Software giant threatens mikerowesoft

[TacticalPeek]

Software giant threatens mikerowesoft
Monday 19th January 2004

Microsoft is threatening teenage software writer Mike Rowe with legal action for registering
and using the domain name mikerowesoft.com


Microsoft has set its lawyers onto a 17-year-old software writer from
Vancouver, called Mike Rowe, because he has registered
MikeRoweSoft.com, which the company said infringes on its copyright.

Mike Rowe, who registered the domain name in August 2003, received an
email from Microsoft's lawyers three months later asking him to transfer the
domain name to Microsoft. They also offered to pay him a "settlement" of
$10 (£5.55), which is the cost of his original registration fee.

"I was surprised that they would offer such a little amount of money to
persuade me to hand my domain over," said Rowe, who wrote back telling
them that he had worked hard on the site and spent money printing
stationary, but would be willing to give it up for $10,000. In response, he
received a 25-page letter explaining why Microsoft's customers could get
confused between his site and their site.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39119181,00.htm

[ramapo]

1. Send Bill a note

I sent a short note off to Microsoft basically telling them the company should be ashamed of itself

[bleedingheart]

2. hahahaha Microsoft is a household name and by

stating that users would get confused by his site they are basically stating that their users don't know how to spell their name..hahahahah

that is to laugh...hahahaha

there is just so much funny news today.

[Gribbenes]

3. MikeRoweSoft

Funny. I wonder if Redhat will sue "eunochs.com"

[mbperrin]

4. Hell, kick in another ten, Bill and make him change HIS

name!

[jayfish]

5. Why Doesn't The RW...

go ballistic when corporations file frivolous lawsuits? I expect Der Freeperland to start defending Microsoft's actions any minute.

Jay

[RememberTheCoup]

6. In defense of Microsoft...

(and if I'm defending Microsoft, you know something is up :))

...if this kid is going to go into business, he has to play by adult rules. I remember a case last year where some kids opened a lemonade stand in a place where a lot of vendors had food and beverage stands, including the mayor (I believe) of the city. The mayor told the kids they couldn't operate without a license. A lot of people were attacking the mayor for doing that, but there isn't a separate set of business rules for children - if you want to play the game, you have to follow the rules. And personally, I think the kid was greedy for asking for $10,000. Domain name jumping like that is illegal.

[Adapter44]

7. Can you please point out the applicable law?

"Domain name jumping like that is illegal."

Please cite this.

Also - the issue to me seems to be another case of copyright/trademark/patents gone nuts. IF you were to accept that Microsoft has a valid argument here, then ANYTHING that even SOUNDS like X company name/product/etc can be sued for.

So let's say a company called Demographic Underground decided democraticunderground.com was infringeing on their "rights", would you support them possessing DU? If not, why? It's the same logic. Or would you give Microsoft special rights? Do you not find it equally as crazy?

Also - Microsoft should also sue the owners of the following sites MikeRowSoft.com, MyCrowSoft.com, MikeRoweSoft.org. I can think of TONS of other domains that exists that sound very similar to multinational corporations. I believe massive legal action is in order against all of them.

[RememberTheCoup]

9. Okay, you got me...

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't have any specific law to cite here. I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that you can't buy up a domain name that infringes on another company's trademark and then try to sell it to that company for an exorbitant price. The example you give seems a bit different to me because, though similar, they are not perfect homonyms. But I will not try to debate the legal particulars here. I'll leave that to others. The main point I was trying to make is that just because it's big, bad Microsoft vs. a 17-year-old kid doesn't automatically make the kid right and Microsoft wrong. And that the kid has to learn to play be adult rules if he wants to be an entrepreneur. It didn't seem to me, based on this article, that Microsoft was harassing him in any way or anything like that.

[Adapter44]

10. Well

If he were in the states he could very well be screwed as federal law does prohibit cyber squatting. (though it is questionable if that is what this is... although he asked for money, the situation leading up to it and his explanation could sway a judge/jury) Fortunately being in BC he is in a much better position. The courts there are usually far more liberal compared to the states when it comes to trademark/copyright/patent issues. Really I don't think Microsoft has a legal case they can win. Though then again the amount of legal BS you can pull when one side is a 17 year old and the other has millions on millions to spend on a legal department is very great.

[Occulus]

12. ummmm

" I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that you can't buy up a domain name that infringes on another company's trademark and then try to sell it to that company for an exorbitant price."

It's HIS name. Not Bill's. Why isn't M$ suing the parents for naming their child something that could be confused with Microsoft? The company is a person under the law, after all.

I mean, certainly Microsoft is older than this kid, so it stands to reason that his parents could reasonably be expected to know that Mike Rowe is similar to Micro, right?

:eyes:

What if he copyrighted his own name?

[DrBB]

14. I don't think that's the issue. It's "due diligence"

I'm not a lawyer either. But these cases come up all the time; it's not just Microsoft. And as I understand it, the reason they pursue these things is not because the kid is going to cut into their bloated profits. It's because the law requires them to do "due diligence" in maintaining their trademarks, otherwise those trademarks can become generic and they'll lose their rights to 'em. Like kleenex or scotch tape (no uppercase initials required).

It's not that they think little Mikey's site is a genuine threat to them per se, it's that, once they KNOW about an actionable case, they have to go after it in order to show due diligence. I don't even think it matters to them that much whether they win in a case like this--the point is that they can't be shown to have failed to take action in a case of infringement and thus weakened their trademark claim.

B.t.w., as my avatar indicates, I'm not a Microsoft fan....

[RememberTheCoup]

15. thanks for the info!

I'm getting an education here. :hi:

[northzax]

18. exectly right

it's the same reason that Disney will sue elementary schools who paint Mickey Mouse on the cafeteria wall without permission. failure to enforce your copywrite causes it to become diluted and eventually useless. They actually cannot pick and choose. Now I bet you that Microsoft wishes they'd never heard of this guy, Mike Rowe. But now that they have, they have to go looking to shut him down.

Think about it, are knockoff T-shirts in Malaysia really cutting into Nike's profits? not really, it's actually free advertising. Do they really care about street vendors selling knockoffs? nope, but the copywrite laws make sure they care. no one who buys a 5 dollar nike t-shirt, or a 10 buck version of Windows is actually likely to buy the real thing, but without enforcing the law on the little guy, the company cannot then complain when a competitor does the same thing and really starts to damage them.

it's strange, but it's the law.

[w4rma]

16. It's the programmer's name + "soft" for gosh sakes. (n/t)

[RememberTheCoup]

17. Well, I'll leave the legal arguments to others, as I already said.

I don't know whether the fact that his name really is Mike Rowe has any legal relevance. Does it make him immune from trademark infringement in this case? I would think not, but I'll let others debate that.

As far as intent goes, I do think it's possible he decided to use the "lucky" fact that his name was Mike Rowe as a way to get some money from Microsoft. Or maybe he was just making a pun. He could have gone with MikeRoweSoftware, perhaps. Anyway, I made the only point I really wanted to make here which was that his age alone does not exempt him from following the law.

[northzax]

19. Truth in Domain Names Act, 2003

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.00939:

designed to stop misleading names that lead to obscene sites (whitehouse.com anyone?) but perhaps can be stretched to cover more.

[Robb]

8. Yeah, but not exactly "jumping"

His name is Mike Rowe, and he does write software.

I would think he'd have a good case, especially if you introduce the concept of parody.

FWIW, $10K seems pretty reasonable, especially considering the press he's gotten mentioning the domain name. :shrug:

...Can we also have a laugh at the fact that MS's Canadian lawyers are called "Smart and Biggar"? :D

(On edit): Just read a report from the UK saying he only asked for $1,000, not $10,000. Which is it?

[chasqui]

21. My friend works at Smart & Biggar!

He is in Montreal.

[sendero]

11. This is standard Microsoft modus operandi...

... and why I disrespect them not only as a purveyor of mediocre-at-best technology but also as a business bully.

I doubt very much that, given that both sides had equal representation in court, that MS could win this, unless the guy uses colors/fonts etc on his site to try to make himself look like MS.

I realize I do not know every nuance of the laws concerning this, but the bottom line is I think that it is only illegal if you are trying to pass yourself off as someone else, or the existence of the site somehow damages MS. It is hard for me to concieve of how this could be so.

Companies who are worried about similar domain names (these really arent') should invest the $8 per year and buy each name they would consider problematic. Failure to do so makes it their problem.

[TrueStory]

13. Micro$oft should sue Mike's parents

because the parents named the guy Mike Rowe and the parents buyed him a computer

[ThoughtCriminal]

20. It took 25 pages to explain

how M$ customers might get confused? They must REALLY be "Hooked on Phonics (tm)"