Jump to content

Microsoft v. MikeRoweSoft: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
del dash
GDallimore (talk | contribs)
11,312 edits
→‎Further developments: you don't "copyright" infringe a "trademark". They're two separate and distinct rights and causes of action
Line 27: Line 27:
After settling the suit Rowe attempted to [[auction]] off the documentation he had received on the on-line auction site [[ebay]], describing it as "a piece of Internet history".<ref name="iol"/><ref name="cnet2"/> This included an inch thick [[WIPO]] book, copies of trademarks, web pages and e-mails between him and Microsoft as well as one copy of the original 25 page cease and desist letter.<ref name="cnet2"/> The auction received more than half a million page views and bidding rose to more than $200,000.<ref name="cnet2"/><ref name="inquirer">{{cite web | author = Inquirer staff | title = Mike Rowe Microsoft auction over | publisher = [[The Inquirer]] | date = 2004-02-06 | url = http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2004/02/06/mike-rowe-microsoft-auction-over | accessdate = 2008-10-01}}</ref> The high bids turned out to be fraudulent and the auction was restricted to pre approved bidders;<ref name="cnet2"/> after restarting from the reserve price of $500 the documents eventually sold for $1,037.<ref name="inquirer"/><ref name="taipei>{{cite web | title = Sued teen sells letter from Microsoft | publisher = [[Taipei Times]] | date = 2004-02-09 | url = http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worldbiz/archives/2004/02/09/2003098113/wiki | accessdate = 2008-10-01}}</ref>
After settling the suit Rowe attempted to [[auction]] off the documentation he had received on the on-line auction site [[ebay]], describing it as "a piece of Internet history".<ref name="iol"/><ref name="cnet2"/> This included an inch thick [[WIPO]] book, copies of trademarks, web pages and e-mails between him and Microsoft as well as one copy of the original 25 page cease and desist letter.<ref name="cnet2"/> The auction received more than half a million page views and bidding rose to more than $200,000.<ref name="cnet2"/><ref name="inquirer">{{cite web | author = Inquirer staff | title = Mike Rowe Microsoft auction over | publisher = [[The Inquirer]] | date = 2004-02-06 | url = http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2004/02/06/mike-rowe-microsoft-auction-over | accessdate = 2008-10-01}}</ref> The high bids turned out to be fraudulent and the auction was restricted to pre approved bidders;<ref name="cnet2"/> after restarting from the reserve price of $500 the documents eventually sold for $1,037.<ref name="inquirer"/><ref name="taipei>{{cite web | title = Sued teen sells letter from Microsoft | publisher = [[Taipei Times]] | date = 2004-02-09 | url = http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worldbiz/archives/2004/02/09/2003098113/wiki | accessdate = 2008-10-01}}</ref>


Initially during the case Microsoft emphasised the importance of preventing copyright infringement of their trademark,<ref name="wired"/> but later admitted that they may have taken their trademark too seriously and had been overaggressive.<ref name="zdnet2"/><ref name="usatoday"/> It has since been suggested that Microsoft had little choice but to pursue the issue once it had come to light or it would have risked losing its trademark and that had the case gone ahead Rowe would have had a strong argument for keeping the domain as he was using his real name.<ref name="zdnet2"/>
Initially during the case Microsoft emphasised the importance of preventing infringement of their trademark,<ref name="wired"/> but later admitted that they may have taken their trademark too seriously and had been overaggressive.<ref name="zdnet2"/><ref name="usatoday"/> It has since been suggested that Microsoft had little choice but to pursue the issue once it had come to light or it would have risked losing its trademark and that had the case gone ahead Rowe would have had a strong argument for keeping the domain as he was using his real name.<ref name="zdnet2"/>


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 10:20, 7 October 2008

Microsoft argued that their trademark had been infringed because of the phonetic resemblance between "MikeRowesoft" and "Microsoft".[1]

Microsoft v. MikeRoweSoft was a lawsuit filed by Microsoft over the domain name "MikeRoweSoft.com"; the defendant was a Canadian high school student named Mike Rowe.[2] The case received international press attention following Microsoft's perceived heavy handed approach to a 12th grade student's part time web design business and the subsequent support that Rowe received from the online community.[3] A settlement was eventually agreed, with Rowe granting ownership of the domain to Microsoft in return for training and gifts.[4]

Background

"Since my name is Mike Rowe, I thought it would be funny to add 'soft' to the end of it"

Mike Rowe [5]

"MikeRoweSoft.com" was initially registered by Canadian student Mike Rowe in August 2003, Rowe set up the site as a part time web design business.[2][6] He is reported as choosing the domain because he thought it would be fun to add "soft" to the end of his name;[4] however, Microsoft saw the name as trademark infringement because of its phonetic resemblance to their corporate name and demanded that he give up the domain.[1][7][8] After receiving a letter on January 14, 2004 from Microsoft's Canadian legal representatives Smart & Biggar, Rowe replied asking to be compensated for giving up the domain.[5][9]

Microsoft replied back, offering to pay his out-of-pocket expenses of $10, the original cost of registering the domain name.[7] Rowe responded asking instead for $10,000,[10] later claiming that he did this because he was "mad at" Microsoft for their initial $10 offer.[5] Microsoft declined the offer and sent a cease and desist order spanning 25 pages, accusing Rowe of setting up the site in order to try to force them into a large financial settlement.[8][2]

Press coverage and settlement

Rowe went to the press, creating publicity for the case and garnering support for his cause including donations of over $6000 and the offer of free advice from a lawyer.[11][12][5] At one point Rowe was forced to take down his site after it was overwhelmed by around 250,000 page views over a period of twelve hours, only managing to get the site back up after changing to a service provider with a higher capacity.[13][1] The case, portrayed as a David versus Goliath struggle, characterised Microsoft in a negative light and the resulting bad publicity would later be described as a "public relations mess".[14][15][11] The public showing of support that Rowe received was credited with "softening Microsoft's stance", leading to an eventual settlement.[1]

In late January 2004 it was revealed that the two parties had come to an out of court settlement, with Microsoft taking control of the domain.[16] In return Microsoft agreed to pay all of the expenses that Rowe had incurred including setting up a new site at and redirecting traffic to "MikeRoweforums.com".[17] Additionally Microsoft provided Rowe with a subscription to the Microsoft Developer Network, an all expenses paid trip for him and his family to the Microsoft Research Tech Fest at their headquarters in Redmond, Washington, training for Microsoft certification and an Xbox with a selection of games.[7] Following an on-line poll Rowe donated most of the money that had been given to him for a legal defence to a children's hospice, putting the remaining money towards his future university education.[12][18]

Further developments

"We take our trademark seriously, but in this case maybe a little too seriously"

Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler [13]

After settling the suit Rowe attempted to auction off the documentation he had received on the on-line auction site ebay, describing it as "a piece of Internet history".[10][9] This included an inch thick WIPO book, copies of trademarks, web pages and e-mails between him and Microsoft as well as one copy of the original 25 page cease and desist letter.[9] The auction received more than half a million page views and bidding rose to more than $200,000.[9][19] The high bids turned out to be fraudulent and the auction was restricted to pre approved bidders;[9] after restarting from the reserve price of $500 the documents eventually sold for $1,037.[19][20]

Initially during the case Microsoft emphasised the importance of preventing infringement of their trademark,[17] but later admitted that they may have taken their trademark too seriously and had been overaggressive.[15][13] It has since been suggested that Microsoft had little choice but to pursue the issue once it had come to light or it would have risked losing its trademark and that had the case gone ahead Rowe would have had a strong argument for keeping the domain as he was using his real name.[15]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d Sieberg, Daniel (2004-01-20). "Teen fights to keep MikeRoweSoft.com". CNN.com. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  2. ^ a b c Kotadia, Munir (2004-01-19). "Software giant threatens mikerowesoft". ZDNet. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  3. ^ Barker, Gary (2004-01-21). "Teenager takes on a corporate monster". The Age. Retrieved 2008-10-02.
  4. ^ a b "Boy swaps MikeRoweSoft for Xbox". BBC News. 2004-01-26. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  5. ^ a b c d KOMO Staff & News Services (2004-01-18). "Microsoft vs. Mikerowesoft". KOMO News. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  6. ^ "Microsoft Not Soft On Mike Rowe". CBS News. 2004-01-20. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  7. ^ a b c Kotadia, Munir (2004-01-26). "MikeRoweSoft settles for an Xbox". CNET. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  8. ^ a b "Microsoft takes on teen's site MikeRoweSoft.com". CNN.com. 2004-01-20. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  9. ^ a b c d e Festa, Paul (2004-02-02). "MikeRoweSoft sell-off bids going, going...down". CNET. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  10. ^ a b "MikeRoweSoft takes the war to eBay". iol.co.za. 2004-01-29. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  11. ^ a b Carmichael, Amy (2004-02-05). "Microsoft vs. mikeRowesoft ends amicably". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  12. ^ a b Sjöberg, Lore (2004-03-24). "Anti-MS Fund Goes to Charity". Wired News. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  13. ^ a b c "Microsoft lightens up on teen's mikerowesoft site". USA Today. 2004-01-20. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  14. ^ Bishop, Todd (2004-01-21). "Mikerowesoft vs. Microsoft: The saga continues". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  15. ^ a b c Kotadia, Munir (2004-01-20). "Microsoft: We took MikeRoweSoft too seriously". ZDNet. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  16. ^ "Microsoft to take over MikeRoweSoft.com". CNN.com. 2004-01-26. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  17. ^ a b "MikeRoweSoft Names His Price". Wired News. 2004-01-26. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  18. ^ "Teen who battled Microsoft donates defense fund to charity". USA Today. 2004-03-25. Retrieved 2008-10-03.
  19. ^ a b Inquirer staff (2004-02-06). "Mike Rowe Microsoft auction over". The Inquirer. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
  20. ^ "Sued teen sells letter from Microsoft". Taipei Times. 2004-02-09. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft&oldid=243623081"