http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/ Engadget Comments for Psion countersues Intel over netbook trademark, asks for $1.2b in damages http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
It doesn't matter if psions device is a pile of crap it's still there trademark :P

Simple as that :)]]>Mar 2nd 2009 4:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Granted, Psion has never really made a attractive product to begin with. Beyond that, I think any intelligent person can see that Psion's trying to trademark the term 'netbook' is incredibly stupid, beyond that asking for $1.2 billion is an affront to the legal system. Nobody ever purchased an Atom powered netbook thinking it was the archaic junk that Psion released over a decade ago.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 4:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/"Granted, Psion has never really made a [sic] attractive product to begin with."

I quite like my Symbian OS phone. Symbian exists today greatly in part due to Psion's EPOC OS, which later became Symbian. It has nothing to do with NetBooks, but software can be an "attractive product", too.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Piece of crap or not, incredibly popular or incredibly obscure, a trademark is still a trademark. Either Intel did not know (which I find hard to believe) or simply assumed it had enough power to get away with it or muscle Psion around in court. Guess they havent followed up on the Apple vs Psion case much.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
However, those of you whom disparage Psion - you should think again. While - back in 1993 - 99% of the middle managers in America were physically excited that Palm had replaced their daily index card schedule, I was picking up e-mail, editing presentations, documents and spreadsheets and staying on top of my business while traveling, partying and sailing all around the country.

Wasn't bad to be mobile with a Psion and a card-deck-sized modem when colleagues were lugging around 10 pound laptops...and Palms.

]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Too bad then Symbian is pretty much irrelevant compared to the modern OS' on the iPhone, Palm Pre, Android, Blackberry etc. Barely 'attractive' in the modern context, even with the vague connection.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 7:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Guaranteed you live in North America... Despite what you may think, Symbian is still the most relevant Smartphone OS today, having the largest Smartphone market share on the planet with close to 50%. It is not quite as popular in the US (I blame the carriers), but there is a whole world out there who don't have access to the iPhone, who don't have a Palm Pre (because it doesn't yet exist), who don't have an Android phone (only available in one market). I'm glad there are all these competitors, as competition only serves to make for better products all around. But to dismiss Symbian would be ridiculous...]]>Mar 2nd 2009 8:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
First off, the connection with Symbian OS to Psion is razor thin. For over a decade, Psion has had no hand in Symbian, a collaborative group of cell manufacturers did. And guess what, most of those manufacturers have since abandoned the Symbian OS for more advanced cellphone operating systems.

Symbian was used widely in the US in Nokia, Sony-Ericcson, and Motorola phones, its just become outdated in the last 5 years. Symbian 9 was released in 2004, and it hasn't been updated since. It's irrelevant, as is Psion for over a decade.

Beyond that, Psion, is making a pathetic display to register a term it doesn't even use, and is making a 1 billion+ dollar frivolousness lawsuit. Psion is the new SCO. ]]>Mar 2nd 2009 9:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 5:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit by taking Intel to court.

Those numbers are not breathtaking (except the damages requested). I hope they can put up a better case than what I've seen so far.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 4:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 4:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Sounds like they have a pretty good case. Plus, they have an obligation to defend their trademark, which costs time and money to develop and register. That's how trademarks work.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 5:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 5:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
The original 1999 netbook ran EPOC (forerunner of symbian). This version was stopped in 2003 and was replaced with the Netbook Pro which was an updated version the ran CE .net 4.2 this version sold from 2004 up to present day.

Now as EPOC was really only made inroads in the Euro market the fact the sales only took off in the US market following availability of the CE version is not a surprise. They were also moving to vertical markets at the same time and CE gave the netbook functionality like RDP and ability to log into the corporate networks etc that these US vertical markets required.

Hope this helps clarify your objections to the sales numbers

John

]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/]]>Mar 2nd 2009 5:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 5:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 6:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Netbook is simply a size-descriptive term. Were Intel to have called Atom the Intel Netbook and used the same ugly outdated logo that ***** (don't wanna say it... might get sued for copyright infringement) uses... then sure, there's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Oops... we can't say mouse anymore... they're "pointing devices". Mouse must be trademarked somehow.]]>Mar 2nd 2009 6:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Telephone, DVD Player? Generic objects. Can't trademark a generic term (though it could be argued that Bell might have trademarked "telephone" had such things been deemed important at the time). Desktop PC, Laptop, Tablet PC? They're form factors. Again, generic terms.

Psion had a product, for which they coined the product name "Netbook". And, really, that can't be taken away from them for no good reason other than a bigger and richer company figures they have a better use for it. They don't even really NEED to have been producing them, though that improves their court case in defending the trade mark.

Even Apple had to settle with Cisco over "iPhone", since Cisco's Linksys division had a product by that name.

And "Blu-Ray" is very much a trademark. You can't use it on your product unless you've obtained the appropriate license (though that would come along with the license for the technology itself). If you somehow reverse-engineered a Blu-Ray drive and built your own that conformed to the same format, you wouldn't be able to call it "Blu-Ray".]]>Mar 2nd 2009 7:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 2nd 2009 7:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
"Netbook" is an invented word, which Psion originally coined for its product. Just because somebody came up with a new use for the term doesn't invalidate Psion's claim on it.

And yes, there is a difference between an invented word and a previously used one. If Hyundai decided to market a car called the Grand Prix, GM couldn't stop them, since that nameplate came from an existing place name. If they decided to call that car the Escalade, though, GM would have a case, since they dropped a wad of dough on a consultant to create that name for them.

]]>Mar 2nd 2009 9:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Those moving stairs you ride to the second floor in a mall...everyone knows they're "escalators"

"The word escalator lost its proprietary status and its capital "e" in 1950 when the U.S. Patent Office ruled that the word "escalator" had become just a common descriptive term for moving stairways." (from History of the Escalator)

If everyone refers to these small form laptops as Netbooks - Psion would reasonably lose their Trademark status over the name.

There are several others that have either lost theirs or eventually will lose theirs such as:
Kerosene
Band-Aid
Scotch-Tape
Photoshop

]]>Mar 3rd 2009 6:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/
Palm almost died this death by Windows Mobile (CE), and is just escaping (maybe) with their new OS and Pre phone.

What netbooks should be are what the first netbook by Psion promised to be: instant on, portable, wireless, great keyboard, 8-10hrs battery, and instant off. Windows is again killing the category by proving to everyone that a netbook is just a really small and barely usable Windows laptop. Runs acceptably well with XP and not so great with VISTA, but hey, you get what you pay for -so goes Microsoft thinking.

netbooks should do what the Nokia 810 achieves and what iPhone maddeningly dances around -true portable internet appliance. The clamshell formfactor needs a hero, but not one that boots up Vista like the Fujitsu 820, or costs over $2000 like the Sony UX50 UMPC. Psion shouldn't be suing, but updating its Revo with a color screen, Li battery, Wifi, and maybe a phone, using Linux or EPOC 6.0. It should offer an updated, wireless, Series 5mx. And simply put, if they merely offered their netbook Pro, which they sucked up and failed by using Windows CE, by updating with built in wireless and a working Linux and sold it for $500 to $700, they would sell these hand over fist.

I've been bellyaching about this on my blog entries below:
http://golfism.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/top-12-features-not-yet-found-on-any-one-netbook/

http://golfism.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/the-protonetbook/

http://golfism.wordpress.com/2009/01/31/12-things-i-hate-about-iphone/]]>Mar 3rd 2009 12:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/psion-countersues-intel-over-netbook-trademark-asks-for-1-2b-i/Mar 3rd 2009 2:27AM