Microsoft applies for trademark on 'Mod'(zdnet.com)
zdnet.com
Microsoft applies for trademark on 'Mod'
http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-applies-for-trademark-on-mod-7000024661/
8 comments
[deleted]
Will the evangelists be known as the Mod Squad?
Isn't it far more likely to mean 'modification' and will be some sort of new marketplace to enhance the experiences of office & windows?
Like game mods and the modding community?
Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion, guess she's not into gaming.
Also how can they file a trademark on a common computing term like mod?
Like game mods and the modding community?
Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion, guess she's not into gaming.
Also how can they file a trademark on a common computing term like mod?
Because trademarks are restricted to a single specific field or class of products/services. Thus there is a Delta which is an airline (trademark applies to the air travel industry) and a Delta which makes faucets (trademark applies to faucets) and a Delta which does dental insurance (trademark applies to dental insurance), and...
In other words, it'll basically only apply to the things they do with it, and to any products/services which could be confused for those things.
In other words, it'll basically only apply to the things they do with it, and to any products/services which could be confused for those things.
But "mod" is already in widespread use in Microsoft's industry and with the same meaning.
Also, Cisco routers and Sysco restaurant supplies, even though a company that sold network hardware wouldn't be able to call itself Sysco for long. This is because the standard is confusion, not an exact string match. As per 15 USC § 1125:
> (a) Civil action
> (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which—
> (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or
> (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities,
> shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125
This is because trademark law is a consumer protection law first and foremost, as opposed to being a property law like copyright and patent laws are. This is also why you can lose trademarks so easily: If you're not using it and defending it, it's presumed you don't care, so nobody's going to confuse an active trademark with a defunct one.
> (a) Civil action
> (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which—
> (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or
> (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities,
> shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125
This is because trademark law is a consumer protection law first and foremost, as opposed to being a property law like copyright and patent laws are. This is also why you can lose trademarks so easily: If you're not using it and defending it, it's presumed you don't care, so nobody's going to confuse an active trademark with a defunct one.
The same way Apple trademarked a the name of a fruit.
https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/...
https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/...
Huh? It wasn't a common computing term at all.
Incidentally, it was a recording label before they essentially entered the music business:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459
Apple Computers won the litigation, but I'm not entirely sure why. The Beatles kept their albums off of iTunes for years because of it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459
Apple Computers won the litigation, but I'm not entirely sure why. The Beatles kept their albums off of iTunes for years because of it.
or how Microsoft trademarked a common GUI element
Were they referred to as "windows" 30 years ago? (I believe so, but I can't recall the exact source) It's easy to think it's a common GUI element name since we all refer to windows in various OS's, but back then, there could have been any number of valid names (panes, panels, boxes, mini-screens, etc)
WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointer) was coined in 1980[1], though Xerox PARC was likely referring to them as "windows" even before that.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
You mean "It was coined by Merzouga Wilberts in 1980"?
Arhive.org's snapshot of Wikipedia's source:
https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottie...
Relevant fragment:
>The main aspect of the GUI was to use graphic metaphors for objects like computer programs and documents. Another man working with the computer scientists was a Graphic Designer called Norman Cox. He was responsible for designing a series of icons to make basic operations of the computer visible as actual objects. Merzouga Wilberts also came up with the concept of WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointers). These interface objects create a feeling of familiarity and consistency for the user enabling a particular message to be conveyed. However, the technology was not yet available to develop the ‘Xerox Star’ and the management at Xerox was not willing to invest any funds into the project as they did not see it as a marketable product. This was a big mistake!
So looks like Charlotte Booth in that relatively modern article meant concept of the WIMP, not terminology.
Arhive.org's snapshot of Wikipedia's source:
https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottie...
Relevant fragment:
>The main aspect of the GUI was to use graphic metaphors for objects like computer programs and documents. Another man working with the computer scientists was a Graphic Designer called Norman Cox. He was responsible for designing a series of icons to make basic operations of the computer visible as actual objects. Merzouga Wilberts also came up with the concept of WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointers). These interface objects create a feeling of familiarity and consistency for the user enabling a particular message to be conveyed. However, the technology was not yet available to develop the ‘Xerox Star’ and the management at Xerox was not willing to invest any funds into the project as they did not see it as a marketable product. This was a big mistake!
So looks like Charlotte Booth in that relatively modern article meant concept of the WIMP, not terminology.
"Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion"
It's an interesting thought, but IMO, it seems less likely than Mary's suggestion.
"Mod," as in "modification" (whether in gaming specifically, or software in general), is an extremely common and borderline generic word that is unlikely to be granted as a trademark. It would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola's trying to trademark "soda" or "soft drink."
On the other hand, "Mod," as in "Modern" or "Modular," for the name of a UI or OS seems at least somewhat novel. I can't think of too many software products using the word "Mod" in that context. This is a usage that would actually stand a chance at being granted as a TM.
It's an interesting thought, but IMO, it seems less likely than Mary's suggestion.
"Mod," as in "modification" (whether in gaming specifically, or software in general), is an extremely common and borderline generic word that is unlikely to be granted as a trademark. It would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola's trying to trademark "soda" or "soft drink."
On the other hand, "Mod," as in "Modern" or "Modular," for the name of a UI or OS seems at least somewhat novel. I can't think of too many software products using the word "Mod" in that context. This is a usage that would actually stand a chance at being granted as a TM.
This is overrated, many companies register many trademarks and end up never using them.
I remember reading in 2009 that Nintendo had registered the trademarks for Pokémon Black, Pokémon Brown, Pokémon White, Pokémon Gray, Pokémon Purple, Pokémon Crimson and Sacrlet (and while black and white were used the others were not).
I remember reading in 2009 that Nintendo had registered the trademarks for Pokémon Black, Pokémon Brown, Pokémon White, Pokémon Gray, Pokémon Purple, Pokémon Crimson and Sacrlet (and while black and white were used the others were not).
Probably the name of the new programming language.
Modulo? Modern?
Short for "modern"?
My guess is "Windows Modern app" => Mod
So Windows RT becomes Windows Mod and runs only Mods; Win 8.x runs Windows programs and Mods; potentially the Xbox One can run Mods, etc.
So Windows RT becomes Windows Mod and runs only Mods; Win 8.x runs Windows programs and Mods; potentially the Xbox One can run Mods, etc.
Modern goes out of date. You don't call things modern, other people call your things modern.
'Module' is more likely. As in 'app' for 'application'. A 'module' implies something that works with other things so a 'calendar module' could work with a 'contacts module' in a 'modular way'. Apps just do their own thing and are standalone, modules integrate into a whole.
Anyway, this is a speculative story about nothing more than a filing for a name. They should put filings in there for things like 'rocket ship' just to get bloggers talking even more speculative nonsense.
'Module' is more likely. As in 'app' for 'application'. A 'module' implies something that works with other things so a 'calendar module' could work with a 'contacts module' in a 'modular way'. Apps just do their own thing and are standalone, modules integrate into a whole.
Anyway, this is a speculative story about nothing more than a filing for a name. They should put filings in there for things like 'rocket ship' just to get bloggers talking even more speculative nonsense.
> Modern goes out of date. You don't call things modern, other people call your things modern.
Agreed, but MS already call the Windows 8 UI 'modern'.
Agreed, but MS already call the Windows 8 UI 'modern'.
"Modern goes out of date."
That's not a problem for Microsoft branding. That has a typical shelf life of three to five years.
Also, I think their goal should be to navigate it back to 'Windows' as soon as possible. It's a bit like "the new Coke". Do you think Coca Cola intended that phrase to last forever? (Sorry, couldn't think of another example. Please don't follow up with remarks on how the new coke ended)
That's not a problem for Microsoft branding. That has a typical shelf life of three to five years.
Also, I think their goal should be to navigate it back to 'Windows' as soon as possible. It's a bit like "the new Coke". Do you think Coca Cola intended that phrase to last forever? (Sorry, couldn't think of another example. Please don't follow up with remarks on how the new coke ended)
Modernism finished some time in the 80's (though I do wonder if Ballmer ever left that decade).
I thought so too, and was a bit put off because it sounds like a word a teen in the 60's would use.
But it could also be short for "modifications", as in "XBox mods". (Ostensibly to appeal to tinkerers?)
The best part of a name is, you don't have to explain it -- let people derive whatever meanings they want. You'll often be surprised (and not always pleasantly!) at the unexpected connotations people derive from a name.
But it could also be short for "modifications", as in "XBox mods". (Ostensibly to appeal to tinkerers?)
The best part of a name is, you don't have to explain it -- let people derive whatever meanings they want. You'll often be surprised (and not always pleasantly!) at the unexpected connotations people derive from a name.
Ah, acronym fun time...
Ministry of Disappointment
Machine of Delusion
Money only Dollars
Or do Android release "Rocker"?
Ministry of Disappointment
Machine of Delusion
Money only Dollars
Or do Android release "Rocker"?
This makes "Mod" look like the new consumer brand to replace the less favored "Live".
Speaking of branding, whatever happened to Microsoft losing the Sky in SkyDrive to BSkyB?