Comments on: Diggdot.us and Others Forced to Remove ‘Digg’ from Address http://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/ Technology News Sat, 26 May 2012 23:23:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: 93 film unitedhttp://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-88032 93 film united Sat, 03 Feb 2007 14:15:29 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/21/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-88032 <strong>93 film united...</strong>SomegifttoME 416253 93 film united application... 93 film united…

SomegifttoME 416253 93 film united application…

]]> By: Ajayhttp://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-59122 Ajay Sun, 24 Dec 2006 17:23:49 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/21/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-59122 There was a similar problem with WordPress a while back.Digg is just cutting out great ways of traffic and popularity, not to mention pissing off fans. There was a similar problem with WordPress a while back.

Digg is just cutting out great ways of traffic and popularity, not to mention pissing off fans.

]]> By: Lewishttp://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57258 Lewis Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:59:52 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/21/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57258 lol, on that doggdot.us a news post from Digg shows "source: d*gg" lol, on that doggdot.us a news post from Digg shows “source: d*gg”

]]> By: curtissthompsonhttp://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57144 curtissthompson Fri, 22 Dec 2006 01:14:52 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/21/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57144 this is one of many reasons we need drastic patent/copyright/trademark reform. There really isn't anything they can do in terms of laws that stand now, if they want to maintain their rights to such names.Here's a list of sites using said names: http://insidesocialnews.blogspot.com/2006/11/list-digg-trademark-infringers.htmlone that hasn't been listed on this post is http://www.overdugg.com/ otherwise it is pretty complete as I helped with it, and compared it to sites I had known as well. this is one of many reasons we need drastic patent/copyright/trademark reform. There really isn’t anything they can do in terms of laws that stand now, if they want to maintain their rights to such names.

Here’s a list of sites using said names:
[insidesocialnews.blogspot.com]

one that hasn’t been listed on this post is [overdugg.com] otherwise it is pretty complete as I helped with it, and compared it to sites I had known as well.

]]> By: natmasterhttp://cybernetnews.com/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57117 natmaster Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:27:14 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/21/diggdotus-and-others-forced-to-remove-digg-from-address/#comment-57117 Banning use of Digg this makes absolutely no sense. Take a page from the book of Google. They did not like people using Google to mean any old web search, because this would destroy their Trademark and make it a 'generic' term. However, they said proper use was using it to mean using the Google search engine.If digg doesn't want people digging things, they might as well start DIGGing their coffin now. Banning use of Digg this makes absolutely no sense. Take a page from the book of Google. They did not like people using Google to mean any old web search, because this would destroy their Trademark and make it a ‘generic’ term. However, they said proper use was using it to mean using the Google search engine.

If digg doesn’t want people digging things, they might as well start DIGGing their coffin now.

]]>