
So basically, Ms is being a bully and not many people will stand up to them. About the TM MS is claiming, Windows Vista, as a whole, this is how they are presenting it..
So if they do challenge someone over "vista", they will show how their "mark" may seem registered, but it is not...
No such thing as an ignorant question.. it would be more ignorant "not" to ask...
Thanks for the compliment.
I think there is nothing wrong in asking, and to make people more aware about Domain Names and TM issues..
As DNQuest once has to say" each case it is unique" so nothing it is really obvious, never and ever for everyone.
Neither are so much obvious the questions I asked.
To me Labrocca's comments are unbelivable, this is the third time I post a question in the Legal forum and I got personally "attacked" by Labrocca.
Omni-scent : I think it is necessary I remember you few things:.
Even if I would have posted a silly question(and I would not be the only one, but I never saw reaction like your, never) you are not allowed to be offensive in anyway:.
If you don't like a thread just ignore it, like anyone else do.
Please read the forum rules that you should have accepted: be polite.
I don't know the term in english for that but here those who hit someone at his shoulders are very badly considered.
I never know you before, I can't even imagine what's make you behave this way against me but I invite you to tell me your reason in private, if you have any.
Sorry to all the other guys here, but I feel I have to say it to him.
Now where exactly did I personally attack you? Personally attacking you would be very very easy but it's not really necessary since it's obvious to most here how you really are. I bet your reputation points just keep on growing. Yeah I am sarcastic and I am NOT your biggest fan. You may not like what I say but it's not a personal attack. It's your posts and your opinions that I find offensive. I bet personally you are a great guy.
Yeah you can post here and ask questions all day long but you don't seem to ever like the answers. Also imho if you spent the time reading threads and trying to comprehend what is already here then your grasp on TM and internet law would by much better.
If you are taking my posts as a personal attack Genialnames that's not my problem. I think you can add me to your ignore list then. If you go to your usercp you should see "buddy/ignore lists" and from there you can add my name so you won't have to read my posts. I am pretty close to ignoring you anyways so it's not a big deal. I have yet to find any value in your posts...
Nobody personally attacked, but in another post, you personally went after me and another member of this forum. Your lack of understanding and lack of acceptance of good advice leaves much to be desired. I will never put anyone on ignore just so I can correct people when they post bad/incorrect/inaccurate opinions on this board. Many newbies as yourself come to this board for answers, most accept the advice, some do not. Either way, I don't care, but what I do care about is the misleading crud that sometimes may get conveyed.
On an added note....
Even hough each case must stand on it's own merits, WIPO will take precedents into consideration. So if you have a case similar to other cases, expect the rulings to be similiar. The original post was a good one, but as I said, money will win out on this one, not justice..
You canot TM a word... you just cant. You can register a TM meaning.
TM is something that goes with a company, I own a few TM's that are not registared.
Vista has many people who have TM'ed the meaning they use it for. Windows vista has the TM on any OS/computer software. So no other OS can name itself windows.
This does not mean that MS can sue me for creating a site spanishvista.com. As this has nothing to do with MS. They can only sue if you are using the TM to sell a computer OS or software that is named with vista.
All of you need to know a TM is an idea, not a word. The word is only the representation of your idea. You canot trademark a word for every possible useage of that word. You just registar it for the field you are currently doing business.
I could come up with a company for selling cars, and call it vistacars.com and windows has NO right to the name or site since it is not infringing the trademark in any way.
Even google would have a hard time taking googlecars.com from my if I had it and were using it as a ecomerse site and had a differant logo with nothing in common with google.com. They own google TM but they only own that so other pages canot create a search called google or replicate any of google services(gmail,gearth,adsense, etc). Some people may disagree however as it seams they dont completely understand how TM's work as google is only TM'd for their current products. Anything with google in it probably will be challenged, but they have to prove you are using it in the same way as them and hurting them by you using it.
The original reason TM came to exist was to ensure people did not get confused with brand names. Noone would confuse google.com with googlecars.com a site about cars... They cant take it from you If you are not using it as they are...
I think better I post again the subject, seem someone it is very distract, again.I posted the question because I have read in other threads (not mine) that some people are worried and I intended this way to offer an opportunity to clarify the situation, I do not have any Vista related Domain (not yet ).
Furthermore my personal curiosity was to understand if the power of money (MS) could in some way affect the way the laws are applied (that's the DNQuest theory)wich in part I think it is the sad thruth.
Tgo wrote: Personally I was always convinced that this is the correct way to interpret TMs, until I read some of the answers here at NP, that even if I did not agree I always avoid sarcastic comments about, because I like to think the forum "it is" the way we make it: I try to keep it interesting, elegant,clever and pleasant ..
Sorry if some of you disagree. ps.
Labrocca I will not add you in any list, I am just asking you to avoid comments on the persons and to stay in topic.
I read your comments and even if I sometime I don't agree I think they are interesting, when they are not OT ,since they represents opinions...
The question really then is whether the UDRP arbitration is as tolerant as the US TM laws are in this respect? It's true, you can't TM a word by itself, but you can trademark a meaning and that meaning cannot relate to whatever it commonly means. For instance, you can't get a trademark on pearls for pearls, but you can get one for pearl as it relates to diamonds (for instance). However, from the way I read the UDRP cases, it seems to me from what I've read that a company merely has to prove a degree of confusion and it would be enough to lose the domain to the plaintiff. For instance, googlecars.com created after Google TM'd their name, while maybe not a TM infringement by law, could be argued that it causes sufficient confusion for a judgement for Google. Am I correct in this, that the UDRP is not necessarily in sync with the US TM laws?..
No, but copyright maybe. Apparently coke copyrighted the word "Enjoy!" that you find on some coke bottles.....
Anyway, MS are going to do the best that they can to TM/Copyright the word vista, even though I know of a few companies that have a product with the word vista or their name contains the word vista...
If you read the TM that MS filed for Vista it's quite extensive. Like I stated before...RESEARCH. You are asking for opinions on how they trademarked the name. WHY NOT GO TO THE SITE AND READ THE TM??? Your question just seems incorrectly worded. It seems like a question that has no answer. It's your lack of understanding of TM law that is rather frustrating.
Maybe that is the book for you...
Hahaha, never seen a more resentful personality, nearly likeable! Can I ask you if where you live it is full of hungry cats ?
Just imagine what if I would have posted this same your comment when casually I read a thread of a girl who was worried to have some problem with MS because she own a DN that contain Vista....
BTW I still consider strong the DNquest point..
IMHO for some reason it seem that the laws come interpreted and applied in order to favor the stronger(who has much money or power), not the weaker.
Maybe it is just an impression......
Actually, google can come after you for googlecars under dillution. Google has gained enough noteriaty to say "When people think of google, they think of us, so discontinue your usage of googlecars". And they will probably win.
In theory, you are correct, the words need meaning to qualify as a TM. They must be used in commerce as an identity. but the bottom line is a TM is just a word. You can't register xboxcars or ebaycars because of dillution. Though generic words are more open to interpretation (apple records, apple computers). Your statement is too broad to cover under the single statement.
McDonalds TMed "smile". but it's not registered...