Microsoft owns PureView, ClearBlack and four other Nokia trademarks

Microsoft owns PureView, ClearBlack and four other Nokia trademarks
When Microsoft purchased Nokia Devices and Services, there were questions about what Redmond would do with certain Nokia created names, like PureView. The latter title was used by Nokia to denote a high-end camera on the back of some of its higher-end Lumia models like the Nokia Lumia 1020.

ClearBack is another name now owned by Microsoft. It is used to differentiate a screen that uses a technology to reduce the reflections on the glass, especially noticeable outside. As a result the blacks become blacker, which improves the contrast of the display, making it easier to read. The ClearBack technology is especially useful for mapping applications, since they tend to be viewed outdoors.

There are four other trademarks that Microsoft is keeping from its acquisition of Nokia Devices and Services. One is Asha, which is the name used for a line of featurephones. The Lumia trademark, which Nokia used for its Windows Phone powered smartphones, now belongs to Microsoft. The remaining two trademarks are Surge, which was the name of a Symbian powered Nokia handset from 2009, and Mural. In 2009, the Nokia Mural was released for AT&T. It is unclear why Microsoft would want to keep trademarks used on five year old Nokia handsets.

All six trademarks now belong to Microsoft Mobile Oy, the name that Microsoft chose for the division that contains Nokia Services and Devices.


Thanks for the tip!

source: NPU

FEATURED VIDEO

56 Comments

1. Reality_Check

Posts: 277; Member since: Aug 15, 2013

ClearBlack* is another name... The ClearBlack* technology is...

4. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Yep. The title is correct, the paragraph isn't.

23. tasior

Posts: 265; Member since: Nov 04, 2012

They alreaddy trashed the ClearBlack technology... Nokia 630 has ClearBlack brand, but has no ClearBlack technology. that means, Microsoft plans using ClearBlack as a buzzword, nothing more. Here are more details on subject:http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/features/item/19865_When_a_brand_name_survives_its.php

29. steelicon

Posts: 318; Member since: Apr 02, 2011

31. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

2. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Glad to see Lumia and PureView won't be disappearing. I read an article the other day implying the Surface team and Lumia team were disagreeing on the names of future models, and it occurred to me that both could/should exist: Lumia would be the range of low, mid, and uniquely-featured Windows Phones (so everything from the 520 to the 1020 and 1520 would be included) with polycarbonate bodies and established Lumia designs, and Surface phones could be higher-end models with metal or other materials for the body, and focus on premium design and perhaps the best of the entire platform's offerings, much like the Surface tablets offer some of the best overall design, functionality, build quality, and appeal in not just Windows tablets, but the entire tablet market.

14. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Just because MS is keeping the trademark, doesn't mean they are going to move product under the mark. Do you really think MS is in the feature phone biz? More like they are keeping Nokia from getting back into the phone biz any time soon.

15. Beijendorf unregistered

That just wouldn't make any sense. Surface: Tablets. Lumia: Smartphones. Keep it simple.

17. ihavenoname

Posts: 1693; Member since: Aug 18, 2013

And who would want a Surface smartphone? Everybody who is going for WP wants Nokia Lumia (note: NOKIA Lumia).

32. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

I went for WP, and the Camera, Not because of Nokia. Only a fool would be so much of a brand blow hard that they would think this. I preferred brand of choice is Samsung, but didnt get the ativ s, went for the OIS, 6 lenses, Nokia instead. Even now it matches up beautiful with the much more powerful s5, and out does the s4. Most recent one was at a party, where we were both taking shots of our kids at the bday event, side by side the s4 lost in every shot to the 925. To the point my friend literally just put his phone in his pocket and stated "email them to me mine sucks".

36. corporateJP

Posts: 2458; Member since: Nov 28, 2009

You contradict yourself. You say if you go for Nokia, you're a blowhard, but you talk highly of Samsung and how it's your brand of choice. Lot's of doubletalk, boss...

41. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

No i was not saying if you go for nokia you are a blowhard. I was saying only a fool, who is a fan blowhard would think that people only went to WP because of Nokia. Where i was the opposite, i owned 3 different WP, right along side droids, before i owned a Nokia. And it wasnt cause of nokia, it was cause of the camera. As well, my brand of choice is samsung, they are usually within my price range for electronics while offering same or more features. My tv's, fridge, washer/driver, pc monitors, hard drives, etc have all been Samsung because of price vs features. Discounts help too. However on the phone front i have not been so happy.

3. express77 unregistered

Microsh!t.

22. Liveitup

Posts: 1798; Member since: Jan 07, 2014

No need for the hostility, some of us thinks that Microsoft is an awesome company, who in many ways changed the world and continues to do so. Celebrate choice, don't hate it.

5. Alex123

Posts: 241; Member since: Oct 17, 2012

Microsoft is definitely afraid of Nokia licensing it's technology to others competitors, I think.

9. microsoftnokiawin

Posts: 1268; Member since: Mar 30, 2012

nokia can still licence the technolofy they still own it microsoft just owns the trademark :) !

6. tigermcm

Posts: 861; Member since: Sep 02, 2009

im very curious why MS took mural and surge

33. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

patents most likely or just wanting to lease the name etc.

7. volcano

Posts: 348; Member since: Jan 25, 2013

im glad they owned these trademarks

8. microsoftnokiawin

Posts: 1268; Member since: Mar 30, 2012

but nokia still owns the technology :) !

10. volcano

Posts: 348; Member since: Jan 25, 2013

no worries they have 10 years license for things they don't own plus teams who develop cameras now in microsoft

52. microsoftnokiawin

Posts: 1268; Member since: Mar 30, 2012

the original team that developed pureview is long gone now :) !

11. chocowii

Posts: 478; Member since: Jan 30, 2014

Use those trademarks wisely. Its better than Smart apps and iApps.

12. corporateJP

Posts: 2458; Member since: Nov 28, 2009

Good luck, MS. The Nokia name is what really sold phones, and that isn't yours much longer...

13. strikercho

Posts: 156; Member since: Mar 20, 2012

I really wish good luck to MS. Everything that Google bought, was destroyed, includeing oneof my favorite brands, like Motorola. I hope MS would be wiser and develop the Lumia and Asha brands with all the goodies like Pureview, Maps, etc. present.

16. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

lolwut .........Google SAVED Motorola from shutting down completely. They gave them that all important cash flow when they needed most. Infact, Google never dictated any terms to Motorola. Watch Motorola's CEO's statement.

28. NokiaFTW

Posts: 2072; Member since: Oct 24, 2012

'Google save Motorola'. lol yeah they saved Motorola by selling them to a Chinese PC manufacturer. Google just wanted the patents, as their own innovation within the company is pretty limited, unlike MS or Nokia.

35. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

Re-read my comment. Motorola's cashflow was so dire back then that would've had to shut down for business IF google didn't help them. Was Lenovo ready to buy them when google bought them ? Also google practically sold motorola at loss discounting the patent of course. With regards to patent, Google signed a bond that'll only use patent for defensive purpose and will not litigate Motorola i.e. Motorola and google effectively share the patent.

42. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

Effectively share but Motorola no longer owns. You see MS went the other way, Nokia still owns and MS shares. Regardless of how Google use the patents, the effectively stripped the company bare. Patents define a company in the business world. As well Nokia was in the same boat during their symbian days before MS.

44. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

'Nokia still owns and MS shares.' The article of the title itself says MS OWNS the patents and no where it mentions about Nokia sharing or even owning for that matter. I don't even see any conditions which Nokia might have put forward towards patents.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.