DailyTech - Office Live Sues Microsoft

Submit News

IT Office Live Sues Microsoft
Gabriel Ikram (Blog) - March 1, 2007 10:57 AM

E-mail

del.icio.us

27 comment(s) - last by Kraenar.. on Mar 4 at 4:25 AM

The "Office Live" brand might be a little more prevalent than Microsoft first anticipated

Office Live LLC., an online media company that gives free professional advice and runs a number of websites, including Officelive.net, has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft targeting its “Office Live” brand. The lawsuit aims to seek an injunction disallowing Microsoft from using the “Office Live” name.

Office Live LLC has had a federal registration on the “Office Live” trademark since 2002, well before the launch of Microsoft’s Office Live services, which only made their debut late last November. Office Live LLC also has a large number of services and websites centered on the Office Live brand, such as Lawofficelive.com, Autofficelive.com, and Realtorsofficelive.com.

Following the release of Microsoft’s Office Live services, Office Live LLC filed a lawsuit against Microsoft on December 29, 2006 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. However, they agreed with Microsoft to refrain from serving the lawsuit in an effort for both companies to discuss the dispute.

When the two companies met on February 12, talks failed and neither of the companies were able to reach an agreement.

In a statement, Lenny Targon, Chief Executive of Office Live stated, “"It is shocking that Microsoft would have so little regard for another company's intellectual property rights that it would select a name belonging to another company. Online software may be the next big thing, but Microsoft has no right to use our trademark without permission." Microsoft believes the word “Live” used in conjunction with other terms is commonplace. They view the word more of as a descriptor and don’t believe Office Live LLC has a trademark.

In an e-mail to CBC News, Microsoft spokesman Jack Evans stated, “Microsoft is using common words in a common way and pairs them with its very famous Microsoft mark. We don't think Office Live LLC has a trademark, or that we are infringing any rights asserted by Office Live LLC."

Microsoft plans to vigorously defend its position in court. In addition, they will also seek to invalidate Office Live LLC’s trademark to the phrase Office Live.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Trademarking...

By Aikouka on 3/1/2007 12:47:47 PM , Rating: 2

Now, I always thought that Trademarking only held up in your specific domain? So if I were to make a car named "Zune", Microsoft couldn't get all uppity with me about it, because it's not a portable music player. If my remembrance about the way it works is correct, would Office Live LLC even have a case as Microsoft's Office Live isn't even the same as what they offer as a business.

If my knowledge of how it works is wrong, please let me know =].

RE: Trademarking...

By Master Kenobi

(blog) on 3/1/2007 12:52:06 PM , Rating: 2

Yea, there are some bluring but Office Live LLC seems to be more of a marketing company than anything else. They say they offer professional services and whatnot but it's really a different color from what Microsoft is offering.

Depending on the judge and how tech savvy he is this will likely be ruled as different domains... but if the judge wanted to be a prick and stick it to them, he theoretically could, until they got an appeals judge with some technical sense.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By dever on 3/1/2007 2:50:53 PM , Rating: 2

The suffix "Live" is getting fairly common for internet applications, similar to "Web" or "Online". Combine that with the fact that MS has been calling thier application suite "Office" without much dispute for many years, and I don't think there'll be much of a case here.

But, then again, I don't believe this company really cares about getting Microsoft to change it's name. It's most likely a calculated effort for extremely cheap advertising.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By PWNettle on 3/1/2007 4:37:49 PM , Rating: 2

Seems like these people going after MS's "Office Live" would make as much sense as MS going after them for using "Office" in "Office Live LLC" and saying they're trying to make money off of one of MS's popular product names.

"It's most likely a calculated effort for extremely cheap advertising"

That or a way to try to get some free and easu cash in a settlement to let it drop.

Our (US) legal system needs a labotomy in a bad way.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By hecksign on 3/1/2007 1:32:23 PM , Rating: 2

this trademarking has become more and more complicated nowadays. and more news about trademark will come in the future. There are unlimited name in this world, why would someone want to use the same name? why dont they come up with something new and brilliant idea about naming their product?

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By masher2

(blog) on 3/1/2007 2:58:53 PM , Rating: 2

> "there are unlimited name in this world, why would someone want to use the same name?"

Primarily because names like "Xojjkloz" and "Snilkiwiggit" aren't extremely good choices for either name recognition or conjuring up pleasant connotation in the minds of consumers. Companies want names that fit their product, that make sense, and are easily remembered. Of those, there are far fewer.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By TomZ on 3/1/2007 3:04:28 PM , Rating: 2

"Snilkiwiggit" - I kind of like that one... You mind if I register a trademark on that one? :o)

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By masher2

(blog) on 3/1/2007 3:26:11 PM , Rating: 2

As long as its in a market other than marital aids...I already own the trademark there.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By TomZ on 3/1/2007 5:04:17 PM , Rating: 2

LOL, that's a good one! You never know, Snilkiwiggits might sell like hotcakes! I'll be able to say I read about them first here on DailyTech.

Parent

RE: Trademarking...

By Samus on 3/2/2007 4:00:04 AM , Rating: 1

Office Live is a really, really dumb name.

Just call it Office.net

Parent

Patenting my name

By Mitch101 on 3/1/2007 3:33:51 PM , Rating: 2

Yes Im thinking Im going to patent my name this way any kids with similar names will have to pay me royalties. So must thier parents. In fact any time someone says my name they should have to pay me royalties.

Its the Microsoft Zune. Zune itself should be a free use word. When refering to the MP3 player yes the Microsoft Zune.

Its Microsoft Office Live. The word or company name should allow for patent use not the name of the product.

Apple would sue Orchards, Juice makers, and granny smith if she existed.

It would be the Apple iPod not the D-Link iPod if it existed.

Product names are stupid patents. We dont have enough words to go around. Its not like IPV6 where we can extend it.

This goes to show how screwed up the patent system is.

RE: Patenting my name

By masher2

(blog) on 3/1/2007 3:47:46 PM , Rating: 2

> "Product names are stupid patents..."

You might be a bit more convincing if you didn't have patents and trademarks confused.

Parent

RE: Patenting my name

By Mitch101 on 3/1/2007 4:34:29 PM , Rating: 2

LOL your right I mixed the words. My Bad.

The rules still apply its like kids saying "I called it first" "No I did". Then attorneys throw in words like Polluted. Come on.

You know Movies eventually come along with the same name as do songs but no one is suing saying hey you stole the name even though its not the same song.

Tradmarking a WORD or WORDS is just stupid.

Corporate names are ok providing you do do the stupid like Intel going after every word with Intel in it.

Parent

RE: Patenting my name

By masher2

(blog) on 3/1/2007 5:13:11 PM , Rating: 2

What's your solution? Toss out trademark registration entirely, so that any company can produce and sell a Mercedes, or a Coca Cola, or a Nike shoe? Talk about mass confusion!

Trademark law exists for very good reasons. And, 99.9% of the time, it works very well indeed...to the benefit of the trademark owners and the general public.

Parent

ROFL, sory, MS loses this one

By Murst on 3/1/2007 1:10:21 PM , Rating: 4

quote:
Microsoft believes the world “Live” used in conjunction with other terms is commonplace. They view the word more of as a descriptor and don’t believe Office Live LLC has a trademark.

Really?

quote:
Windows Live is either a registered trademark or trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.

http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/intellectualp...

I'm generally against stupid lawsuits, but MS will lose this case. You can't use what other people own and get away with it, especially when you exhibit the same behavior towards others when your TM is in question.

What if Microsoft wins this case?

By Arribajuan on 3/1/2007 7:23:06 PM , Rating: 2

It is interesting to see what comes out of this as AMD also has a Live! brand.

In this case AMD could also be upset since they are using the LIVE word. A "!" does not seem to much of a difference to me.

They are referring to a product that is alive, online, live...

Seems similar to the iPod, iMac, iBlah cases...

Apple got out with their business of banning people from using the iCrap name scheme.

What if Microsoft wins? Should this mean that Apple bullied all off of the iBrands it closed?

Should the iCommunity get their iNames back?
Could anybody hop on the Live marketing?

iDontKnow

It just seems really muddy as results vary within similar cases

Just imagine, live tv shows should be paying royalties to the owner of the Live brand...

RE: What if Microsoft wins this case?

By Kraenar on 3/4/2007 4:25:24 AM , Rating: 2

If what your saying happens the way your saying it, then MS is out of luck on using LIVE. I can only think of one right now, but I'm sure there are other entities out there that have been using LIVE for a while, ei.. the band LIVE.

Parent

Hmmmmm

By Master Kenobi

(blog) on 3/1/2007 12:47:05 PM , Rating: 1

This could go either way. Office Live is pretty bland. I also didn't see Microsoft suing AMD for using Athlon XP, which was a blatant play to hijack the Windows XP momentum......

On the other hand, There is Windows Live......

Worst case they just throw the MS Office symbol in front of it and claim it as a "Trademark". I'm not sure about this one..... kind of in a very very grey area. Very generic terms, and terms that are commonly used by a lot of companies.... I think in the end Microsoft will be able to beat them into submission or get Office Live LLC Invalidated and become public domain.

Really is gonna depend on the judge I guess, there isnt a clear winner.

RE: Hmmmmm

By boss coffee on 3/1/2007 2:12:39 PM , Rating: 2

From AMD in 2001:

quote:
Microsoft optimized the DirectX 8.0 interface for Windows XP specifically for the AMD Athlon XP processor. The AMD Athlon XP processor’s innovative QuantiSpeed architecture helps propel Windows XP application performance to a new level.

It was a joint partnership at the time, not a rip of the name.

Parent

Hypocrits

By Tsuwamono on 3/1/2007 12:47:18 PM , Rating: 2

Now microsoft wont want to pay up saying this and that and how its different and such yet they sued a 18 year old kid because he used the name MikeRowsoft as his part time business that he owned for fixing PCs.

Atleast with Mike he changed the name Microsoft is blaitently stealing the name with no regard for its registration.

Trademarks

By chiguy2891 on 3/1/2007 2:32:25 PM , Rating: 2

Maybe Microsoft is taking a page from the Apple book in how they handled the i-Phone incident with Cisco. I don't know the specifics of each case, but on the surface they seem to be pretty similar.

common words huh?

By darkpaw on 3/1/2007 5:51:08 PM , Rating: 2

Well lets see, usually I can understand MS's point, but in this case who are they kidding with the common words things? How much more common can you get then

Office
Windows
Vista

(and as someone already pointed out, even they have Windows Live trademarked).

Really makes MS's legal position sound kinda funny when all their major products are really just common words.

Isn't this similar to a past case MS brought?

By kamel5547 on 3/2/2007 12:52:50 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
, “Microsoft is using common words in a common way and pairs them with its very famous Microsoft mark

Wait... wasn't that the argument Lindows made about Windows? Screw 'em, you can't have it both ways, if Lindows wasn't allowed because in part "Windows" wasn't deemed generic enough, then they shouldn't be allowed to use Office Live.

The scum at MICROSUCKS will try to bankrupt this company

By cornfedone on 3/1/07, Rating: -1

RE: The scum at MICROSUCKS will try to bankrupt this company

By Tsuwamono on 3/1/2007 12:50:04 PM , Rating: 2

Thats alittle harsh of words but i think that the EU is right. in this case and if it weren't for your constant use of the term "Microsucks" even though they do i would actually agree with you.

Probably want to tone it down a bit next time.

Parent

RE: The scum at MICROSUCKS will try to bankrupt this company

By Xenoid on 3/3/2007 3:16:11 AM , Rating: 2

Haha fvcking commie scum posts yet again.

Go hug a tree and play with your Mac while driving a hybrid that gets less highway mileage than my 90 Tercel but costs 30 times as much.

Parent