[Pc_Support] RE: Bryan, the media is finally catching on to what you said about Longhorn

[Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>]

From: "Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>" <thebs413 at earthlink.net>
> Microsoft was _forbidden_ by _court_order_ from stating that any
> derivative was based on Java, until the new 2003 re-license.

BTW, I seriously doubt Microsoft is going to give "free marketing" to
Sun.

It's one of the things that Sun really bitched about in the final
ruling.  Microsoft got to keep all the Java 1.1 code, but call it what
it wanted.  That was an unwanted "side effect" of preventing
Microsoft from using the Java(R) trademark -- which was decided
by a much earlier injuction and then ruling -- but they got all the
spoils of the technology, because they _did_ pay for it.

It was a major victory for Microsoft in the end, and a bad scenario
that Sun had feared would happen.

Only when you have an active contract that explicitly requires
you to market the trademark of another company can someone
be held to that.  Prior to 2003, Microsoft and Sun had no contract
on Java.  Sun sued Microsoft over breach of contract, and it
was so dispersed upon the final terms.

Sun couldn't prevent Microsoft from ussing the trademark and require
them to say it uses Java Technology.



--
Bryan J. Smith   mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org