EU Throws out Microsoft's Vista Font Trademark 82
vitaly.friedman writes "Microsoft has lost another round at the EU though this time it has nothing to do with the antitrust case. This time the dispute is over fonts; specifically Segoe, one of the typefaces Microsoft wants to use in Vista. Microsoft filed its "registered community design" for the font back in January of 2004, paid the required fee, and everything was great until December." A copy of the decision is also available.
Re:Quick! (Score:5, Insightful)
Naturally no one should be able to register an IP that is identical to someone else's.
Re:In case you didn't know (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, I don't know if Linotype have any reasonable grounds to sue MS over this, that's how screwed up typeface issues are.
The big things come down to, fundamentally, every typeface is going to look similar, if the didn't they wouldn't be readable. So, dealing with all that is just a big pain in the butt.
Apple chose to include their Apple logo in the fonts, this is partly so they can use it in random applications, but more so that because Apple owns a trademark on the Apple logo, no one can distribute their fonts under *trademark* law, not just typeface law.
This isn't the first font though that Microsoft straight up copied. Arial (which you may be using to view this site even) is just Helvetica, in as much Segoe is Frutiger Next. Don't think MS would open themselves that wide open to a lawsuit by saying that it's identical, no matter how stupid you think someone is, doing something like that is beyond stupid.
Re:Penny wise, pound foolish (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Quick! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:See for yourself (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft versus society (Score:3, Insightful)
Can't we go one day without Microsoft doing something immoral or illegal?
Re:Quick! (Score:5, Insightful)
As they should do with any company.
Re:Penny wise, pound foolish (Score:3, Insightful)
What "Helvetica"? If you're referring to Arial, then it's by no means a stolen Helvetica
Uh, yes, it absolutely is. It's a third-rate clone of Helvetica done by a company called Monotype so Microsoft didn't have to pay license fees. I guess you have no idea of history, so here, I'll educate you--read this called The Scourge of Arial [ms-studio.com] where its dubious history is discussed. It's a "shameless imposter" of Helvetica thrust upon the world.
; they're totally different designs,
No, unless you think "totally different" means very minor differences.
and anyone who knows anything about type can tell them apart at a glance.
Because experienced designers know what goofy little changes exist in the ugly clone of Helvetica.
People get annoyed about Arial because it's ugly, not because it's "stolen".
Wrong, they're annoyed because it's stolen, and NOT ONLY is it a clone, but it's a bad, ugly one.
And what "Palatino"? Book Antiqua? Ancient history. Microsoft more than made up for it when they actually licensed the genuine Palatino from Linotype -- it's been bundled with Windows since Win2k.
Haha, no it's NOT "ancient history," and to claim Microsoft magically made up for their evil ways after they were forced to license the real font after everyone made a stink about it is total fanboyism.
By the way, this is nothing to do with "settling", "stealing", or "opening themselves up". This is a case of them being denied a trademark. There has been no lawsuit and no claim of damages or illegal activity: the only claim Linotype made was that Segoe was not an original design.
And as par for the course at Microsoft, it's not.
Take off the blinders. Next.