I agree. It's only remarkable from a public relations point of view.
Following the case it was suggested by Struan Robertson – editor of Out-Law.com – that Microsoft had little choice but to pursue the issue once it had come to light or they would have risked weakening their trademark. This view was also espoused by ZDNet, who noted that had Microsoft knowingly ignored Rowe's site, the company would have risked losing the right to fight future trademark infringements.
Comments
Slow news day? How did this make it to the front page?
My guess is that it has to do with the Nissan.com story also on the front page.
I agree. It's only remarkable from a public relations point of view.
Following the case it was suggested by Struan Robertson – editor of Out-Law.com – that Microsoft had little choice but to pursue the issue once it had come to light or they would have risked weakening their trademark. This view was also espoused by ZDNet, who noted that had Microsoft knowingly ignored Rowe's site, the company would have risked losing the right to fight future trademark infringements.
Doesn't everyone love decade old news? http://slashdot.org/story/04/01/26/1816210/microsoft-agrees-...
I don't mind reading up on something I didn't know. It's an interesting case.