Wow ~ Wow ~ Wow ~Wow: TM Domains "Class Action Lawsuit"

[companyone]

And Wow again...


http://domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/vulcan-puts-the-pinch-on-domainers-and-google/


PDF Of Lawsuit


Peace,
Dan

 

[Focus]

hey I used to own one of those! LMAO

 

[Devil Dog]

What's a putative ?

 

[namestrands]

What's a putative ?

It means common knowledge, for example. Adam is the owner of DNForum. That would be a putative statement.

Very interesting and well researched action. Will be educational to watch how this unfolds.

 

[BiggieBiggie is verified member.]

from reading the "law school for dummies" handbook, I deduce this fallacy:


the major flaw I see in the claimant's argument is that...

if the advertisers who are listed on those parked pages and adsense sites are benefiting from the visitors who "type-in" those domain names in their browsers, then they cannot be part of the suit against the defendants.

you cannot say your brand is being deminished, or is confusing to the customer if you are getting targeted traffic from those "typos/misspellings/www's etc" and you continue to buy ads because they produce profitable sales.

just my opinion

go ahead, beat me up!

 

[Rarethings]

interesting. If the lawsuit isn't dropped (which it very well may be) it could have a very strong effect on how google chooses to monetize typos and what they do with those feeds.

 

[BiggieBiggie is verified member.]

interesting. If the lawsuit isn't dropped (which it very well may be) it could have a very strong effect on how google chooses to monetize typos and what they do with those feeds.

i think google will continue to monetize typos as long traffic is targeted and advertisers continue to purchase ads.

but me thinks google has a bigger plan...

to take over your browser!

they are doing everything that "aol" should have done





BTW: Google just opened up a "second floor" in their "Chicago West Loop" office. They plan on hiring around "twenty" engineers and more sales staff to manage their local "A" accounts.

Source: Chicago Sun-Times

 

[Duckinla]

These things just don't scare me anymore. Google will handle this. Not only because the law is on their side, but because they have to. Without typo advertising revenue, their business is decimated. As is the rest of this industry. I think 95% of new registrations today are typos or TM's.

 

[companyone]

but me thinks google has a bigger plan...

to take over your browser!

They already have started...Google/Firefox.

But,

They might not get a chance to do more...as some ISP companys have already taken over IE and Firefox browsers themselves from within their system. You can "opt-out"...but they don't tell you they have taken it over and sure don't advertise how to opt-out.


I live in California and almost never use IE. I just happen to use it a week or so ago, and thats how I found out that my broadband provider (Charter Cable) had taken over all non-resolving things typed in my IE browser.

http://aaplstockquote.com/charter.jpg

This "war" as only just begun.

Peace,
Dan

 

[BiggieBiggie is verified member.]

They already have started...Google/Firefox.

But,

They might not get a chance to do more...as some ISP companys have already taken over IE and Firefox browsers themselves from within their system. You can "opt-out"...but they don't tell you they have taken it over and sure don't advertise how to opt-out.


I live in California and almost never use IE. I just happen to use it a week or so ago, and thats how I found out that my broadband provider (Charter Cable) had taken over all non-resolving things typed in my IE browser.

http://aaplstockquote.com/charter.jpg

This "war" as only just begun.

Peace,
Dan

forcing you to accept cookies, if you opt out?

 

[companyone]

Biggedon...

I see the confusion on my part to your question...the link I provided above is something I found "after" my broadband provider changed the settings of my browser without telling me.

I do not "get" that I have to "accept" a cookie to opt-out.

I think it is something done purposely... to make people just "give up" and leave it to their settings.

I am not computer savvy...but I have been online for 5 years or so and I have never been told, I have to "accept" a cookie from someone in order to opt-out.

Its going to be a war...a BIG "loud" war...it already is... but its kind of a "silent" war right now.

Microsoft has to be doing something about it now...can you image how many browsers that were defaulting to their MSN page... that are no longer doing so?

I accept cookies for logging in to sites faster and easier etc... Not to have someone change my browser settings automatically without telling me beforehand. Why should I have to Opt-out of something, I knowingly did not opt-in to?


Peace,
Dan

BTW: I never read service agreements or anything like that, so maybe they have something in the "fine legalesse"...all I know its a pretty new change, within the last 6 months.

Maybe its something I need to talk over with John Berryhill...but do to the fact DS is named as a defendent in the lawsuit posted above...he may be so busy over the next months/years I may never get a chance to talk to him again...LOL

 

[Devil Dog]

It means common knowledge, for example. Adam is the owner of DNForum. That would be a putative statement.

Very interesting and well researched action. Will be educational to watch how this unfolds.

Excellent. Learn something new every day.