DescentBB

This is just too dang funny. The guy has to be pretty darn naïve to think that MS wouldnâ??t object. Then again, I donâ??t see how his site could be confused with MSâ?? site.
You go girl!!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/0 ... index.html

Rowe Vs. Gaytes

I actually gained some respect for the guy until I read the final sentence.

<font face="Arial" size="3">I do think it'll be very good for me in the long run. Getting into university might be easier for me after this."</font>

Now I just think he's a shortsighted opportunist.

Yeah, I heard about that. That is just flat out messed up. MS is just pulling this because it sounds like them phonetically. They have no way to back up their claim that someone would confuse it for Microsoft.com. I'm looking at the site now and it looks NOTHING like MS.com. There is no copyright infringement because it doesn't have anything there owned by microsoft at all that I can see. Sounds like nothing more than Microsoft trying to be the proverbial playground bully picking on a kid.

The bulk of the argument, according to the kid's report of the legal documents MS sent him, was that there was an issue with him "designing websites" and MS having a program that does the same.

Although some people will say that he's just looking for a quick buck given that he said that he picked the name because it was "cool" and sounded like microsoft, and that it was a business and worth $10,000.

Unless somebody with any authority in MS drops the case, I don't see the kid possibly winning, even if he had good lawyers.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Arial" size="3">Originally posted by Tricord:
I actually gained some respect for the guy until I read the final sentence.

I do think it'll be very good for me in the long run. Getting into university might be easier for me after this."</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Now I just think he's a shortsighted opportunist.

Yeah, he kind of lost me there too.

Actually, I wish the guy luck. If it was me, the tack I would use is this:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Arial" size="3">Dear Microsoft legal team.

Here's how we'll play the game. I'll agree to hand over the domain name to you, in exchange for another domain name (of my choosing) and a quantity of cash not less than USD100,000.00

I'll even promise not to ever do anything similar again too!

Here's why you'll pay:

If I point-blank refuse to deal, you'll be forced to drag me into court, with a barrel-full of lawyers representing you. They'll cost you maybe $500 per hour for each lawyer, and they'll rack up WAY more than 200 hours even before we get to court.

To top it off, the world seems to be behind ME - and not YOU - and to pull me into court might cost you a LOT more than $100,000 in lost good will and lost sales.

Besides, I'm just a 17 year old kid, with no money, and I'd be forced to defend myself in court, and you'd look like nasty people indeed.

So - send me that agreement - and a post-dated cheque.

Thank you for shopping MikeRoweSoft.com!

Kind regards,

Mike Rowe</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I had had the good fortune to be named "Mike Rowe" I don't think I could possibly have resisted naming the site MikeRoweSoft, either.

If this goes to trial, and I really don't think it will, MS will have a very hard time proving that this guys site will hurt them financially. They will most likely settle.

Trademark law is very sticky, and if you don't protect it, then you lose it. So needless to say, it's something that businesses will take very seriously. If this kid's similar-sounding business name can impact MS's trademark, then they absolutely have to fight. They may not really want to have to go up against a 17-year-old, but there's not much choice.

As for whether MikeRoweSoft.com does, in fact, possibly infringe on MS's trademark, I'm not sure, I haven't studied trademark law.

The law says the more valuable the trademark, the easier it is to protect. Given the world value of the Microsoft trademark and the army of lawyers that work for them, they have a very good chance of squashing this kid. Or just settle and buy his domain for a price.

By the way, how legal is what that kid is trying to do? I know that when you're 17 in Belgium and you're offering services for money (as in, not in a student job contract), you're breaking the law. You need to have a business, or at least a license to do such kind of work, which is not issued to underage people. I bet he's not even paying tax on what he earns from his site. I hope they catch him on that.

A 17 year old git that thinks he's figured it all out? In two years he'll be a university dropout.

As long as he declares any income he makes he's okay. And if it's cash, it's untraceable.

If he makes $4000 a year or less he doesn't have to declare anything.
Or, if he made over 4K but had enough write-offs such as a computer to stay under 4K, he's ok.

I want to work in the US

In Belgium, it is not impossible to work and earn money as an underage person, but it's close
I had a job developing software for Oracle databases and CF applications, and in order to be legit I had to work as "student job contract for receptionist" or something. Earnings were limited to this-much a month, that-much a year, work hours were regulated very strictly, etc..

In real life we don't bother checking all of it, but when time comes to do the paperwork we had to figure out a way to make everything fit on paper without breaking this or that law, while still being allowed to cash in the wage. In the end we had to cut some corners because I couldn't get more than a certain amount of cash, so my boss bought this (at the time) â?¬1.000 22inch flat CRT for me to compensate, and put it in his own company expenses

You guessed it: Belgium is a ****ing fraud zone! Everybody does it because everybody else does it, and otherwise the tax claimer sucks you dry

Heh... I was a salaried employee over the summer two years ago but last year I was an "independent contractor" instead. Basically that meant my boss couldn't put any restrictions on my hours -- a privilege I already enjoyed, considering my boss's son is in my homeroom in high school and he understands -- nor did I have to actually be physcially present in the building to prove that I did work.

Making less than $10,000 a year (or something like that) I got all of my taxes back from the state and feds. My boss didn't have to withold anything, and didn't have to pay any payroll taxes (or the infamous New York City double-tax on employees, seeing as the company is based in Queens).

Downside? I work smarter and faster than anyone else that he's ever hired but only get paid $10 an hour. Upside to that is that it's $2 an hour more than my friends get mindlessly scanning condoms and Ex-Lax through the register at the local Eckerd.

Mikerowesoft...hmmm? Maybe the kid should get in touch with the Viagra people. After he sells out to MS, he can change his name to Mikerowehard.

De Rigueur mentioned this in another topic