3 ms·

They should have licensed the name Metro from Metro AG and called it that. Instead they gave it the same name as their runtime? Seriously? It boggles my mind as

They should have licensed the name Metro from Metro AG and called it that. Instead they gave it the same name as their runtime? Seriously? It boggles my mind as to how they didn't anticipate this being confusing.

dagw 14y ago
While I certainly agree as such, have you considered that perhaps they tried and Metro AG didn't want to license the name? Metro AG is a pretty huge company with annual revenues that easily match Microsoft's so it's not like MS could just simply buy them off.
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  Apple somehow got the more distinctive name iPhone even though there was a voip phone with that exact name (owned by a very big company), yet somehow a grocery store has claimed ownership of a common word in all markets and industries?
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    It's not a grocery store, it's a €67 billion a year wholesale and retail group with 6 different store chains under its belt including wholesale warehouses, grocery stores, department stores and -- most importantly -- two consumer electronics chains. You could have a Metro-owned store with Metro signs over Android tablets next to a Microsoft store with Metro signs over Surface tablets. The likelihood of confusion that'd create is the very definition of trademark infringement.
  - dagw 14y ago
    The Linksys iPhone was a fairly insignificant Cisco product and there is some dispute as to what extent they where even using the name before Apple showed an interest in it. Between 2000 and December 2006 they didn't use the name for any product they sold. And the December 2006 Linksys iPhone was a re-branding of an existing product. A cynical person might suspect that Cisco had completely forgotten that they even owned the iPhone trademark until Apple asked to license it and then quickly started to us it again in hopes of winning a bigger settlement.

dagw 14y ago

While I certainly agree as such, have you considered that perhaps they tried and Metro AG didn't want to license the name? Metro AG is a pretty huge company with annual revenues that easily match Microsoft's so it's not like MS could just simply buy them off.

MatthewPhillips 14y ago
Apple somehow got the more distinctive name iPhone even though there was a voip phone with that exact name (owned by a very big company), yet somehow a grocery store has claimed ownership of a common word in all markets and industries?
- dangrossman 14y ago
  It's not a grocery store, it's a €67 billion a year wholesale and retail group with 6 different store chains under its belt including wholesale warehouses, grocery stores, department stores and -- most importantly -- two consumer electronics chains. You could have a Metro-owned store with Metro signs over Android tablets next to a Microsoft store with Metro signs over Surface tablets. The likelihood of confusion that'd create is the very definition of trademark infringement.
- dagw 14y ago
  The Linksys iPhone was a fairly insignificant Cisco product and there is some dispute as to what extent they where even using the name before Apple showed an interest in it. Between 2000 and December 2006 they didn't use the name for any product they sold. And the December 2006 Linksys iPhone was a re-branding of an existing product. A cynical person might suspect that Cisco had completely forgotten that they even owned the iPhone trademark until Apple asked to license it and then quickly started to us it again in hopes of winning a bigger settlement.