Swedish court blocks Lindows sale

A Swedish court has temporarily blocked the distribution of Lindows software in the country, pending a ruling on Microsoft's claim that the company's name violates its Windows trademark.

Magistrate Ulrika Carlehall of Stockholm City Court said in her ruling that Microsoft has shown probable cause for trademark infringement and therefore may suffer further damage if products with the Lindows name continue to be sold in Sweden. She set a fine of US$3 million (3 million kroner) if Lindows fails to comply with the injunction.

"Microsoft is using lawsuits as a battering ram to smash Linux, to prevent it from reaching retail stores," said Michael Robertson, chief executive officer of Lindows.com. "We're hopeful that the Judge will see Microsoft's true intentions are to sustain their monopoly and will grant Swedish computer users the same choices that global computer users are benefiting from. Microsoft tried this identical legal manoeuvre in the U.S., attempting to block the growth of Linux with mainstream computer users."

Lindows sells a version of the open-source Linux operating system with an interface that resembles Microsoft's Windows. Microsoft sued the company for alleged infringement of its U.S. trademark shortly after Lindows opened for business, with a trial set for March. Microsoft recently expanded the trademark battle to Europe.

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

Talkback 3 comments

  1. One presumes that the Swedes, who do not speak English as a first language, do not realise that the term 'Windows' is a generic English word, much like 'Table' or 'Chair', and should not be given any form of trademark protection, certainly not against wor Anonymous -- 12/12/03

    One presumes that the Swedes, who do not speak English as a first language, do not realise that the term 'Windows' is a generic English word, much like 'Table' or 'Chair', and should not be given any form of trademark protection, certainly not against words like 'Lindows.com' which do not exist in the English language.

  2. Bit of a difference...while the company name might be Lindows.com, the software is called Lindows, and if MS has registered Windows as a trademark they are entitled to the full protection of that trademark, whether or not it's a common word or not. Anonymous -- 12/12/03

    Bit of a difference...while the company name might be Lindows.com, the software is called Lindows, and if MS has registered Windows as a trademark they are entitled to the full protection of that trademark, whether or not it's a common word or not.

    Going by your argument, Apple should not be able to protect their name, or Ford either, just to name two.

  3. That anonymous guy has it wrong. Ford was not a generic term when it was copyrighted. It may be now, but now beforehand. Windows was, and still is, a generic term for a hole in the wall that you can look through. Just because Lindows r MrDamage -- 12/12/03

    That anonymous guy has it wrong.

    Ford was not a generic term when it was copyrighted. It may be now, but now beforehand. Windows was, and still is, a generic term for a hole in the wall that you can look through.

    Just because Lindows rhymes with Windows doesnt mean a thing. If i start a computer hardware company called "Grapple", does that give Apple the right to sue me for having a name that rhymes with theirs, even if my product is along the lines of the IBM PC (x86) architecture, rather than the Apple RISC based architecture? I think not.

    If MS was serious about "protecting copyrights", then they should be going after the companies that create products like;
    BPS Windows Trace Remover
    Windows & Internet Washer Pro
    Security Officer for Windows
    Advanced Windows Cleaner
    Windows System Optimizer

    After all, these products themselves, just in name and functionality, highlight the severe shortcomings of Windows.

    Considering even the US courts have not handed out any injuction against Lindows, and that the judge presiding over the trial warned Microsoft about its use of a generic term, its a bit rich to enforce other coutnries to uphold an ideal which has not even been settled in its howntown.

    When it comes down to the crunch, this is nothing more than M$ once again trying to enforce its monopoly upon the world, using any means, fair or foul.

Add your opinion


Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Renai LeMay StartupCamp Melbourne: The review
    StartupCamp Melbourne looks to have produced just as interesting ideas as the Sydney event which immediately preceded it, but the Victorian start-ups appear to have stumbled during execution. Sydney 1, Melbourne 0.
  • Array Google should come clean on datacentres
    It's nice that Google says it has put an effort into making its datacentres more energy efficient, but the search giant's pledges won't mean much until it discloses just how many of the beasties it's actually running.
  • Array US shows what OPEL could have been
    Sprint's WiMAX roll-out in Baltimore will prove the Australian government's decision to worm its way out of the Opel WiMAX contract was a short-sighted, and ultimately damaging, political stunt that has benefited nobody.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured