Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet United States

Dell Loses Bid To Trademark "Cloud Computing" 146

Posted by kdawson from the answer-cloudy-try-again-later dept.
1sockchuck writes "The USPTO has issued a 'non-final determination' refusing Dell's request to trademark the term 'cloud computing' (we discussed the application earlier), finding that the term is generic and 'therefore incapable of functioning as a source-identifier for applicant's services.' According to Data Center Knowledge, 'Dell has the option of filing a response to submit arguments to dispute the USPTO examiner's findings.'" Here is the USPTO's ruling. A week and a half ago the PTO cancelled its 'notice of allowance' for the mark, a move little remarked upon at the time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dell Loses Bid To Trademark "Cloud Computing" More

Dell Loses Bid To Trademark "Cloud Computing"

Comments Filter:

  • Humanity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bigtallmofo ( 695287 ) * on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:21PM (#24640773)
    Does it make anyone else sad when they think that there are fellow members of our race that would patent breathing if they could and would idly watch people that couldn't afford to pay their licensing fees suffocate?

    • Re:Humanity (Score:4, Funny)

      by timmarhy ( 659436 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:23PM (#24640789)
      i've looked through my file and found you are in violation of my patent on the inhalation of air. please stop stifling innovation and pay my royalties you freedom hating commie.

      • Re:Humanity (Score:5, Funny)

        by msu320 ( 1084789 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:37AM (#24641217)

        i've looked through my file and found you are in violation of my patent on the inhalation of air. please stop stifling innovation and pay my royalties you freedom hating commie.

        "Uh, prior art." - God

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tyrione ( 134248 )

          i've looked through my file and found you are in violation of my patent on the inhalation of air. please stop stifling innovation and pay my royalties you freedom hating commie.

          "Uh, prior art." - God

          Where have you been?!

          Oh I see. When it comes to profits you're Johnny on the spot, but when it comes to the rest you're just moving in mysterious ways.

    • Re:Humanity (Score:5, Funny)

      by PPH ( 736903 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:44PM (#24640943)
      Better yet: Patent farting and wait for them to explode.
    • Yes, very sad. Well, it would, except I haven't paid for "sadness"; I'm too poor to license the full range of emotions.

    • Not me. Feeling sad about that is patented, and I can't pay the licencing fees. :(

    • Re:Humanity (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Renraku ( 518261 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:52AM (#24641307) Homepage

      Maybe it'll come to that one day. Look at what Monsanto pulls. Trust me, if Monsanto had their way, they'd own all food production in the US. Then they'd jack the prices up 50x, since its been shown that we Americans have enough disposable income to be able to make it to work and back when gas prices rise 400% in two years.

      1. Plant a field of GM crops.

      2. Test neighbor's crops for patented GM markers.

      3. Sue neighbor when nature spreads the GM genetic markers to other fields.

      4. Profit, force neighbor to burn their crops.

      5. Buy out their field and plant a field of GM crops, watch his neighbors get nervous.

      • If you want to know more about how genetic modification makes extortion against farmers possible, see the movie, "The Future of Food" [thefutureoffood.com].

        The movie is about a plan of a big corporation, Monsanto to get control over the food supply, using its patented genetically powerful weed-killer Roundup, and patented seeds that are resistant to the weed-killer.

        This is how Monsanto does it: Monsanto patented and sells a genetically modified versions of normal food crops. Inevitably, some of those plants spread and be
    • You would not pay for breathing yourself, but you would pay if IMPLEMENTED such a breathing mechanism in a device or sorts... You see, the patent holder could sue or try to extort evolution, or god, but not you.

      So no, it does not make me sad.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

      Now it's just time to go and invalidate a lot of other too plain trademarks. Just think of one that we use daily...

    • Of course, breathing has heaps of prior art.

  • too bad (Score:5, Funny)

    by schnikies79 ( 788746 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:31PM (#24640837)

    If they got it, no one else could use this worthless buzzword. Now everyone has a chance to launch cloud computing on the web 2.0 while hyping it in the blogosphere.

    *Sigh*

    • Re:too bad (Score:5, Funny)

      by Nefarious Wheel ( 628136 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:36PM (#24640877) Journal
      Cloud Computing? You mean they wanted to be *that* closely sssociated with vaporware?

      • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Cloud Computing? You mean they wanted to be *that* closely sssociated with vaporware?

        Oh no! Snakes have invaded Slashdot.

      • Cloud Computing? You mean they wanted to be *that* closely sssociated with vaporware?

        It's worked well so far with Steam...

    • Re:too bad (Score:5, Funny)

      by Robert1 ( 513674 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:50PM (#24640979) Homepage

      Just wait till cloud computing supplants networking as everybody's favorite buzzword:

      "Hey Bob, yeah, I'm just cloudin' with some clients, be with you in a sec."

      "We have an impressive cloud infrastructure and our services can allow anyone to become more cloudy."

      It's going to happen! :(

      And of course, we can't forget the groan worthy puns from news agencies "Cloudy days ahead for Dell!" - ugh.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Koiu Lpoi ( 632570 )
      Sorry if I'm "out of the loop", but what exactly IS "cloud computing"? I keep hearing this term to describe several (seemingly) unrelated projects, and I'd like it if somebody could break it down, or if that's impossible, just say "it's the latest buzzword, and means about as much in the real world as 'synergy'".

      • Re:too bad (Score:5, Funny)

        by Koiu Lpoi ( 632570 ) <koiulpoi AT gmail DOT com> on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:16AM (#24641113)
        I'd also like to point out that the Wikipedia Page [wikipedia.org] lead me on a chain from that into Web 2.0 [wikipedia.org], Tag clouds [wikipedia.org], and Folksonomy [wikipedia.org]. I want to know two things: Who is actually using these buzzwords in real development work, and why are all the names so stupid (especially "folksonomy")?

        • Re:too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jlarocco ( 851450 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @01:07AM (#24641383) Homepage

          "Cloud computing" is the "web 2.0" buzzword for "Internet". It's used primarily to confuse investors and venture capitalists who remember how poorly the "... on the internet" fad turned out in the late 90s.

          The other words were made up to help solidify the illusion that "cloud computing" is something new.

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by symbolset ( 646467 )

            Uh, no. Cloud computing is a buzzword for non heirachical distributed infrastructure for services. If you have a set of nodes and any node can be any type of server, and the control of which node runs which service is part of a distributed infrastructure which self nominates nodes for running services based on some metric such as speed of storage, local need or need for offsite redundancy then you're in the cloud. Control of the cloud is yet another redundant self managed service.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jd ( 1658 )
          1. Players of buzzword bingo. 2. It avoids confusion with their real work.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by KGIII ( 973947 )

          Wyse, Google Apps, etc...

          Err, if you're old enough? Dumb terminals and the mainframe but the mainframe is the 'net. Yup... It's a retarded buzzword.

        • Interesting, the Wikipedia page mentions a few companies:

          The cloud computing "revolution" is being driven by companies like Amazon, Google, Salesforce and Yahoo! as well as traditional vendors including Hewlett Packard, IBM, Intel and Microsoft[9] and adopted by individuals through large enterprises including General Electric, L'Oréal, Procter & Gamble and Valeo

          No Dell...

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Wikipedia to the rescue: Cloud computing [wikipedia.org]

        In short, it is a service where apps and data are stored "in the cloud" -- the cloud refers to the symbol used in diagrams to depict a network you have no knowledge nor control of the technology. Kinda like a black box, but very buzzword-worthy and makes you look cool. For example, Apple's Mobile Me is a cloud computing. It stores web 2.0 apps that you use to sync your computer with other devices. You don't need to know how Mobile Me works at Apple's data center, you

      • Generally, it describes a webserver or service that runs on multiple computers where any of the computers can be removed/replaced without stopping the service.

        A good example (perhaps _the_ good example:-) is GFS. [google.com]

        It expands the concept of a cluster - in that most clusters the database servers and perhaps the NFS/SAN run on dedicated, specialized machines vs. the cloud running all services on the same kind of machines.

        The big advantage for the webhost/service provider is that (theoretically) they can run all

    • Re:too bad (Score:5, Informative)

      by hack slash ( 1064002 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:14AM (#24641093)
      "blogosphere"

      Another term as bad as "cloud computing".
    • You mean Web 2.0 (R) [wikipedia.org], registered trademark of United Business Media.

    • If they got it, no one else could use this worthless buzzword. Now everyone has a chance to launch cloud computing on the web 2.0 while hyping it in the blogosphere.

      Quite correct. Though they could consider trying "cloudware." It has all the buzziness of "cloud computing" and all the value of "vapourware." It could be one of the most apt buzzwords ever.

    • I'm sure Apple will soon be bringing out the iCloud. And even if they don't, somebody will buy one.

  • Slashdot Poll (Score:5, Funny)

    by Nymz ( 905908 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:46PM (#24640961) Journal
    Shouldn't this be a Slashdot Poll question like "What is a less generic name for Cloud Computing?"

    a) Dell's Cloud Computing
    b) gEverything has it, or it doesn't exist
    c) Skynet's primary self awareness functions
    d) Cloudboy Neal

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      e)Internet

      We already have it and it describes the same thing as this "new?" cloud computing initiative. No one has ever networked a bunch of resources together before and made them available...

  • The Scots already did this ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Sunday August 17, 2008 @11:50PM (#24640977)
    It's called "McCloud Computing", and there's no point in copyrighting the name because there can be only one of them.
  • They should have gone with "Cumulonimbus Capillatus [wikipedia.org] Computing".

    Heck of a lot more fun to say.

  • Next trademark attempt - Clod Computing (Score:5, Funny)

    by tinrobot ( 314936 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:07AM (#24641061)

    i.e. - Computing for idiots.

  • We should building a cloud computing module a piece of software in Linux kernel that should be free completely and no fucking patent! Patent is shit, Cloud computing piece of software module will be open source and patent-free and making cloud computing software source code be available on cloud of internet.

  • WtF (Score:5, Informative)

    by dr_turgeon ( 469852 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:17AM (#24641115)

    I work for a company (a bank) that seems to apply a trade/service-mark to random word combos in at least every third or forth sentence of any marketing--even internal materials. I envisage a child claiming "mine" all the time or using a label maker ad nauseam.

    • This reminds me of Cat (from Red Dwarf) walking around with a spray bottle: "This is mine, this is mine, and all of this is mine." Or, the seagulls from Finding Nemo. Regardless, you sir, are living in comedic hell.
  • thinking. if you so much as think of putting together a patent i will sue you or demand royalties.

    don't think about patents, think about lawyers, ideas, money, food or sleep. i will issue promptly cease and desists emails and letters.

  • Microsoft announces its new product for distributed computing architectures, "Microsoft Cloud".

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by VGPowerlord ( 621254 )

      I thought it was Microsoft Cloud Server 2008.

      • No, no, I heard it was Microsoft Cloud Server 2008 Enterprise Edition. ..bruce..

        • No, no, I heard it was Microsoft Cloud Server 2008 Enterprise Edition. ..bruce..

          That really depends on how many computers are in the cloud. The Datacenter Edition would be needed for large clusters, like, say... this Internet thing I keep hearing about.

  • A million duhs screaming out (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EdIII ( 1114411 ) * on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:45AM (#24641273)

    finding that the term is generic and 'therefore incapable of functioning as a source-identifier for applicant's services

    Everyone on the streets had known that. Dell had known this from the START. The patent lawyers for Dell ALSO knew this. What is surprising is that the USPTO knew this.

    • Re:A million duhs screaming out (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hellwig ( 1325869 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @03:48AM (#24642169)
      The USPTO has a fantastic trackrecord. When Microsoft wanted to trademark their word processor with the name Word, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their new graphical OS that dispays applications in windows (a concept created by another company) Windows, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their suite of office applicatons as Office, did the USPTO let them?

      Okay, ignore those examples, but at least they didn't let Trump trademark You're Fired.

      But seriously, why do companies think they can trademark phrases they didn't create? Q-Tips, Kleenex, Xerox, these are creative trademarks that people easily associate with their respective products. Who the hell is gonna hear Cloud Computing and think Dell? Now, when I hear the word Dell my mind is flooded with a whole cocaphony of phrases I would rather forget (Dude, you're Getting a Dell!)

      • But seriously, why do companies think they can trademark phrases they didn't create?
        Because they know that sometimes they will get away with it and if they succeed it gives them a nice stick to bully thier competitors with.

        Also remember that many of the companies involved are multinationals. That means if they get the trademark in loads of countries even if it is one that wouldn't hold up in court they have a lot of bullying power (see: windows vs lindows).

      • The USPTO has a fantastic trackrecord.

        Considering their workload, budget, and constant abuse from ignorant citizens and journalists, they do indeed have a fantastic track record. Of the tens of thousands of items passing their desks each year, most people tend to fixate on the ten or so stupid moves that someone chooses to bitch about. It happens. It can't be perfect, and even if it could, it would cost more than anyone is willing to spend.

        When Microsoft wanted to trademark their new graphical OS that dispays applications in windows (a concept created by another company) Windows, did the USPTO let them?

        Did they have a choice? Microsoft doesn't have a trademark on the use of the term 'windows' (either ge

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by VGPowerlord ( 621254 )

        The USPTO has a fantastic trackrecord. When Microsoft wanted to trademark their word processor with the name Word, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their new graphical OS that dispays applications in windows (a concept created by another company) Windows, did the USPTO let them? When Microsoft wanted to trademark their suite of office applicatons as Office, did the USPTO let them?

        Did you actually look up the trademarks for those?

        Last I heard, the trademarks Microsoft owns are on "M

        • Believe it or not, Microsoft *also* has a trademark on the sole word "Windows", without the word "Microsoft" in front of it. That was a key part of the "Lindows" litigation a few years back - Lindows sought to invalidate that particular trademark, the judge was going to allow it, that ruling was upheld on interlocutory appeal, and Microsoft immediately settled for $20 million rather than have Lindows follow through.

  • Not quite so sudden (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FilterMapReduce ( 1296509 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @12:53AM (#24641313)

    This article is tagged "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense", but U.S. trademark law is typically endowed with a little more common sense (a little) than copyrights and patents, the other major areas of IP law. For example, how trademarks can only be held so long as they're actually in use. Compare this to copyrights applying for the life of the author plus seventy years; as a result, abandonware sites can and often are prevented from providing software titles years after the publishers have ever tried to make them available for a profit, or at all.

    I expected that Dell would lose this ridiculous trademark bid and I'm pleased that the USPTO acted appropriately. Nonetheless, I'm sure that my fellow Slashdotters will be all too happy to expose my ignorance by providing plenty of counterexamples of trademark-related idiocy.

    • The tag "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense" is one of the most overused tags on Slashdot; along with "hardhack" (when the article is obviously about a softhack) and "goodluckwiththat". I'd like to see those three tags used a little more sparingly, since tags are used to look up older articles. "Oh, it was tagged with 'hardhack'. I'll just... fuck... three hundred pages of results...".

  • HP lost it's bid to trademark "Personal Computer".

  • What They Wanted (Score:3, Insightful)

    by YetAnotherBob ( 988800 ) on Monday August 18, 2008 @09:47AM (#24644229)

    I think that Dell got the ruling they wanted. This was a preemptive move. Now, they have prevented anyone else from trademarking 'cloud computing'.

    A purely defensive move.

    If only this worked with patents.

  • to patent "Online Shitting".

    well. apparently the patent office hates innovation.
  • Isn't it sad that, for the first time in it's history, the USPTO has finally done something right an its only affect is to save Dell some embarrassment down the line when the business community recognizes "Cloud Computing" as the useless marketing buzzword, as the tech community already has.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zarf ( 5735 )

      I for one am glad. It means we can keep using this new buzzword for at least another three years. I just can't handle learning new buzzwords too fast.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close