European court rules Skype’s name is too similar to UK based Sky broadcaster

[NumLock21]

i love the irony of you calling sky a cry baby in that reply.  well my intellectually challenged little friend, maybe sky should keep its name because it was founded in 1989, where as skype was founded some 14 years later, just a thought.

 

oh and as for promote its self better....well sky in the uk is the largest pay tv provider by some margin. it has 10 million plus subscribers compared to its closest rival with 3.7 million....i think there well known enough.

 

if i were you, i wouldn't chime in in subjects you 0 knowledge about.....

Skype was founded in 2003 years before it was acquired by eBay and then a few years later on by Microsoft. If Skype will make the consumers get confused with Sky, then why didn't Sky say something about it back then? Why wait this long to do so? If Sky has 10 million plus subscribers then why are they so concern about Skype? So maybe if they better promote themselves like globally, they won't have to worry about Skype. Oh and while Sky is busy picking on Microsoft, look at the other "Sky" that's out there. Is Sky going to complain to the EU on the other Sky as well? Now if Apple owns Skype, I bet Sky won't even dare to complain. :rolleyes: BTW, I've heard about Sky so don't assume others people here have 0 knowledge.

[LAwLz]

Skype was founded in 2003 years before it was acquired by eBay and then a few years later on by Microsoft. If Skype will make the consumers get confused with Sky, then why didn't Sky say something about it back then? Why wait this long to do so? If Sky has 10 million plus subscribers then why are they so concern about Skype?

They did... Seriously, did you just read the title of the thread and then made up a whole scenario of what happened in your head? Sky filed the first complain to the EU all the way back in 2005. Skype was only 2 years old at that point and had about ~3% of the VoIP marketshare. This lawsuit has been going on for about 9 years and it just now reached a conclusion.

This thing started way before Microsoft bought Skype so this isn't just some "baww EU just hates Microsoft" deal either, unless you think that the EU court can see into the future, dragged the court process out for 6 years until Microsoft got involved on purpose, then waited another 3-4 years and then gave the verdict.

[jaggysnake57]

Skype was founded in 2003 years before it was acquired by eBay and then a few years later on by Microsoft. If Skype will make the consumers get confused with Sky, then why didn't Sky say something about it back then? Why wait this long to do so? If Sky has 10 million plus subscribers then why are they so concern about Skype? So maybe if they better promote themselves like globally, they won't have to worry about Skype. Oh and while Sky is busy picking on Microsoft, look at the other "Sky" that's out there. Is Sky going to complain to the EU on the other Sky as well? Now if Apple owns Skype, I bet Sky won't even dare to complain. :rolleyes: BTW, I've heard about Sky so don't assume others people here have 0 knowledge.

 

 

1 what @LAwLz said

2 why promote globally when you dont offer a product globally?

3 in that list 7 of the sky broadcasters are owned or were started by news corp that owns sky plc for the others, they don't operate in that region so can not really file a suit.

4 finally i don't think other people have 0 knowledge...just you. i dont know whats worse, the fact you are talking out of your arse of the fact that you cant be bothered to fact check. seriously if you had clicked on the links you had posted then you could have saved yourself some embarrassment.

[mr moose]

It did stop waste of equipment by making it sharable between device more. i can take, leave, hate the eu's other dumb ideas, but this idea was worth cost by keeping charger waste under control

 

It might make life a little easier for the average consumer, but is it ethical? apple have not broken any laws and every phone still comes with a charger so it's not actually reducing the amount of chargers being made and sold. 

 

 

They did... Seriously, did you just read the title of the thread and then made up a whole scenario of what happened in your head? Sky filed the first complain to the EU all the way back in 2005. Skype was only 2 years old at that point and had about ~3% of the VoIP marketshare. This lawsuit has been going on for about 9 years and it just now reached a conclusion.

This thing started way before Microsoft bought Skype so this isn't just some "baww EU just hates Microsoft" deal either, unless you think that the EU court can see into the future, dragged the court process out for 6 years until Microsoft got involved on purpose, then waited another 3-4 years and then gave the verdict.

 

Yes, I seriously doubt this has anything to do with MS specifically.   I think anyone would be hard pushed to make a rational link there.

[AxelRantila]

It did stop waste of equipment by making it sharable between device more. i can take, leave, hate the eu's other dumb ideas, but this idea was worth cost by keeping charger waste under control

Not to mention it makes finding compatible equipment a lot better. People can say whatever they want about the USB connectors, it does not change the fact that the U in USB is still by far it's biggest strength. When every phone had it's own connector, it was not always that easy to find a replacement charger just like that.

[IdortMasterRace]

This kind of shit is why we need out of the EU.

 

[linuxfan66]

Not to mention it makes finding compatible equipment a lot better. People can say whatever they want about the USB connectors, it does not change the fact that the U in USB is still by far it's biggest strength. When every phone had it's own connector, it was not always that easy to find a replacement charger just like that.

and thereby extending the life of older devices where the charger disappeared. but otherwise works fine.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

I don't see how that gives any court the right to tell a company what connector to use.  If you want a phone with a standardised connector then buy one.  I have been using mobile phones since 1994 and haven't had any problems, every phone comes with a charger anyway so I really don't see how it's an issue. 

 

EDIT: and on top of that, what law did apple break that warranted the courts to order them to change their plug?  Was it IP infringement? nope, was it anti competitive? nope, their plug has no ill effects on the consumer or competition.  Was it unfairly creating a monopoly? nope, to do that a consumer must not have a choice, going on phone sales alone there is no way you can argue consumers don't have a choice.

 

what makes you think this is about Apple?  Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, Motorola ... the list of manufacturers that use proprietary plugs on some of their phones (usually dumbphones) goes on and on.

 

As for the argument that every phone still comes with a charger, there are plenty of second-hand phones being sold without one.  There are also burners with micro USB port being sold without a charger or cable (to push the price down even further). 

It's going to take some time, but eventually the big manufacturers will most likely make the charger an optional extra on even the high-end phones.

[mr moose]

what makes you think this is about Apple?  Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, Motorola ... the list of manufacturers that use proprietary plugs on some of their phones (usually dumbphones) goes on and on.

 

As for the argument that every phone still comes with a charger, there are plenty of second-hand phones being sold without one.  There are also burners with micro USB port being sold without a charger or cable (to push the price down even further). 

It's going to take some time, but eventually the big manufacturers will most likely make the charger an optional extra on even the high-end phones.

 

Using apple because they are the ones who expressed a desire not to change and also they were the most reported, Had I said Ericson people would have missed the point because Ericson doesn't exist anymore and hardly anybody cares what plug is on them.  However the same argument does apply to them all.  On what legal right does the EU have to tell any phone maker what plug to incorporate into their product?

[Dabombinable]

Using apple because they are the ones who expressed a desire not to change and also they were the most reported, Had I said Ericson people would have missed the point because Ericson doesn't exist anymore and hardly anybody cares what plug is on them.  However the same argument does apply to them all.  On what legal right does the EU have to tell any phone maker what plug to incorporate into their product?

(though it does make things easier for people) 1 word: None 

[mr moose]

(though it does make things easier for people) 1 word: None 

I absolutely agree it makes life easier for people.  But what some people here have failed to grasp is that it is essentially dictatorship to tell a company how to make their product,  Aren't we supposed to let them make their own products then let the consumer decide which one they want?  Usually the best product becomes the standard. 

[Dabombinable]

I absolutely agree it makes life easier for people.  But what some people here have failed to grasp is that it is essentially dictatorship to tell a company how to make their product,  Aren't we supposed to let them make their own products then let the consumer decide which one they want?  Usually the best product becomes the standard. 

Apple never keeps their laptop charging ports long enough to allow one to become standard though and other companies have tried to pull the same BS (because "we're ass holes who love money").

[mr moose]

Apple never keeps their laptop charging ports long enough to allow one to become standard though and other companies have tried to pull the same BS (because "we're ass holes who love money").

 

Then my argument is; that's their prerogative and I am sure there are some consumer who no longer buy apple because of it.  I personally won't buy an apple laptop because (apart from the many other reasons) I have three chargers here that work with acer, HP, Lenovo, Asus and Toshiba.  I don't need the government telling me which is better for me And if I ever start my own manufacturing company I certainly don't want them telling me what ports I have to use.

[Dabombinable]

Then my argument is; that's their prerogative and I am sure there are some consumer who no longer buy apple because of it.  I personally won't buy an apple laptop because (apart from the many other reasons) I have three chargers here that work with acer, HP, Lenovo, Asus and Toshiba.  I don't need the government telling me which is better for me And if I ever start my own manufacturing company I certainly don't want them telling me what ports I have to use.

I get that, I was talking about ports being changed needlessly from 1 device iteration to another. Eg. Removing a pin, adding a pin, changing the connector's shape slightly, and so on.

[Hieb]

meh Skype has been rubbish every since MS merged it with MSN and cluttered it up with absurd amounts of ads anyways... does anyone even use it anymore?

[linuxfan66]

Umm yes people do still use it

[TopWargamer]

I don't think this is the case of stupidity, although it certainly does make Sky look extremely stupid. Pretty sure Sky just wants the money from whatever lawsuit they'll be throwing at Microsoft. 

[DeScruff]

  I don't need the government telling me which is better for me

You right! we don't need the government telling whats better for us when we can have companies who have monetary incentive to tell us which is better!

/sarcasm

Though I am just saying, that is kinda what you are kinda saying.

[jaggysnake57]

I don't think this is the case of stupidity, although it certainly does make Sky look extremely stupid. Pretty sure Sky just wants the money from whatever lawsuit they'll be throwing at Microsoft. 

 

did you read any of the thread?  this laws suit started long before MS took over

[Nowak]

meh Skype has been rubbish every since MS merged it with MSN and cluttered it up with absurd amounts of ads anyways... does anyone even use it anymore?

Why yes, people still use Skype.

[Pepsiman]

This kind of shit is why we need out of the EU.

 

OH MY GOD UR A RACIST IM REPORTING YOU FOR RACISM HOW DARE YOU SUPPORT THEM SCUM

[Ialyrn]

 

oh and as for promote its self better....well sky in the uk is the largest pay tv provider by some margin. it has 10 million plus subscribers compared to its closest rival with 3.7 million....i think there well known enough.

 

Lets be serious here, they are only the largest TV provider in the uk because Virgin media are not allowed to put their fibre lines in a lot of area's. Especially around the Midlands. For me the worst part of moving to the Midlands, is the lack of a decent all in one TV/Phone/Internet bundle; which only comes from Virgin Media in the UK. It is cheaper than what Sky offers, and the internet is about 120MB/s faster on the downloads on the highest tier. At the moment I have to use sky for TV, and BT for my phone and internet.

Before anyone says "virgin media is crap", I was a long standing Virgin media customer before I moved to the Midlands. They have their faults, just like any company out there does.

As for this thing between Skype and Sky, I honestly believe the ruling is a bit daft. I have never mixed the two up, and don't personally know anyone who has. I certainly do not know anyone who believes that Sky owns Skype.

 

[jaggysnake57]

Lets be serious here, they are only the largest TV provider in the uk because Virgin media are not allowed to put their fibre lines in a lot of area's. Especially around the Midlands. For me the worst part of moving to the Midlands, is the lack of a decent all in one TV/Phone/Internet bundle; which only comes from Virgin Media in the UK. It is cheaper than what Sky offers, and the internet is about 120MB/s faster on the downloads on the highest tier. At the moment I have to use sky for TV, and BT for my phone and internet.

Before anyone says "virgin media is crap", I was a long standing Virgin media customer before I moved to the Midlands. They have their faults, just like any company out there does.

As for this thing between Skype and Sky, I honestly believe the ruling is a bit daft. I have never mixed the two up, and don't personally know anyone who has. I certainly do not know anyone who believes that Sky owns Skype.

 

 

what a load of crap....virgin media were telewest that started in the midlands virgin media had a major hq not 2 mins from where i live so the idea that dont offer to the midlands is horse shit. virgin isnt cheaper than sky i have sky i pay 90 a month and super fast BB is an extra 20 so thats 120 virgin is 120 witrh less features and restricted broadband speed at peak times. between 3pm and 12 am speeds are restricted to just 5% of your max speed so 150mb becomes 7.5.....fuck that been there and ill never go back.....oh and virgin has a worse customer service rep than sky.

[Ialyrn]

what a load of crap....virgin media were telewest that started in the midlands virgin media had a major hq not 2 mins from where i live so the idea that dont offer to the midlands is horse shit. virgin isnt cheaper than sky i have sky i pay 90 a month and super fast BB is an extra 20 so thats 120 virgin is 120 witrh less features and restricted broadband speed at peak times. between 3pm and 12 am speeds are restricted to just 5% of your max speed so 150mb becomes 7.5.....fuck that been there and ill never go back.....oh and virgin has a worse customer service rep than sky.

Not horse shit at all, I live in the Midlands too. Where I live, I can only get Virgin media access through an old copper BT line; not over Virgins fibre network. Which is not in all regions of the UK, and only because they are been blocked from installing it. You might have access to it where you live, and good for you; but there is a serious lack of competition in the UK between Virgin Media and Sky for an all in one TV/Phone/Internet package. If Virgin media did have their fibre lines in all area's of the UK, I can guarantee that Sky wouldn't have has big a piece of the pie as they do. 

[jaggysnake57]

Not horse shit at all, I live in the Midlands too. Where I live, I can only get Virgin media access through an old copper BT line; not over Virgins fibre network. Which is not in all regions of the UK, and only because they are been blocked from installing it. You might have access to it where you live, and good for you; but there is a serious lack of competition in the UK between Virgin Media and Sky for an all in one TV/Phone/Internet package. If Virgin media did have their fibre lines in all area's of the UK, I can guarantee that Sky wouldn't have has big a piece of the pie as they do. 

 

jesus seriously....really want to go down this road....ok then

 

virgin, according to ofcom, are available to 48% of uk, so it stands to reason that they should have at least have the subs of sky. they don't they have 37%, therefore, if they could offer to the whole of the uk, they still wouldn't be as popular. Now WTF this has to do with how well know ski is, i have no clue, but you have reminded me that sky offer products through other platforms including virgin. sky movies, sky sports, sky news, et el. also they offer mobile only subs and now tv subs so the idea that sky need to advertise themselves more is down right stupid