Microsoft will fight to keep Office Live Name

Office Live LLC filed a trademark-infringement suit against Microsoft in the U.S. District Court of Central California in Los Angeles earlier this month over Microsoft's Web-based small business package of the same name. Microsoft Office Live, which debuted in November 2006, provides CRM, a Web presence, collaboration, and accounting services to small businesses. In a statement, Microsoft spokesman Jack Evans said his company doubts the legitimacy of Office Live's trademark claim and will "vigorously defend" its legal position to maintain the name for its service: "Clearly, if anyone is seeking to gain from the name of another company's products, it's the plaintiffs in this case."

According to court papers, Office Live, in North Hollywood, California, is seeking damages and an injunction to stop Microsoft from using the Office Live name. Microsoft named its Office Live service as part of the whole "Live" branding. Office Live said it registered to trademark the "Office Live" name in 2002, launching many Web sites including: lawofficelive.com, autoofficelive.com, realtorsofficelive.com, doctorsofficelive.com, accountantsofficelive.com, and psychologistsofficelive.com. It originally filed suit against Microsoft over the trademark in December 2006, but the case was put on hold so the companies could negotiate a settlement. When one was not reached, Office Live moved forward with its lawsuit against the software giant.

News source: InfoWorld

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Mozilla Security Update Fixes 7 Vulnerabilities

Next Story

Sony Warns About European PS3 Backwards Compatibility

21 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

There's a place near me called "Active-X Osteopaths". I wonder if they've been around as long as/longer than the Microsoft technology platform of the same name. And if they should call their lawyers

Well if my memory serves M$ got a site closed called mikesoft or something similar years ago saying it was using their trademark to get attention or whatever excuse.

So they should face the same fate.

leesmithg said,
Well if my memory serves M$ got a site closed called mikesoft or something similar years ago saying it was using their trademark to get attention or whatever excuse.

So they should face the same fate.


That was a kid wiith a site named "MikeRoweSoft"

You know I can understand these cases where the guy claims copyright infringement (lose, win...whatever).

But cases where the plaintiff claims punitive damages for something similar to this, where a product with a similar name causes increased traffic, is completely ridiculous. Your site gets more traffic, as well as better chances for purchase.

I understand that the case is for the first type of issue, copyright infringement. If he is in the case legitimately, then thats fine. But if in the back of his mind he knows he has no shot, he should not even be here. Enjoy the increased traffic while you can, and sell as much of your junko product as you can. Being #100,000,000 on Alexa rankings never brought anyone anything...a quick spike to #1000 or something, on the other hand, can do so...lol...like a tidbit on the front page about traffic spike.

Some people just dont know how to revel in good times.

Tokar said,
You know I can understand these cases where the guy claims copyright infringement (lose, win...whatever).

But cases where the plaintiff claims punitive damages for something similar to this, where a product with a similar name causes increased traffic, is completely ridiculous. Your site gets more traffic, as well as better chances for purchase.

I understand that the case is for the first type of issue, copyright infringement. If he is in the case legitimately, then thats fine. But if in the back of his mind he knows he has no shot, he should not even be here. Enjoy the increased traffic while you can, and sell as much of your junko product as you can. Being #100,000,000 on Alexa rankings never brought anyone anything...a quick spike to #1000 or something, on the other hand, can do so...lol...like a tidbit on the front page about traffic spike.

Some people just dont know how to revel in good times.


And is it the quality traffic you are talking about? If you are talking money here, a lawsuit is a better and faster way to get what you want compared to useless traffic that has probably no potential of being converted into a revenue stream. MS should have researched that, and this is the simplest thing they screwed up on, because a simple search on the Companies House database would probably pop the company name up. I see fail to see anything except for ignorance in MS's actions, especially if the plaintiff has contacted them to resolve the issue out of court.

As a correction to the article (something that really confused me),
The lawofficelive.com, autoofficelive.com, etc. websites were not registered/started by Microsoft (as the article seemed to indicate), but by the other Office Live company.

I figured it was weird for Microsoft to register such names, and when I visited those sites, they were not quite up to Microsoft's quality (not to mention the lack of MS Office branding).

The contact link indicates it's for the Office Live company in Hollywood, Calif.

I'm surprised you can copyright a term like "live", they could always call it MS Office Live... Then again I'm sure Microsoft tried to copyright Windows and Office :S

Evolution said,
I'm surprised you can copyright a term like "live", they could always call it MS Office Live... Then again I'm sure Microsoft tried to copyright Windows and Office :S

They did. They destroyed some small-time programmer a few years ago over the use of the Windows name in a product made for Windows. A couple of years ago they also forced Ghisler to remove the Windows from Windows Commander, so that the name was changed to Total Commander.

Anyway, the trademark in question here is "Office Live," not "Live." If the other company registered it in 2002, MS doesn't have a much of a case.

Surprisingly, after several years and all it's immense legal resources, MS still can't get rid of http://www.****microsoft.com/ .

I guess they don't want that kind of publicity?

"You're suing WHAT?!"

I agree with MS on this.. Too many goddamn blood hounds out to suck MS' blood over a bit of money... Grow up, make a better product, and stop b!tching about it.
It's not like anyone ever heard of the other Office Live anyway...

Computer Guru said,
Too many goddamn blood hounds out to suck MS' blood over a bit of money...
Yes, some what true but...

Computer Guru said,
Grow up, make a better product, and stop b!tching about it. It's not like anyone ever heard of the other Office Live anyway...
That's not even close to the point... and you need to wake up to reality :P

They are in reality...

Office Live regstered the trademark in 2002. No matter what Microsoft say, its their legal right to fight. If a window company went out and called themselves "Windows Vista" or "Micro-soft windows", you dont think microsoft wouldnt fight?

Just because its microsoft, it doesnt mean they cant be fought against. I think you're the one who needs to grow up ;)

Oh, and just because YOU havent heard about it, doesnt mean it doesnt count - even if its a sole trader and not a corporation, they still have the right, Microsoft doesnt own the world... not yet anyway