Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Utube to sue YouTube amid site confusion

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #16
    Well, I did it. I went to check utube.com. And no, these people are not morons, at least in so far they're not taking the "business opportunity" to milk the traffic. It's a machinery company for crying out loud. Would you seriously expect them to rush into the webads trade because their homepage happens to get a lot of accidental hits?

    The lawsuit is still ridiculous though.
    DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.

    Comment

    • #17
      Umm, hmm.

      Anyone considered that the lawsuit is just cheap publicity? $1000 in filing costs in exchange for tons of national media and a much higher Google rank?
      <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
      I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

      Comment

      • #18
        Originally posted by snoopy369
        Umm, hmm.

        Anyone considered that the lawsuit is just cheap publicity? $1000 in filing costs in exchange for tons of national media and a much higher Google rank?
        Yeah, Ming did just above, as a matter-of-fact.

        Comment

        • #19
          Originally posted by snoopy369
          Umm, hmm.

          Anyone considered that the lawsuit is just cheap publicity? $1000 in filing costs in exchange for tons of national media and a much higher Google rank?
          If what they say is even remotly true though, they don;t want or need more traffic though...

          Comment

          • #20
            They mostly do business with other companies, not with consumers, which implies national name recognition isn't very useful to them.
            DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.

            Comment

            • #21
              - and so from there it's not hard for them to keep in touch with all their customers and say "hey guys, our website is now at NotAtAllUtube.com". The defence lawyers should eat them alive.

              Comment

              • #22
                If they can show their business has been materially damaged, YouTube may have some liability. But I'm confident this lawsuit was filed in order to solve the loss-of-service problem, and it forces YouTube to pay attention. YouTube will ultimately agree to some accommodation (like buying the URL and funding the retrenchment of Utube's site), and will benefit from the publicity of being a "good guy" corporate citizen.
                Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
                RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms

                Comment

                • #23
                  Originally posted by -Jrabbit
                  If they can show their business has been materially damaged, YouTube may have some liability.
                  BS in any sane country. How is this YouTube's fault?

                  Comment

                  • #24
                    Fault? Who said anything about fault? That's VERY different from liability.
                    Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
                    RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      I think he means it's usually not enough to show damage, but a fault has to be proven as well before there can be liability.
                      DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        All I'm saying is, YouTube can always use more publicity and has a lot of money.
                        Universal Tube is a little company that can use a little relief. I'm thinking they'll get it.

                        It will never go to court.
                        Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
                        RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms

                        Comment

                        Previous 1 2 template Next
                        Working...
                        X