Guest shadamehr Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 According to "The Industry Standard", Microsoft and Engadget have supposedly resolved their differences, over the recent Windows Mobile 2005 future details post they ran, that was similarly picked up by other sites, including our very own Modaco very early on. The curious bit about this however, is that it is claimed that after discussions with Engadget, they have not had to remove anything, as they have proven to Microsoft that they were not doing anything wrong in posting this. I am very unclear as to the implications this has for all the other sites that also ran the story, as it would seem (IMHO) that this means other sites, as long as only referring or linking to screenshot details (as this was the MS main complaint), were similarly not actually doing any wrong... Ah well, too late now, thank you Microsoft *lol* Electronics news site Engadget.com has resolved a dispute with Microsoft Corp. in which the software giant sent a letter demanding Engadget remove screen shots concerning the future of Windows mobile software, according to the founder of Weblogs Inc., Engadget's parent company. The letter, which Microsoft also sent to other Web sites that posted the item, suggested Microsoft is attempting to crack down on those who use content that the company considers proprietary. Apple Computer Inc. recently had a similar response to unauthorized publication of future product information, filing suit Jan. 4 against the owner and the editor of Apple fan site Think Secret. "We have been talking to the people at Microsoft and we've basically worked it out. We're not making any changes to the article," said Jason Calacanis, founder of Weblogs Inc., Engadget.com's parent company. Engadget did not steal any information and was simply reporting on information that it had found elsewhere on the Web, he said. "At least in the mobile group (of Microsoft), they know that if they have issues, they can talk to us," Calacanis said. The item, under the heading "Sneak Peek at Windows Mobile 2005 (Magneto)" contained a screen shot and brief article about a future mobile version of Windows, along with a link to an item at Windows fan site Neowin.com. The Engadget item, posted on Jan. 5, said the operating system would be previewed by Microsoft President and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas that day. It was not, and has not yet been previewed. On Jan. 18, Engadget received a letter from a law firm representing Microsoft. The letter, a copy of which was posted on Calacanis's own weblog, said the news item "includes material which is in violation of Microsoft's intellectual property rights" and that "content currently residing within your computer system infringes on the trademark rights of Microsoft Corporation." It identifies the infringing content as screen shots of Windows Mobile 2005. The letter requests that the Web sites remove the information and warns, "you may otherwise be liable for trademark infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and/or other remedies at law, including civil and criminal penalties." After Calacanis posted the letter and his own comments on his weblog, he was contacted by Robert Scoble, a blogger who works at Microsoft, who introduced him to other Microsoft employees for a discussion, Calacanis said. Neowin, as well as smart phone information Web site Modaco.com, removed their news items after receiving similar communications from Microsoft. Administrators of those sites could not immediately be reached for comment. In response to a request for comment, Microsoft said legal requests not to post proprietary material are common in the industry. "In this particular case, it is important to note the information in question was comprised of stolen images that were obtained illegally from a Microsoft server. While many sites cooperated fully and immediately removed these images, given the viral nature of these illegally obtained images, we were required to take additional steps," Microsoft said in a prepared statement. "It is our preference to address these issues through personal contact and when we cannot, to do so in a respectful manner," the statement said. Calacanis said this was the first significant case of Engadget receiving such a letter. He fears such tactics will have a "chilling effect" on smaller Web sites that post information about products and industry news. "They're trying to go after individuals who they don't think will have the wherewithal to handle these kinds of situations," Calacanis said. Weblogs Inc., based in New York and Santa Monica, California, operates 70 weblog sites. Source/Full Article: Stephen Lawson/The Industry Standard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul [MVP] Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 Nice to get a mention... although the author really didn't try to contact me for comment :D P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shadamehr Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 That's because you "could not immediately be reached for comment" Paul, according to his article *lol* (What do you mean he never rang you? How dare he). (Not wishing to seem patronising either, but can I applaude you for your original stance on freedom of speech too Paul - I think it was entirely the right view to take at that time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul [MVP] Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 :D P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest McHale Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 does that mean I can repost the pics? -Mc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nedge2k Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 i can think of another that wasn't contacted to remove said material :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaser81 Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 Well at least Microsoft has calmed down a bit!! The whole thing seemed a little silly anyway!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest McHale Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 (edited) :D Zip removed - see Shadamehr's comments Edited January 27, 2005 by McHale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shadamehr Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> @ McHale... Please bear in mind, that all this came about because MS were not happy about the images being shown. Engadget proved that they were only linking to external images as it were. This is how it was found they were not doing any wrong. So please bear in mind, that the file you posted should NOT contain a direct occurence of the image, as far as I read the issues in the case going, and that if it does, as the zip is hosted on Modaco server space, Modaco would thus be liable. So for now, best to keep any images as LINKS ONLY, to external sites that first showed them. That's how I read this ruling/case as having panned out, anyhow...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest McHale Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 So please bear in mind, that the file you posted should NOT contain a direct occurence of the image, as far as I read the issues in the case going, and that if it does, as the zip is hosted on Modaco server space, Modaco would thus be liable. So for now, best to keep any images as LINKS ONLY, to external sites that first showed them. ooops... I don't want to get Modaco in trouble. I like it here. :D Mods... I didn't post that zipfile to be a wisea$$. If it's not supposed to be there, please delete them from my above post with my appoligies. -Mc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shadamehr Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 ooops... I don't want to get Modaco in trouble. I like it here. :D Mods... I didn't post that zipfile to be a wisea$$. If it's not supposed to be there, please delete them from my above post with my appoligies. -Mc <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't worry too much mate - we KNOW there is no intention to do any wrong. I'm not even sure what IS wrong anymore, with Microsoft keep chopping and changing. So for now, I am more than happy to leave the post as it is, until Paul can see it, and he can think about it himself... Cheers mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest McHale Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 (edited) actually, as soon as I read your post, I reported my own post to the mods for their blessing. That's gotta be a first! Maybe Microsoft doesn't want it publicly known how few changes are actually made and people won't care about upgrading? That's why I stayed with Windows 3.1 instead of moving to XP. I just didn't see anyt major changes. :D -Mc Edited January 28, 2005 by McHale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts