LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.BSkyB gives Redmond a "reasonable amount of time" to implement the changes.
Read more.BSkyB gives Redmond a "reasonable amount of time" to implement the changes.
Brain damaged.
Originally Posted by Agent
The sky is now patented
Buy the company that owns "MyDrive" (it's somewhere in Switzerland) and then use that. Then just run a search and replace, changing SkyDrive with MyDrive - which, imho, is a better name anyway.
It'll be very annoying to Microsoft if Sky didn't actually have a cloud storage product on the way. And personally, I think Sky's being stupid - far better to arrange a partnership with Microsoft letting them use the name in exchange for Sky being able to get some special deal with Microsoft - e.g. selling Sky services to XBone owners etc.
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
Sky's being like Apple then ?
So, everything that has the name SKy is copyrighted by BSkyB ?
Well done, MS will now remove your apps from XBOX. Bravo!
They should call it MoonDrive with the tagline "We've gone a level above, put your stick in the moon"...
CloudDrive?
Online backup and storage solution. Or is that not catchy enough :thumbup:
Intel i7 8700K delidded | Asus TUF Z370 Gaming Plus | Palit GTX980 SuperJetStream 4Gb | Samsung 840 EVO 240Gb | Samsung 1Tb F2 | WD 1Tb & 2Tb | Corsair 750TX v2 | 32Gb Corsair Vengence | Saitek Cyborg EVO F.S. | Zalman MS800 | Corsair K90 | AOC 27" 2560x1440 |AOC 24" HD | HTC Vive
“This post was written using 100% recycled words.”
No. First, it's a trademark, not copyright. Second, it applies very specifically to certain categories of activity.
We have, more or less, worldwide trademark laws. What do you suggest? That we just don't bother, and that anyone can rip off anyone else's reputation when they feel like it?
Trying making a car, or related product, and calling it Ferrari, or opening a shop and calling it Harrods, and see how long it takes for the legal letters to arrive.
If MS want to call their product a name, in a category of activity and legal jurisdiction, where a registered trademark already exists for that name, they deserve what they get for not doing their basic checks before naming the product.
And it's not as if MS are exactly shy about resorting to lawyers to protect their IP.
They either took a flyer, or were basically incompetent, in name selection, tried to bluster their way through it for several years, and lost in the courts. Serves 'em right.
I wonder what's more important, MS removing Sky apps, or Sky refusing MS access to Sky services in a geographical region largely dominated by Sky, when MS are touting the XBO as a media device, not a games console?
Seems to me they've more to lose from that pee'ing contest than Sky.
There's kind of a difference between marketing an exact copy of an existing brand name than using a dictionary word in a product name. It's like GAME taking gamestation to court (if they weren't owned from the same company), games workshop, the makers of the hunger games and game of thrones etc. If you want to use a common word as a company name, I think you ought to expect that people should use it themselves. Especially when no-one would even confuse the two and they're not trying to imitate them.
CloudDrive is the obvious, its MICROSOFT CloudDrive, ie a drive in the "cloud"
Thing is, it's not just using a dictionary word .... like, oh, Apple, for example. It's a registered trademark, like Apple.
And you say nobody would confuse them, but that's exactly what happened. Part of the evidence for trademark infringement was the Sky call centre logs with people calling Sky when they had problems with SkyDrive precisely because they thought, you know, being called Sky Drive it was. "drive" product run by Sky.
It is not just, or even, that it's a company name. It's a Trademark. You do not get trademark protection just by creating a company. You get it by registering a trademark, in one or more specific areas of operation, and companies work hard, and spend a LOT of money on developing trademarks, and establishing brands, because brand recognition and brand reputation are phenomenally valuable assets.
Microsoft know this perfectly well. Goodness knows they're keen enough to protect their own IP, and a trademark is IP.
Except Ferrari actually makes cars, and Harrods actually has a shop. Sky doesn't have any cloud services, storage or otherwise. Also, Microsoft called it "Microsoft SkyDrive", not "Sky Drive". I very much doubt that it occurred to anyone at Microsoft that some backwater broadcasting company in a few islands 3,000 miles away existed, much less that they had any interest in usurping their reputation for being anti-competitive, fleecing their customers, and otherwise being asshats towards everyone.
Surely Sky do have cloud services, Sky Go for starters is a cloud based streaming service.
Secondly, just a point to the article writer. MS didn't fail with the appeal, I understand they chose not to appeal the ruling.
What's wrong with Microsoft Cloud Drive [MCD]?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
