Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo Serious Fights Yahoo! trademark

fsck writes "Australian actor Yahoo Serious is fighting Internet portal Yahoo! for the trademark to the word Yahoo, registered with the Australian Trade Marks Office in August. Yahoo! was founded in 1994, whereas Yahoo Serious changed his name by deed poll in 1980. It sounds as though Mr Serious is, among other things, tired of receiving any more misdirected Yahoo! snail mail." The levels of comedy to this are astounding.

350 comments

  1. Does he... by rayamor · · Score: 0, Funny

    Does he...uh...Yahoo?

    1. Re:Does he... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      Yahoo!!!! a Serious question!!!

  2. is this for real? by jmahler · · Score: 1

    april fools is still quite a ways off, guys.

    sometimes, it seems, the ridiculous is more real than the fantasy.

    wow.

    great way to start my morning.... with a cup of coffee snarfed out my nose and into my lap. thanks, slashdot.

    1. Re:is this for real? by Trem · · Score: 3, Redundant

      I think the question should be: Is he serious???

    2. Re:is this for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      I think the question should be: Is he serious???

      Nope, just a Yahoo.

    3. Re:is this for real? by radja · · Score: 1

      >f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmg

      so I did :)

      //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    4. Re:is this for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has Yahoo has instructed their lawyers to "Get Serious"?

    5. Re:is this for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mabye this asswipe should be forced to go back to his real name and not clog up the courts with his frivolous, made-up lawsuits. Should everybody named McDonald get to sue McDonalds? This guy is a fucking moron.

  3. whatever by Joshuah · · Score: 1, Redundant

    where was this smuck back in 1994? why wait until now to say something about it. im sure in the last seven years he has heard of yahoo and should of said something sooner. This is just outright people being stupid. It's like the guy named legally to oxford to keep oxford university from taking his domain.

    there are no supid questions only stupid people!

    1. Re:whatever by Dr_Cheeks · · Score: 4, Insightful
      why wait until now to say something about it.[sic]
      The reason he's only just brought this up is because Yahoo! is trying to register their trademark in the field of entertainment - a piece of turf that Mr. Serious has already staked out (well, sort of). When they were just a search engine he could hardly claim there was going to be a lot of confusion, but since they're on his doorstep now he's got a bit more of a case.

      Course, the fact that he's not exactly the best known actor ever may prevent most people from being confused since they're unlikely to have heard of him. But since IANAL, I'm going to leave that discussion to the court to decide.

      And laugh if he wins.

      It's just a shame he didn't change his name to Micro Soft.

      --

    2. Re:whatever by jazman_777 · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's just a shame he didn't change his name to Micro Soft.


      Speaking of Microsoft, there should be a class action lawsuit by everyone named "Bob" against Microsoft, for trying to appropriate the name, and throw in a defamation suit, too.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    3. Re:whatever by Alien54 · · Score: 2
      There is the off chance that the college students who started Yahoo! had heard of and even watched some of Yahoo Serious's comedy films while in school.

      and got the idea for the company name from that.

      very hard to prove, of course. completely speculative. but definitely possible.

      Even I have heard of Young Einstien, for example. and I don't get out enough.

      --
      "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    4. Re:whatever by Manitcor · · Score: 1

      If you look at the case filing you will see that Yahoo! made the original mark claim in January of 1996 as a computer company. In May of 96 another claim was made as an entertainment company.

      The document also states that Serious's first counter claim was made in November of 1997. It finally says that his arguments were filed in time and accordance with Australian laws.

      He's been fighting this for a while it seems and keeps getting slapped down (he has filed against Yahoo 5 times). Being not very well known (anymore) and the fact that he never actually trademarked the name, I doubt he will win but then IANAL.

      --
      "Don't mess with him, he taunts the happy fun ball."
    5. Re:whatever by yellowjacket03 · · Score: 1

      The reason he's only just brought this up is because Yahoo! is trying to register their trademark in the field of entertainment - a piece of turf that Mr. Serious has already staked out (well, sort of).


      I guess if you want to call Young Einstein entertainment, I cannot stop you. But I wish that I could.

    6. Re:whatever by mzweng · · Score: 1

      Mr. Serious and Yahoo! should hook up. He can be their new spokesperson.

      He'll have a job (since I haven't heard of him in any films recently, I can't imagine he's working much) and Yahoo! won't have to deal with the lawsuit anymore. Problem solved.

      _______________________

    7. Re:whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be nice! The guy invented both surfing and rock and roll, as well as put the bubbles in beer. for chrisakes!

    8. Re:whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw come on... it was the Austin Powers of the 80s, the Australian Naked Gun.

      Now Reckless Kelly, that was more like 'Weekend at Bernie's II' - taking the original joke that little bit too far.

      I haven't seen Mr Accident yet but I suspect it could be something of a more tasteful Guesthouse Paradiso - great stuntwork but not exactly your top class comedy.

  4. IANAL by cecil36 · · Score: 1

    But I say "First come, first served" Sorry, Yahoo!

    1. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I ANAL too! Maybe we could get together sometime...

      -SpanishInquisition

    2. Re:IANAL by AUSketch · · Score: 2, Informative

      You have to remember that trademarks have context, meaning that they're only valid in relation to the primary function of the registrant company. This is why we can have a Delta Airlines, a Delta Electronics, and a Delta Faucets without any of them suing the others. So unless Mr. Serious is a website (not has a website), he doesn't have much legal ground.

    3. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      trademark doesn't work that way.

      If this "Yahoo" guy is doing anything at all with his name other than just existing, then at least in the domain where he is working, OK. But on the net? No.

      Trademark is all about the "domain" of the mark.
      Yahoo's is in Internet services. This guy's claim is...well...his name.

      Next loser.

      While it would be tacky for McDonalds Corp. for suing, say, McDonald's Painting, of Helena, MT, because that is all that Conan McDonald does with his company (actually, I think this was worked out in a real, analogous case way back when), but if Conan decided to open a burger shack called McDonald's, or probably any kind of eatery or pub, McDonald Corp.'s lawyers would be on him like blow flies on a dead squirrel.

      Now, he very well could work it to call his joint "Conan McDonald's Scottish Meat Sandwiches" or soemthing...

    4. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo! (web search) registered in the entertainment field. They're encroaching on his territory. Yahoo Serious was obviously there first.

    5. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Read the article! Read the article! READ THE ARTICLE!!!!! Spammit!!!


      Yahoo! tried (and succeeded, despite the fact that Yahoo Serious registered a complaint at the time), to register in a number of different fields. One of them was entertainment. That's a field that mr. Serious is already clearly recognized in.


      As for the whole McDonald's thing. I'm pretty sure that, in the past, McDonald's has tried to sue another restaurant named McDonald's. The guys name was McDonald. He clearly wasn't trying to create confusion, they lost.

  5. Silly! by NineNine · · Score: 1

    So now, common words can be registered? I think that "yahoo" was around longer than either of these companies/organizations/people. That's ridiculous. Heck, that's like me registering the number "Nine".

    1. Re:Silly! by DoctorNathaniel · · Score: 1

      Or microsloth trademarking the number '486'. Which they attempted to do.

    2. Re:Silly! by gimpboy · · Score: 1

      was it microsoft or intel? i just dont understand what micrsofts motivation would be to register a tradmark on a model number for an intel chip.

      --
      -- john
    3. Re:Silly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes? You could register that as a trademark, if you traded under the name. Then if anyone else tried to trade under it in a business similar to yours, you could stop them. It stops people trading off the reputation of other companies. It's a good thing. This has been standard practice for many years now. Where have you been?

    4. Re:Silly! by Jim+the+Bad · · Score: 1

      You mean Intel trying to copyright the name '586'. Of course they failed, and 'Pentinum' was born.

      --
      -- And when Justice is gone, there is always... Force. --Laurie Anderson, "Oh Superman"
    5. Re:Silly! by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      Yahoo was actually invented by Johnathan Swift in "Gulliver's Travels" as a race of brute humans.

      If anybody should have a trademark on this, it's Swift.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    6. Re:Silly! by rm-r · · Score: 2

      If anybody should have a trademark on this, it's Swift.

      And since an author's copyright expires 70 (IIRC) years after his death the word is now in the public domain and should remain there.

      --

      J-aims
      --
      Yo, whatever happened to peas? Join T( H)GS
    7. Re:Silly! by znu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trademark isn't the same thing as copyright. You get to own a trademark for as long as you're actively using it; they don't expire. But Swift wouldn't own this trademark. Simply using something in a fictional story doesn't establish a trademark. You have to do business with/under than name.

      --
      This space unintentionally left unblank.
    8. Re:Silly! by Trebuchet · · Score: 1

      Can Yahoo Serious be said to be "doing business" under the name Yahoo? If hes doing business at all, wouldnt it be under the name "Yahoo Serious"? Sorry, but this is one time where im going to have to side with the big guy.

      --

      Malcolm solves his problems with a chainsaw,
      And he never has the same problem twice.
    9. Re:Silly! by eggboard · · Score: 0

      it doesn't work that way. Trademarks are arbitrary combinations of words, letters, and symbols that don't have a specific generic meaning in in the industry in which they're applied. You can *always* register common words, you just can't register them in fields in which they are generic.

      So IBM can trademark "blue" for computers, because "blue" didn't mean anything. Owens-Corning registered "pink" as a trademark for fiberglass because it allowed them to stand out, but it's not a fundamental property or term in the field.

      Yahoo could register Yahoo as a trademark because the Internet and computing doesn't define yahoo as anything except people who are unable to properly explain what a yahoo is and why it should suddenly choose to collapse on the stock market.

      Oddly, a copy of Microsoft Encarta that fell through a wormhole from the future defined yahoos as a "bunch of guys who were the first ones up against the (trading) wall when the revolution came."

      --
      Freelance tech journalist for the Economist, MIT Technology Review, Macworld, and others
    10. Re:Silly! by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 2

      Expect to be served a notice from Wayne Gretzky's lawyers any day now.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

    11. Re:Silly! by StevePoole · · Score: 1

      This happens. Porsche's 911 was originally the 901, but in 1964 Peugot got pissy about a 3 digit number with a 0 in the middle since they had that pattern protected in some fashion.

      --
      Lick my plate, you dog dick
    12. Re:Silly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pawsible :. <- PAW!

  6. Yahoo by kob43 · · Score: 2, Troll

    Please, people, this is Serious.

    --


    Kiss my bass.
    1. Re:Yahoo by chizzad · · Score: 1

      Or is this one Serious Yahoo?

      --

      Don't write in this space.
      OK
    2. Re:Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when is he going to sue Carrot Top for ripping off his haircut?

    3. Re:Yahoo by hamburger+lady · · Score: 1
      what would be funny is if he were to change his name from Yahoo to Whoopee.

      'course, then Whoopi Goldberg would sue him into the ground...

      i guess he just can't win.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
  7. Great idea! by Johnny5000 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm going to sue anyone named "John" born after 1977!

    -J5K

    --
    The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    1. Re:Great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great! There's sure to be some lawyers near you that'd like your money when you lose. Keep that economy afloat...oh, and try and learn at least a little about what you're talking about.

  8. What's next? by zombieking · · Score: 2

    Yakoff Smirnoff sueing everyone that's every said "I love this country" for copyright infringement? Give me a break...

    --

    -----
    "The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
    1. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...although it would probably make more sense if he sued them for saying 'What a country!'

      yep. those brain cells haven't seen much use in a while....

  9. Trademarked names by richie2000 · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    Maybe he should just copyright the concept of naming and be done with it. :-)

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
    1. Re:Trademarked names by jkthatcher · · Score: 1

      While we're at it, why not just copyright the concept of copyrighting - that would really give them something to think about..

    2. Re:Trademarked names by Shadowin · · Score: 1

      "Maybe he should just copyright [slashdot.org] the concept of naming and be done with it. :-)"

      Hmmm, wouldn't that be a patent?

      -Shade

  10. Yahoo?? by override11 · · Score: 1

    Ya know, I hope this guy wins! As much as US Companies seem to LOVE copyrights, it would be irony if a person took on a big company like this and won. Not that yahoo is a "big bad company" or anything, but its just the whole little guy vs big busines, should be fun to watch it unfold. *grin*

    --
    No I didnt spell check this post...
    1. Re:Yahoo?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo Serious isn't a "little guy", he is some washed up actor from the 80s who apparently is running out of cash reserves...

    2. Re:Yahoo?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, they are a big bad company. Now, anyway. They used to be a nice little search engine, now you practically have to mount an expedition to find what you're looking for in all the crap on their main page :)

      And I don't think anyone at Geocities has a high opinion of them since they took over and put on bandwidth limitations and site shutdowns to force people into using their pay services.

  11. Is he? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    Is Yahoo Serious going to make Yahoo! give up the domain Yahoo.com? This reminds me of the Madonna domain dispute.

    1. Re:Is he? by jkthatcher · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but from what I gather, this is an Australian case, which is AFAIK outside the jurisdiction of any US courts - and thus any sort of cases disputing the American yahoo.com domain?

    2. Re:Is he? by Flakeloaf · · Score: 0

      Yes, but did you honestly expect the musician Madonna to win a lawsuit forcing people to stop saying Christ's mother was "like, a virgin"?

      --

      Am I the only one who heard Roxette to sing "I'm gonna get blitzed for some sex"?

    3. Re:Is he? by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      what makes yahoo.com an american domain? because it's "owned" by an american based company? doesn't yahoo have presense in lots of other countries?

      anyway, i don't see how a domain name could be country based unless it's a .us or .au specific domain. even then, there would have to be government restrictions to regulate the traffic for those domains to keep it within the country. once a domain's traffic enters a particular country, they have to play by their laws and rules don't they? (yahoo - france - selling nazi stuff).

      i'm not an advocate for government regulation of the internet at all, but i do think that it's certainly possible to happen. governments regulate all other forms of publishing and commerce. if i'm publishing a kiddie pr0n mag, i can't just go around distributing it anywhere. i probably can't even get it published just anywhere. if i'm trucking a load of marijuana from one country where it's legal, to another that's legal, i can't really go _through_ another country where it's not legal.

    4. Re:Is he? by ahde · · Score: 1

      .com is implicitly an american domain, same as .net, .org, .edu, .gov, .mil, etc. if you want to use an international tld, .biz and .museum are still available.

    5. Re:Is he? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL, but from what I gather, this is an Australian case
      Really? I ANAL too! Maybe we could get together sometime...

    6. Re:Is he? by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      how is it implied that .com is an american domain? or .net .org .edu .gov for that matter?
      we own the net?

  12. Origins? by Runt-Abu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about Jonathan Swift who inveted the word in the first place?

    Surely the great great great grand nice (twice removed on her mother's side) could have some contention about this?

    --

    GCM d+ s+:+ a- c++ U? P! L E-- W++ NM+ V PS- PE+ Y+ PGP- t 5+ X?+ R+++$ tv+ b+ DI++++ D---- G e
    1. Re:Origins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you are forgeting is copywrite's run out in the US at least after about 75 years (depends on when it was created)

    2. Re:Origins? by aozilla · · Score: 2

      Copyright runs out, but trademarks last forever (at least theoretically).

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  13. Name Copyright... by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember that you could use any name if you didn't compete on same turf.
    Yahoo (the portal) will have to find another name for this part of its activity...
    +
    "Freeman said registration of a celebrity name as a trademark had already been done by names such as Australian cricketing legend Sir Donald Bradman, actress Farrah Fawcett and Australian entrepreneur Dick Smith"

    OK for Farrah, but who the hell is this Sir Bradman, who is Dick (sic) Smith ?

    And who is this "a case brought by actor and director Yahoo Serious "

    He's know to have played in "Young Einstein"...

    After such a feat, I would have changed my name to John Smith and gone into reclusion... What a name !

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:Name Copyright... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      OK for Farrah, but who the hell is this Sir Bradman, who is Dick (sic) Smith ?

      Gasp! Having to ask who Sir Bradman is? Why, just Australia's answer to Babe Ruth is all. He's the most famous Australian cricketer there ever was.

      Dick Smith is another (locally) famous Australian. He started a chain of electronics stores much like Tandy and Radio Shack. Later on he branched out into exploring, and seemingly travelling everywhere in a helicopter.

    2. Re:Name Copyright... by lord_ashaman · · Score: 5, Informative
      ..but who the hell is this Sir Bradman..


      Who is Sir Donald Bradman Indeed! Ok It may just be that im australian, but Sir Donald Bradman is one of the Australias most famous cricketers. Born in 1908 in SA (south australia) , with a test average of 99.94, and in all the tests in which he played, in he scored a total of close to 7000 runs.

      Sadly Sir Don passed away in august 2000. he was made a Companion of the Order of Australia. one of may great australians. but then I guess most Americans wouldnt know of him, let alone Cricket.

    3. Re:Name Copyright... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, maybe an Australian cricketing legend, and a (famous) Australian entrepreneur.

    4. Re:Name Copyright... by gowen · · Score: 2

      Sadly Sir Don passed away in august 2000

      February 25 2001, actually. Now who is the "Babe Ruth" I keep hearing about?
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    5. Re:Name Copyright... by zsau · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, such famous Americans as Donald Duck were named after the Aussie legend. And Dick Smith makes food, if that's yet to be mentioned.

      Tristan, wondering if he'll lose his email addy over this (note the .au) ;)

      --
      Look out!
    6. Re:Name Copyright... by RainbowSix · · Score: 1

      Hey, I read Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, so I know!

      --
      --------
      It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
    7. Re:Name Copyright... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cricket is a pussie game. And you know it.

    8. Re:Name Copyright... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      He invented the candy bar.

    9. Re:Name Copyright... by RembrandtX · · Score: 1

      I am an American who knows about cricket.

      Bowlers, the fact that the ball is 1/2 smooth and 1/2 not, Just what a sticky wicket is, etc etc etc. Even tried to play it once at a company funciton. [english people apparantly find it VERY funny after a few beers when you swing at a cricket ball like you would at a baseball. The also occationall follow it up with comments like 'How did they *win* the first american civil war playing cricket like that' or 'oi! get me another pint you sneaky pint-stealing-git!']

      I still hate the game, its a long drawn out excuse to drink lots of beer and get away from the wife and kids. [since they are not coming with you due to the boredom levels.]

      of the 1/2 dozen cricket games I went to while residing in the UK [2 of them being vs the australian something or other teams :P you know .. that match in 98ish that lasted 3 days]
      i saw more beer, and people reading the paper than I did see people watching the game *grin*

      no wifes or kids though :) of course, thats *english* cricket .. Oz Cricket is slightly different isnt it ?

      don't you let girls play it or something (JOKE ! IM JOKING :P)

      --

      --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    10. Re:Name Copyright... by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      Yup...that's right....

      Australians have the amazing talent to completly forget that cricket even exists until their team suddenly start winning....then they act as if they'd been following it all along....

      trouble is.....they have an annoying tendancy to keep winning.......bastards....

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    11. Re:Name Copyright... by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Dick Smith was an electronics entrepeneur, started a chain of electronics stores in Australia, which branched out into New Zealand and now has many many stores in both countries. Took over NZ's own David Reid electronics as well. Think Radio Shack for the south pacific region.

      New Zealand Online Branch : http://www.dse.co.nz/

      Australian Online Branch : http://www.dse.com.au/

      --
      NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
    12. Re:Name Copyright... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I still hate the game, its a long drawn out excuse to drink lots of beer and get away from the wife and kids.

      And the problem...?

    13. Re:Name Copyright... by Zazm · · Score: 1

      Dick Smith is an Australian Businessperson, Adventurer and Pilot. His primary business seems to be his chain of retail electronics stores, however he has recently branched out into foodstuffs and other household consumables (all "Made in Australia").

      Perhaps the most famous product of this marriage is his Australianised version of "Red Head" matches: "Dick Heads!"

    14. Re:Name Copyright... by stux · · Score: 1

      but who the hell is this Sir Bradman

      Careful, them's fighting words....

      I happen to like Dicky as well...

      And frankly, I think you'll find more australian's familiar with Mr Yahoo, than with Yahoo! And actually I hope YSerious wins.

      An Australia.

      :)

      --

      ---
      Live Long & Prosper \\//_
      CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
      Jedi & Last *-fytr
    15. Re:Name Copyright... by stux · · Score: 1

      And Dick Smith makes food, if that's yet to be mentioned.


      Thats a joke right?

      Dick Smith is that guy who started the dick smith electronics chain in australia (competes with Tandy (read: RadioShack))

      Then did some crazy stuff in helicopters over antartica,

      Then started the australian geographic society,

      Now I think he runs the Federal Aviation Thingy or something :)

      Cool guy... looks like bill gates ;)

      (tought me electronics... the FunWay!)

      Great analogy re bradman... is "who the hell is Babe Ruth"

      --

      ---
      Live Long & Prosper \\//_
      CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
      Jedi & Last *-fytr
  14. I can see it now by YakumoFuji · · Score: 1
    Yahoo Serious makes another movie about a dotcom startup named a company called Yahoo, the movie is so bad, and generates so much negative publicity that the Real Yahoo!(tm) goes under (classic case of personal vs corporate confusion).


    Seriously (no pun intended), this has been talked about and been on the books for ages... he was never a tall poppy, or we would have carved him up ages ago.

    --

    no sig for you
    1. Re:I can see it now by wizkid · · Score: 1


      Translation:
      Yahoo is running out of money, and wants some publicity to start a new movie!

      --
      I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong :)
  15. Seriously Amused by TellarHK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I actually wondered about this one, having seen Serious' magnum-crapus 'Young Einstein' several years ago - early nineties, IIRC. I think the important reason why he's waited this long, is that he's an Australian, and this whole thing started with the August registration in Australia of the Yahoo! brand.

    I know that you supposedly can't trademark a proper name, and since Yahoo had changed his proper name -to- Yahoo ages ago, he's got a very good point. This one'll be fun to see the results of.

    1. Re:Seriously Amused by garcia · · Score: 2

      fun? I don't see anything amusing about this at all.

      In the United States there is a trucking company w/the same name as me. I am quite proud to see their name on the side of the trucks when I go by. I feel special.

      I still think that anyone who does this is looking to make money.

    2. Re:Seriously Amused by elefantstn · · Score: 2
      I know that you supposedly can't trademark a proper name


      In that case, I need to find me a lawyer, because the Miller Brewing Company has deep pockets.



      Sincerely, Josh Miller

      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
    3. Re:Seriously Amused by egomaniac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know that you supposedly can't trademark a proper name

      Where do people keep getting this idea from? McDonald's. Wendy's. Samuel Adams. Warner Brothers. Ford. Chef Boyardee (yes, he was a real person, although he spelled his name differently). The list goes on...

      Everybody named Wendy does not get to sue the fast food chain just because they happen to share the name. An unrelated Mr. Sam Adams does not get to put the beer company out of business. Trademarks are only infringed when there is the potential for 'consumer confusion', and trust me that Mr. Serious is the only one confused about this. He's probably doing this just for the publicity, unless he has a very stupid lawyer.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    4. Re:Seriously Amused by SaxMaster · · Score: 1

      How about you settle out of court for a home-delivered lifetime supply of beer? That would be pretty cool :)

      --
      "Dancing is the vertical expression of a horizontal desire" --Robert Frost
    5. Re:Seriously Amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      a lifetime supply of Miller?

      how is that winning? :P

    6. Re:Seriously Amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are just a stupid fuck who spends all his time on Slashdot. Nobody could possibly confuse your name because you are not famous.

    7. Re:Seriously Amused by markmoss · · Score: 2

      Trademarks are only infringed when there is the potential for 'consumer confusion', and trust me that Mr. Serious is the only one confused about this.

      Actor's get jobs because people recognize their name. I don't know about Australia, but in the USA, the actor's guild ensures that stage names are unique. That is, if your real name is Paul Newman and you become a professional actor, you've got to adopt a different stage name. So an actor's name is his trademark. And I don't think it is necessary to register it.

      You are right that legally trademarks are only infringed when there is potential for confusion. Java the computer compiler and The Java Shop restaurant would not be infringing ... but if some posterior orifice at Sun decided to sue, the restauranter might well be driven into bankruptcy by legal fees. Even though his business was named that back when "Sun" meant a big ball of fire in the sky.

      So I can well understand why Mr. Serious wants to make sure it's understood from the start that he was there first.

    8. Re:Seriously Amused by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 1

      If he were truely smart he would ahve tried to get an endorsment deal. I dont know why anyone hasnt pointed this out to him. He should used it as an opportunity.

      I looked at his site - he looks to be an ego-maniac.

      I have been entering "Bob@Wehadababyitsaboy" as my email address and name on forms for a little while now. so has my roommate. the other day wine.com sent me a catalog to "Bob Wehadababyitsaboy" via snail mail :)

    9. Re:Seriously Amused by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      There's a Bill trucking company?

  16. Here's how they should settle it... by DickPhallus · · Score: 1

    Yahoo should just register Yahoo! with the exlamation mark... that way mr. serious can lighten up a bit... bah...

    --

    --
    Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
  17. No way! by richie2000 · · Score: 1, Troll

    He can't be serious!

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
    1. Re:No way! by kruemelmonster · · Score: 1

      Look at his Website and you know it... it seems it isn't hit by the Slashdot-Effect.
      CAN this person be serious?

  18. MOD UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I vote this to be the best play on words, ever. That's hysterical. MOD UP.

    1. Re:MOD UP by kob43 · · Score: 1

      No, I'm Serious. There's no one better equiped to ruin my day than Yahoo Serious.

      --


      Kiss my bass.
  19. Timing by .sig · · Score: 1

    Was he waiting until Yahoo! got so big that he could actually make some money from the lawsuit? He's had plenty of time, I really doubt he just heard of Yahoo last month. Does anyone even know if there's a time limit for making such claims? Or even if a patent held in Australia is a valid claim against an international company.

    Besides, everyone know's that the company appends an exclamation mark ('!') at the end of Yahoo, so it's a completely different name!

    --
    -Space for rent
    1. Re:Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read a little, he's been fighting it for years and complained shortly after they registered the entertainment trademark in Australia (the one he's fighting, he has no claim and seemingly no interest in fighting anything as ridiculous as international trademarks or their rights to operate as a computer company).

      I suspect if Yahoo probably registered it WITHOUT the exclamation mark, hence the problem.

  20. Comedy? by thejake316 · · Score: 1

    If it's involving Yahoo Serious, the comedy levels will be astoundingly low.

    --
    AC's cheerfully ignored
  21. Yahoos. by irn_bru · · Score: 1

    All we need now is Jonathan Swift to come back from beyond the grave and instigate a class action on behalf of some little lilliputians...

    1. Re:Yahoos. by Deanasc · · Score: 2
      It was the Horses not Lilliputians whose island was shared with the Yahoos.

      In any event I believe you are correct that it would be Swift who has the ultimate claim to the word Yahoo. If it were coined in the last 70 years,that is. I think Swift and his heirs are just out of luck today.

      --
      I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
    2. Re:Yahoos. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In any event I believe you are correct that it would be Swift who has the ultimate claim to the word Yahoo

      You people never learn, do you? This is a trademark case. To have a claim to the use of a word as a trademark, you have to trade under it. Remarkably simple concept, yet too complex for Slashbots (and, I believe, Linux users in general).

      Swift never traded under the name, unlike Yahoo! and (possibly) Yahoo Serious. So he doesn't have any claim whatsoever, and the fact that he invented the word is utterly irrelevant (the concept of utter irrelevance should be familiar to Linux users).

    3. Re:Yahoos. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother, it looks like the majority of comments
      are already talking about copyrighting or patenting a name. Watching this kind
      of stupidity unfold is kind of fascinating.

    4. Re:Yahoos. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hehe, you are both on my +1 list. I wish I could set something to automatically consider a certain user's writeups as 5s, no matter what the actual score.

  22. Yahoo Serious already lost the fight. In August! by ers81239 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you read the link, it finds in favor of Yahoo.com. Pertinent info below:

    From the Australian Trade Marks Office:

    Yahoo Serious v Yahoo! Inc [2001] ATMO 74 (13 August 2001)

    The evidence shows that Mr Serious does not use his name, Yahoo Serious, or his forename, to distinguish goods or services. It is true that he writes, directs and produces motion picture films in which he stars; however, it is not apparent in the evidence that either of the words `Yahoo Serious', or the word `Yahoo' are used as a trade mark in relation to the films. The closest that I can find in the evidence to use of any sign that might be as a trade mark is the repeated use of the words, a `Serious Production' or `Serious Entertainment' on promotional material associated with the motion pictures. However, this use is obviously of no assistance to Mr Serious as the opposed trade mark is the word YAHOO! and I therefore do not have to decide whether this use of the word SERIOUS is as a trade mark.

    --
    there are 2 kinds of people. those who divide people into 2 kinds, and those who don't.
  23. sesame street... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Today's show has been brought to you by.. the letter A, the letter D... shit, someone copyrighted the letter D.. ok ok, the number 3... fuck not again

  24. Won't happen... by Abnornymous+Howard · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but it won't happen, bacause of tha fact that it is a big corp vs a person. In todays world, especially the Internet world, the odds are given. Sorry Yahoo(person)! BTW I loved his movie Young Frankestein, especially the scene where the prison chef is baking pie with live kittens! You could see them under moving under the dough!.. *lol*...

    1. Re:Won't happen... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      BTW I loved his movie Young Frankestein...
      Wrong movie. Young Frankenstein was the classic Mel Brooks movie with Gene Wilder. Perhaps you mean Young Einstein?
      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:Won't happen... by Abnornymous+Howard · · Score: 1

      Oops... I stand corrected... :)

    3. Re:Won't happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surprising how many well-known people crop up in the movie too. Sue Cruickshank who used to be big (in more ways than one). The prison cart has Glenn Butcher from Full Frontal, and The Sandman (had a feeling Flacco turned up at some point too, maybe in one of the other movies). The 'big bad guy' is John Howard - not the Prime Minister, the other guy who's recently found big success with Seachange and Almost Greener. And one of the extras in the band at the end looks suspiciously like someone who's now famous - can't remember who now, possibly Heath Ledger but I think he'd have been too young. Georgie Parker (All Saints), Esben Storm (Round the Twist), Kaarin Fairfax, and a few other familiar names are there too.

  25. Missing the point. by Welpa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think most of you guys are missing the point.

    Yahoo is moving to register the trademark now, they applied for it in August. Being an actor, it means that if Yahoo Serious was to release merchandise etc. under the name Yahoo, Yahoo! inc. would probably sue him.
    This wasn't a problem before they applied for the trademark.

    How would you guys feel if I tried to register the trademark "Linus Torvalds" tomorrow?
    I think that Mr. Serious has a serious point.

    (pardon the pun :)

    1. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think several companies used Hutchinson, Smith, etc... So people with these last names would have trouble selling goods in there name.

    2. Re:Missing the point. by xyzzy · · Score: 4, Informative

      First, we should all keep in mind that this is Australian law, so YMMV.

      However, it is not axiomatic that you have a (trademark) right to your own name. Ever heard of "Taylor Wine", a fairly large upstate-NY winery that markets inexpensive table wine? It was a family-owned business. In the late 70s, two brothers that ran the business had a falling out. One brother decided to run his own business, and incorporated "Taylor" into the name.

      Much sueing occurred -- and the court ruled that the original Taylor could prevent the new Taylor from using the FAMILY NAME in his business (and, presumably, anyone else who wanted to use "Taylor" in relationship to a winery). The fact that it was his name didn't carry any weight. I believe there have been several other similar cases, but I can't remember them off the top of my head.

      FYI, if you want to know the outcome -- Taylor #2 renamed his winery "Bully Hill" (I believe the original winery was on a hill...), and continued to do business. I left upstate NY in '90, so I don't know how much success they've achieved. Neither wines were particularly good :-)

      Now, I believe Linus holds the trademark for "Linux". Could you open a company called "Linus Torvalds Operating Systems, Inc" ? Maybe.

    3. Re:Missing the point. by LMariachi · · Score: 1
      Same thing happened with the Manganaro name in association with two competing sandwich shops in Hell's Kitchen. They're right next door to each other, too. It would be beautiful if the current mood of solidarity united the two.
      FAMILY FEUD: MANGANARO'S AGAINST MANGANARO'S
      New York Times, May 14, 2000
      by Tara Bahrampour

      At least the Capulets and Montagues didn't have to share a name. Not so the descendants of a 19th-century Neapolitan who opened an Italian deli on Ninth Avenue 107 years ago. In high fairy-tale tradition, the business eventually passed to descendants: four brothers named Dell'Orto who, citing differences in management style, divided it up between the oldest and youngest pairs. That was in 1961, and family relations were never the same.

      Salvatore and Vincent, the older brothers, took over the original store, Manganaro's Grosseria Italiano, a prosperous business that sold groceries and had a small sandwich counter in the back. James and Mario, the younger brothers, got the business next door, a budding sandwich shop called Manganaro's Hero Boy. Both businesses were given the right to use the Manganaro name, but relations between them quickly soured. By the early 1960's the two sides had stopped speaking, and since then a trail of litigation has kept the feud alive.

      These days, the owners express their rancor through telephone directory one-upmanship. Together the stores have two phone numbers but 10 listings under variations of the Manganaro name -- and, in the Grosseria's case, through signs.

      "Hero Boy is Not Affiliated with Us! -- Manganaro Foods," read placards inside and outside the old-style deli at No. 488, between 37th and 38th Streets.

      James objects to the signs. "They're saying I'm not a Manganaro," he said, sitting behind the counter in the spacious, white-tiled establishment at Nos. 492 and 494 that he runs with his three sons. "I have just as much right as they do. We both got the name from the patriarchs in the family."

      The stores locked horns in court in the 1980's, when Hero Boy sued the Grosseria for establishing a telephone line called "Manganaro's Hero Party Hotline" that sold six-foot and party hero sandwiches.

      "By doing that, he bummed into my business," said James, asserting that in the 1960's and 1970's he spent considerable sums to promote his six-foot heroes, a sandwich he says Salvatore had hardly dabbled with until the 1980's.

      But Salvatore strongly disagrees. In fact, he said, "We originated the six-foot sandwich." The court fights, which also focus on use of the Manganaro name and other issues, continue today. One of James's sons, Anthony Dell'Orto, says he can't recall ever speaking to Salvatore's daughters, though they grew up side by side.

      "In pictures of my christening, some of my cousins are there and I don't even know who they are," he said, looking down the few feet of sidewalk toward his uncle's store. Has he ever said hi to them? "No, not really," he said, shrugging.

    4. Re:Missing the point. by sulli · · Score: 1
      First, we should all keep in mind that this is Australian law, so YMMV.

      Well, actually in Australia, YKMV

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    5. Re:Missing the point. by BrianH · · Score: 2

      Must be something with wineries. The same thing happened to the fairly famous Gallo family a number of years back. The modern winery was founded by two brothers, Ernest and Julio Gallo, while the third brother Joseph became a dairy farmer.

      The Gallo winery, as most wine drinkers know, expanded rapidly and is now the largest winery in the U.S., and one of the largest in the world. Well, in the early 80's the third brother, Joseph Gallo, began selling his dairy products directly to consumers in grocery stores. There was cheeses, milk, butter, and cremes (but no wine), and all were marketed under the name "Gallo Farms". When the Gallo Winery heard of this, they quickly demanded the name be changed. Cheese, they reasoned, is commonly consumed with wine...therefore creating the possibility of confusion.

      Joseph Gallo tried to comply at first, changing the company name to "Joseph Gallo Farms" to add some differentiation, but that wasn't good enough. The winery wanted him to desist from using his last name altogether. Joseph Gallo refused and his brothers dragged him to court for trademark infringement (Gallo Winery is still a privately held corporation entirely controlled by the Gallo family). Joseph Gallo had a serious problem with this, and claimed that the law shouldn't be able to prevent him from using his last name. After all, Gallo in Italian was like MacDonald in Scotland...a very common name.

      Joseph Gallo ended up losing his shirt. Not only did the judge order him not to use his own name, but he was also slapped with a large compensatory and punitive fine because of his belligerance. Of course, the judgement could have had something to do with the fact that the Gallo winery helped to finance the elections of nearly every local official before the early 90's, and the fact that the Gallo's power over the local economy was greatly feared by most of Stanislaus Counties government workers. NOBODY was going to risk pissing the Gallo's off, so poor Joseph really didn't stand a chance.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
  26. Nothing here to see by GauteL · · Score: 2

    The appeals-court will most surely turn it down, and thats the end of the story.

    I'm not a lawyer, but makes this interesting at all is the sheer absurdity of his claims.
    If Yahoo! had been named "Yahoo Serious!" then he'd have a case, it happens plenty of actors have strange sounding first names.

    I for one, has never heard about the actor Yahoo Serious, and if he is worried that people might mistake Yahoo! for himself, then he is seriously deluded and overrates his own fame.Besides, yahoo is a very old and common outburst, and they are not even in the same business.

    1. Re:Nothing here to see by Katravax · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm surprised you haven't heard of him. He's pretty well known. His movies are fun to watch. Sort of a cross between Ed Wood and Paul Hogan.

    2. Re:Nothing here to see by MouseR · · Score: 2
      The appeals-court will most surely turn it down, and thats the end of the story.

      If this occurs, Yahoo (Serious) could change his name to

      1. Weepee Hooray
      and then copyright that before some 31337 dude starts a new portal service.
    3. Re:Nothing here to see by Havokmon · · Score: 1

      You assume that a technological company is well known to people who aren't in technology?

      I would assume if you watch TV you know of Yahoo Serious. If you don't know Yahoo Serious, you probably don't watch that much TV.

      And if you don't watch that much TV, AND you aren't in technology, you wouldn't know either of these names.

      Keep it in perspective folks.

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    4. Re:Nothing here to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who does watch TV, I'm offended by this claim! The guy's done 3 things, total, according to IMDB. Yes, I've seen Young Einstein but I think the only reason ANYBODY would remember his name is because it's odd.

    5. Re:Nothing here to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they are not even in the same business.

      Really? Tried looking up Yahoo! in the US trademark database? Yahoo! has tons of trademarks, covering everything from sound recordings featuring comedy entertainment and performances, to umbrellas. And more.?

      (incidentally, US trademark 74014097 is "Yahoo Serious", owned by Serious Productions Pty. Filed in 1989, cancelled in 1999. Go figure)

    6. Re:Nothing here to see by Havokmon · · Score: 1

      I don't think the issue is 'well-known'-ness, but how long you've been using your name in the community.

      Just because you don't know about my small business, doesn't mean someone can walk in, spend a few million on advertising, and claim my name is theirs.

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    7. Re:Nothing here to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but then Peewee Herman would sue him for infringing on his similar character name.

      And Yahoo (or Weepee) could get it thrown out because it was clearly in parody.

      Then Mimi Driver could walk into the whole thing and sue them all for stealing her franchise on stupid actor names.

      After which Groucho Marx would surprise everyone by turning up with a lawsuit of his own.

  27. I don't see how this applies by Shadowin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yahoo! is a trademark of an internet portal. Yahoo Serious' "business" has nothing in common with Yahoo!'s, so what does it even have to do with him? I think the schmuk just wants to get in the news because it has eluded him for quite a few years. Either that or he's looking for a quick buck (settlement).

    -Shade

  28. Well he shouldn't have attracted Yahoo's attention by perdida · · Score: 1, Informative

    He can't understand how a name that he has used, has been identified with him, been exposed worldwide, how someone can come along and simply take that," he said. "We're wanting to preserve his right to use the name Yahoo."

    Chrysiliou said his client, who changed his name by deed poll in 1980, was widely known and had been extensively publicised as Yahoo.


    What this article isn't mentioning is that, now that Serious has gotten Yahoo! involved in litigation as a publicity stunt, he IS violating their copyright by using Yahoo!'s fame to get his own name in the newspaper.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! seized royalties from this guy's sales of previous and future work.

    Don't poke the lion, boy.

  29. Abott and Costello, forgive me. by neo · · Score: 5, Funny

    A: So I'm starting this internet company.
    C: Oh yeah, well you better have a really good name for it. Something to stick in people heads.
    A: Oh I do, I'm really excited about it.
    C: What is it?
    A: Yahoo!
    C: So you're excited, so what's the name.
    A: No, that's the name.
    C: What's the name?
    A: Yahoo!
    C: I can't tell it's exciting, what's the name!
    A: I just told you the name.
    C: Why can't you just tell me the name.
    A: Yahoo!
    C: You can't be serious.
    A: I'm not, that's someone else.
    C: That's not what I'm asking!

    1. Re:Abott and Costello, forgive me. by driftingwalrus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yahoo actually started life as an acronym: Yet Another Hierarchical Officious Oracle.

      --
      Paul Anderson
      "I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
  30. A tough decision by truesaer · · Score: 1
    Its tough to decide who to ally yourself with in this case...


    Keep in mind, this is the same man who has been bringing us fine cinema such as "Young Einstein" for many many years.


    On the other hand, Yahoo! provides an outstanding method of locating pr0n.


    I guess the courts will just have to decide this one.

  31. apology by bowb · · Score: 4, Funny

    On behalf of my fellow Australians I would like to apologize for the crimes committed against comedy by Yahoo Serious.

    1. Re:apology by First+Person · · Score: 2

      Okay, the comment was funny. But when I noticed the moderation, insightful, my ribs began to hurt.

      --
      Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
    2. Re:apology by Speare · · Score: 2

      On behalf of my fellow Australians I would like to apologize for the crimes committed against comedy by Yahoo Serious.

      Now can you apologize for Mel Gibson's Hamlet and Paul Hogan's... um... everything?

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    3. Re:apology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of us have our reads set to +3 for a reason, please moderate the parent post down.

    4. Re:apology by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Paul Hogan's... um... everything?

      Actually, the first Crocodile Dundee movie was pretty damn funny. If only he had stopped with the first one... it's been so beaten into the ground that everyone has forgotten that the first movie was good.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    5. Re:apology by Telecommando · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thank you.

      And in reciprocation, we Americans would like to apologize for Carrot Top.

      Well, actually not so much apologize as fire him from a cannon into a low earth orbit without a space suit.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    6. Re:apology by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      I rather like his work. It's relatively harmless fun, and fairly funny. Give the guy a break here.
      I plan on getting "Young Einstein" and "Reckless Kelly" on DVD at some point.

      Paul Hogan, OTOH, what is that all about?

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    7. Re:apology by Bonker · · Score: 1

      Don't set precidents, man! Americans don't want to own up to Pauly Shore and Carrot Top, let alone apologize for their existance.

      Hmm.... Whew! Carrot.com isn't a search engine.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    8. Re:apology by errxn · · Score: 1

      No, but dice.com is.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    9. Re:apology by GrenDel+Fuego · · Score: 2

      Mel Gibson is American, not Australian. He was born in America, then moved to Australia at a young age, and has moved back to America again.

    10. Re:apology by igglebop · · Score: 1

      Ok, But first apologize for, damn I don't think this box is big enough

      --
      "Are you from Iowa or something" "No I'm from Utah" "Oh..., sorry" :)
    11. Re:apology by Jburkholder · · Score: 1

      >we Americans would like to apologize for Carrot Top

      God that guy must scare little children. I used to think he was mildly amusing when he used to show up for 20-30 seconds at a time on Comedy Central's "Short Attention-Span Theatre" (anyone remember that show?)

      But now AT&T got some wild hair up their @ss and hired them as their "1-800-callatt" spokeman. Just what the _hell_ is the reason for going with that freak of nature!?

    12. Re:apology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention Pauly Shore. Our nation has much to answer for :(

      Will someone from Canada apologize for Tom Green? The worldwide healing process can start here, on /.

    13. Re:apology by jred · · Score: 1

      I'm shocked & appalled. A week ago, if I were tasked with finding other Yahoo fans, the first place I'd have looked would've been /. After all, everyone knows they have a great sense of humor. Surely they can appreciate the comedic genius of the man Yahoo Serious. But no. Everyone here just wants to bash him. Maybe instead of a web portal stealing his name, a certain NW software company should have stolen it. At least then you could bash two for the price of one.

      Long Live Yahoo (Serious)!!!!!!

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    14. Re:apology by Riktov · · Score: 1

      And while you're at it ... or better yet, before anything else - how about Jacko, the Energizer "Oy!" guy!?

  32. Well if Yahoo can do it ... by ManxStef · · Score: 1

    then maybe I should sue Pause Technologies for infringing on my name. I wonder if TiVo would pay my legal costs? :) Stefan Pause

  33. Registered in August by kruemelmonster · · Score: 1

    It seems, tha Yahoo! registered it's name in australia THIS August. So before this, this guy hadn't to care about Yahoo!
    But now it seems, he thinks to have found a Source of money, so he sues Yahoo!...

  34. Two different trademarks? by truesaer · · Score: 1
    Shouldn't Yahoo Serious get the trademark on "Yahoo Serious," while Yahoo! gets a trademark on "Yahoo!"?


    It seems to me that a trademark on a name doesn't tradmark everything remotely similar. Yahoo! has punctuation, Yahoo Serious is a weird Australian violin-playing genius. I don't expect to see too much confusion...

    1. Re:Two different trademarks? by lord_ashaman · · Score: 4, Funny
      Yahoo Serious is a weird Australian violin-playing genius



      the words "Yahho Serious" and "genius" shoud never be uttered in the same sentance.

    2. Re:Two different trademarks? by zsau · · Score: 1

      Your proposed 'Yahoo Serious,' for Yahoo Serious' trademark posseses punctuation, too.

      --
      Look out!
    3. Re:Two different trademarks? by LighthouseJ · · Score: 0

      No way, having two different trademarks and everyone behaving nicely would be the simple and civil thing to do. We have to go forth in a ridiculous lawsuit to show people how frivolous lawsuits can be.

    4. Re:Two different trademarks? by LighthouseJ · · Score: 0

      Also, maybe George Lucas will learn a thing or two about suing some medical company for naming syringes "Light Sabers". [slashdot.org].

    5. Re:Two different trademarks? by Doug-W · · Score: 1

      You mean other then how you just used them both in a sentence?

    6. Re:Two different trademarks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Yahoo Serious is being considered a genius now, then i guess that means pauly shore is a super-genius. heh.

    7. Re:Two different trademarks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the word is than dude...

  35. Praise the underdog! by The+Ultimate+Badass · · Score: 1

    I'm in favour of this lawsuit. Even if it loses, it will be interesting enough to offer insight into the way the courts favour corporate muscle over the little guy. Indeed, this lawsuit is a parable for the growing corporate domination of the USA (if it loses).

    If Yahoo Serious wins, it will prove that, despite all that has happened to take our rights away, and all that has been done to make copyright law the tool of corporate evil, the underdog can still use copyright law to defend himself from evil corporations. It may, in fact, prove that copyright law is the tool of the common man (if it wins), despite corruption by corporate interests.

    If it loses, this case will provide further evidence that copyright laws are unjust, and should be ignored at will. If it wins, this case will prove that copyright laws are just, and can still be used by ordinary people to defend themselves against corporate titans.

    The fact that this case is even being fought is proof that copyright laws are able to be turned to the hands of the fading middle classes who are the heart and soul of the American Dream. The fact that it has come to the point that a man must defend his name against corporate intrusions is proof that corporations have twisted copyright law to their own ends, so that it no longer serves the purpose of good.

    --

    Denial isn't just a river in Italy

    1. Re:Praise the underdog! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, this suit will do none of the above. It has already been worked out in courts LONG before this case.

      Think of McDonald's Corporation vs. anyone with the surname McDonald or MacDonald.

      Or, think of Accenture nee Andersen Consulting.

      Cmon.

      Unless Yahoo Serious has some sort of business venture that he has trademarked, and Yahoo! the corporation was intruding on his business, then this has absolutely nothing at all to do with the corporatism plague or Goliath wanting to itch his butt with David, or whatever.

  36. In other news... by dafoomie · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    In other news, CmdrTaco sues Taco Bell for trademark infringement.

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What lamebrain modded this down? (Posting anonymously to protect my normal automatic +2 against abusive moderators.)

  37. Well, then... by Ghengis · · Score: 1

    I think I'll just register every letter of the alphabet and charge you all a per letter fee for writing anything! This is rediculous. Why would you change your name to something like Yahoo anyway? You might as well call yourself "Bufoon" or "Over Zealous Idiot".

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

    1. Re:Well, then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Mr. Over Zealous Idiot to you.

  38. defend all challenges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    We'll never relinquish the last rites to ScaredCity(pm) (no challenges so far). We ARE feeling concerns for the identity crisis/royalty rights, of our dear friend & colleague, Elmer Fudd. Hasn't his gooed name been put through enough debasement? Where are HIS rights?

    We will, in good faith, be turning over the rights to this remarkable web address, including a year's free hosting, to somebody who is able to follow simple directions, & is not aFraUD.

    fud is dead, (& we don't mean elmer).

    face scans of the REAL .commIEs, whoare, buy the way, STILL out on bail.

  39. John Boy by Voidhobo · · Score: 2, Funny

    If only I had been there before the Waltons. Then it would be Good Night, John-Boy forever!

  40. Lord knows... by desslok · · Score: 1

    ...you wouldn't want to tarnish his career.

  41. Gullivers Travels by peter303 · · Score: 2

    Weren't yahoos petty government officials in Gulliver's Travels? I think Swift was paradying British officialdom at the time.

    1. Re:Gullivers Travels by Runt-Abu · · Score: 1

      Yahoo's were the naked feral humans that lived with the Whinnig (talking horses) and represented all the vices and evils that humanity has.

      More information including the possiblity of word play can be found here

      --

      GCM d+ s+:+ a- c++ U? P! L E-- W++ NM+ V PS- PE+ Y+ PGP- t 5+ X?+ R+++$ tv+ b+ DI++++ D---- G e
  42. Make the punishment fit the crime. by Glenda+Slagg · · Score: 2, Funny

    When this guy loses his case, is there any chance that the Judge can force him to change his name to Iyama Twat? It seems so much more appropriate.

    --
    - - Sha la la la . . .
  43. Another Concern by GospelHead821 · · Score: 1

    Something mentioned in passing in this article gave me quite a turn. It said that several other act(ors/resses) had trademarked their names. What exactly does that imply? Granted, Farrah Fawcett isn't so common a name, but Dick Smith? Does this mean that had some other Australian actor named Dick Smith wanted to get into show business, he would have had to have changed his name or risked a law suit? What are the actual benefits of having one's name trademarked like that?

    --
    Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
    Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
    1. Re:Another Concern by Brian+Boitano · · Score: 1

      Just FYI

      Dick Smith started up a chain of electronics stores called (unsurprisingly) "Dick Smith Electronics"...

      --
      What would Brian Boitano do?
    2. Re:Another Concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means they have decided that their image is their intellectual property, so they trademark it.

      You wouldn't want to be Farah Fawcett (did she ever trademark "Bighair Queen?") the 45-year old discovering that there was a totally hot 18-year old , with better hair, getting quite the load [sic] in porn with the screen name, "Farafaw Sett".
      The name isn't exactly trademarked per se, but the name in association with the image is.

      McDonald is a relatively common surname in Anglo countries. The only problem someone named McDonald would have would be opening a restaraunt, especially a fast food restaraunt, named McDonald's.

    3. Re:Another Concern by -=OmegaMan=- · · Score: 2

      Well, in America, two members of the Screen Actors Guild cannot have the same professional name. See Vanessa Williams (lousy actress formerly on the first season or two of Melrose Place) and Vanessa L. Williams (lousy actress/former Miss America who has graced the pages of Penthouse and currently appears in Radio Shack commercials).

      So, if Dick Smith were an American actor, yes, any future theoretical Dick Smiths would have to register professionally under a different name.

      --

      This sig is xenon coated, and will glow red when in the presence of aliens

  44. Copyright Eggplants? no way! by Ace905 · · Score: 2

    jeez, I hope nobody goes out and copyright's "Eggplant". The ECA would be screwed!

    Eggplants!

    Ace905
    [President] The Eggplant Coders Association

    --

    Ace
  45. How can you get confused? by mblase · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple Computer and Apple Vacations. They both use the same identifier, there's a potential trademark violation. Except there isn't, because one is "Computer" and is associated with hardware and software, while the other is "Vacations" and is associated with the travel industry. Easy to tell them apart. This is how trademark disputes using common words are dealt with.

    Yahoo! (with the exclamation mark, which they have always used even if their users don't) is associated with a Web portal, and has been for years, while Yahoo Serious (with the last name) has always been associated with comedy (well, loosely). "Yahoo" is a common word, but they're used differently in each case, so there's no confusion.

    If you ask me, this is just a cheap publicity ploy by Yahoo Serious to get his name back in the public eye, since his acting ability is incapable of doing so. The dispute is a non-issue, and will be treated as such by the courts.

    1. Re:How can you get confused? by guuyuk · · Score: 2, Informative
      Hmmm... I remember a similar trademark suit that was successfully negotiated between Digital Corp. and a British vacuum cleaner company. Both companies had products named "VAX". The agreement was that Digital wouldn't make vacuum cleaners and the vacuum cleaner company wouldn't make computers.


      Of course, making computers that suck is another matter :-)


      (Actually (IMHO), the VAX computers of the time were damn good machines. Sears sold the VAX vacuum cleaners here and they really sucked, which is a good thing for a vacuum cleaner)

      --
      We're sorry, the phone number you have reached is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try your call again
    2. Re:How can you get confused? by echidna75 · · Score: 1

      I have a two word rebuttal: Yahoo Movies.

    3. Re:How can you get confused? by finial · · Score: 1

      However, if both of them were to begin marketing the same product, it can be trouble. Microsoft(r), for example, has a trademark on "Microsoft" in almost every category under the Sun(r) including T-shirts, coffee mugs and pocket knives in addition to software and computers you would expect. So if Yahoo Serious and Yahoo! were to both sell, say, online movie services, or T-shirts or coffee mugs or fright wigs, one of them will lose. Which should it be?

    4. Re:How can you get confused? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not necessary to be in competition in order to win a claim of trademark dilution. Also, the exclamation point has been used to refer to Yahoo Serious at least since 1989. See this Time Magazine cover. He'll probably lose the case, but more likely because he did not use the word Yahoo in commercial use enough (and did not defend its use enough). Before Yahoo! came around, if you asked what the word meant to people, they'd probably answer "some guy" or "that gulliver's travels thing" or the actual definition, none of which are trademarkable of themselves (except perhaps by the heirs of Jonathan Swift).

    5. Re:How can you get confused? by Calle+Ballz · · Score: 1

      So I can open up my own line of Microsoft Windows ? Not computer applications, however doublepaned weatherproof storm windows. They are cheap, easily installed and will shave pennies off the dollar on heating bills. Available at better hardware stores nation wide!

    6. Re:How can you get confused? by Sabalon · · Score: 2

      Okay...not to be confused with Yahoo Serious Movies. Everytime I've seen mention of him, it was always as Yahoo Serious, not Yahoo.

      Yahoo Serious Film Festival - I recognize those words but that sentance makes no sense.

    7. Re:How can you get confused? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Apple Computers didn't try to register 'Apple' as a trademark in the realm of vacations (presumably justifying it that their computers might be used for booking a holiday online, or some such, or maybe they planned to someday provide a travel agency...), in which case there would be an issue with Apple Vacations.

      I don't see Yahoo! producing a lot of movie or TV content in Australia and yet their trademarks enter into that area.

      They are right, however, that he uses the 'Serious' name in most of his publicity/business dealings. But really he's just protesting their right to hold that trademark in an area where the name was already established; I doubt it's publicity-seeking (the case hasn't got much attention and this 'news' is just an update on a long, long legal process) or money-grubbing (it seems he'd rather see the trademark removed, rather than some kind of big payout for its' use).

  46. my god by ReidMaynard · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    this type of posting is better than monster.com

    our company has a director of marketing position open, you sound like the right fit....

    --
    -- www.globaltics.net

    Political discussion for a new world

  47. Names by scott1853 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My name is Scott. Does that mean I can sue the owner of scott.com? Nope.

    Did Yahoo Serios pull his current name out of thin air, i.e. was is completely originaly and never been said before? Nope, that word has been around a lot longer than he's been using it.

    He's been in more recent movies than Young Einstein but when was the last time you heard his name mentioned? During promos for Young Einstein.

    Does he have a chance in hell of winning? Nope.

    1. Re:Names by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, Scott.com is a great example - it is NOT owned by the paper products company - it is owned by Scott Software Systems, Inc which is a one-man show run by a guy named Gregory Scott. In fact, the paper products company with the same name DID try to sue him, but because his last name was Scott and he was using the site for legitimate business (not trying to rip off the trademark) he got to keep it.

      (I knew wbout this because of the old "friend of a friend")

      --

      The Digital Sorceress
  48. Failed career by Merkins · · Score: 1

    This sort of thing really annoys me. This idiot (and echoing a previous poster, I have to apologise on behalf of Australia for the crimes against comedy) was a short term flavour of the month in the early nineties.

    He just released a movie last year that AFAIK went nowhere, his career is fucked, so, hmmmm I know, I will sue a big company and make some cash.

    The is opportunism, pure and simple...

    1. Re:Failed career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love the way that short-termed flavour of the months become such an embarrassment. Young Einstein was pretty funny (his later movies not so, or at least, not as original). But alas, it suffers the same fate as Hey Dad, the Big Brother contestants, Hey Hey It's Saturday and It's A Knockout, of being things that were really popular at the time, but which it's apparently no longer okay to enjoy.

      Meanwhile, I have to say that it was pretty clever of old Yahoo to predict in 1997 that in three years' time he would make a movie that would bomb, but his lawsuit against Yahoo.com would rate a mention on Slashdot to give him some much needed publicity.

      Well, either that, or you're just shooting your mouth off, completely uninformed about what he wants to get out of the lawsuit, and when it came about.

  49. Yahoo Yahoo! by debaere · · Score: 1

    I don't see a problem, Yahoo Serious does not have
    an exclamation point anywhere in his name.

    --

    DOS is dead, and no one cares...
    If there's a Bourne Shell, I'll see you there
  50. Why bother... by hhe_hee · · Score: 1

    I can't see why he bother's with this, he just can't win. He just can loose. It's like McDonalds, I bet there was alot of guys named McDonalds even before that company was started. Maybe he should think about changing his name to Slash Dot instead

    --
    2 reptiles beneath your current threshold.
    1. Re:Why bother... by Telecommando · · Score: 1

      Actually there is an inn and restaraunt run by the original McDonald family in Scotland. When the McDonalds chain was suing everyone in sight that was using the name McDonald, the owner of the inn basicly told them, "Bring it on, we go back 300 years. Who has the prior claim now?" McDonalds (the chain) has yet to do dick to him.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
  51. Down under hits by LRNG_LNX · · Score: 1


    So, the telephone tones, and this. What's the beef? I saw the Australia incident episode of the Simpsons last night. Is there a theme? I guess it's just the outta control everyone sue everyone . . . as on South Park. What next? You named your child the same name as mine?!?!?

    --
    If you don't like this . . . MOD someone else up.
  52. Up Next by PinkStainlessTail · · Score: 1
    Pauly Shore versus every peice of coastline on the planet. Oh, and all the parrots too.

    --
    "Slashdot is about legos and staplers." -Cmdr. Taco
    1. Re:Up Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parrot's say Polly, unless it's the one at a local pet shop, he knows two phrases "Nice tits" and "How about a fuck"

  53. Sure it's different.... My company is named M... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft!

    See if that works.

  54. The Greatness of Bradman by universalcurb · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I know that this is way of topic, but as an American who is a Circket fan (am I the only one?), I just have to say that a test average of 99.94 is just insane...that's like, hitting 300 RBI's per season for your whole carreer in baseball.

    --
    dum spiro, spero
    1. Re:The Greatness of Bradman by TomV · · Score: 1
      I know that this is way of topic, but as an American who is a Circket fan (am I the only one?), I just have to say that a test average of 99.94 is just insane...that's like, hitting 300 RBI's per season for your whole carreer in baseball.


      Bradman isn't just an Australian Legend - you've hit the nail on the head - he was without doubt the most brutally effective batsman who ever played first class cricket, by a country mile.


      Played 80 innings in test matches, not out in 10, highest score 334, total runs 6996, average only 99.94 because he went for nothing in his last ever test - 4 runs would have been enough to make it a hundred average. In 338 first class matches we're looking at 211 centuries, including 41 doubles, 8 triples and an HS of 452 not out. The nearest competitors for average are Graeme Pollock (60.97 from 41 innings) and George Headley (60.83 from 40 innings). Of current players, Tendulkar averages 57.18, Steve Waugh 51.87 and Lara 47.68.


      Search on 'Bodyline' and you'll see how there was an Imperial crisis and several changes to the laws of cricket just because Bradman was so insanely great. Not that that stopped him...


      TomV

    2. Re:The Greatness of Bradman by MisterPo · · Score: 1

      "Bodyline"?

      For those that don't know, the British fearing the inevitable, thus came up with a strategy to take Bradman out of the game.

      Basically we tried to kill him by hitting him with the cricket ball, which is heavier and carries far more momentum than a baseball. By various combinations of swerve, bounce and just simply chucking it out him, Bradman still maintained his cool.

      In fact he was the Australian Fonz.

      Po

  55. Robert De Niro did the same thing by hammy · · Score: 2, Informative

    There was a resturaunt in Vancouver called De Niro's. Robert De Niro took them to court saying they were infringing on his copyright by calling the resturaunt by that name. He won and as a result the resturaunt changed it's name to "Section 11" or something, the section of the copyright act he sued them under..... So there are precedents of similar things happening.

  56. Bradman article by Goonie · · Score: 2

    A google search would do the trick, or you could just read this Wikipedia article I contributed to which should give you some idea.

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  57. Re:No worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I prefer a Wallaby. It's tighter. More like a man.

  58. That sounds like Apple Computers v Apple Records by cheekymonkey_68 · · Score: 1

    "Apple Computer and Apple Vacations. They both use the same identifier, there's a potential trademark violation. Except there isn't, because one is "Computer" and is associated with hardware and software, while the other is "Vacations" and is associated with the travel industry. Easy to tell them apart. This is how trademark disputes using common words are dealt with. "

    Right idea except Apple did have a trademark dispute with Apple Records (The Beatles record label...you know that popular 60's group)which is a similar situation to the one you're describing

    Now IANAL but Apple Computers and Apple Records are easy to tell apart but Jobs lost in the trademark dispute, so you're analogy whilst logical has a historical precedent against it.

  59. Given the dot bomb economy.... by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    their stock price and business model, Yahoo! should probably change their name to OhShit!

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  60. Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always thought those two could do somekind of cross promotional thing.

  61. frivolous by ColonBlow · · Score: 1

    After "Young Einstein", he should feel lucky if anyone mentioned the word "Yahoo" ever again.

    --
    free online diet tracking.
    1. Re:frivolous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After "Young Einstein", everyone was mentioning the word. After "Reckless Kelly", everyone was mentioning it in terms of "wasn't that rather similar to that other thing that Yahoo did?". Then after a 10 year break, everyone was mentioning it in terms of "oh, another movie with that Yahoo guy we used to like".

  62. Re:Another Concern - Dick Smith by Hieronymus+Howard · · Score: 1

    ...but Dick Smith? Does this mean that had some other Australian actor named Dick Smith wanted to get into show business, he would have had to have changed his name or risked a law suit?

    Nope, you've misread (or misunderstood) the article, which says, "Australian entrepreneur Dick Smith."

    This Dick Smith has a large chain of electronic shops, called "Dick Smith Electronics" in Australia & New Zealand and also has many other products including foodstuffs and 'dickheads' matches (which subject to another bizarre lawsuit). His picture is on every electronics shop and he looks like some kind of uber-geek - like Bill Gates, but even more so.

    HH

  63. H&M and the Logg family by shaka · · Score: 2

    Here in Sweden, we had a similar case when H&M, the international clothing company, launched it's label LOGG a couple of years ago.
    The Logg family sued, and won. H&M had to change the name of the label to "L.O.G.G. (Label Of Graded Goods)".
    So really, this is no joke - it's serious (no pun intended).

    --
    :wq!
    1. Re:H&M and the Logg family by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      >Here in Sweden, we had a similar case when H&M, the international clothing company, launched it's
      >label LOGG a couple of years ago.
      >The Logg family sued, and won. H&M had to change the name of the label to "L.O.G.G. (Label Of
      >Graded Goods)".
      >So really, this is no joke - it's serious (no pun intended).

      This is true... except the fact that the Logg family LOST.
      If you can read swedish see http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/9807/07/telegram /inrikes24.html

  64. Thank for informing me.

    Please note I am French :
    Cricket is a game played by Englishmen (BBC broadcasts it sometime)

    As for Australia, for us, it just as far as we may go from home. With New Zealand. Bloody too far.

    Thanks again for the data

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
  65. How about copyrighting the copyright symbol? by sstidman · · Score: 1

    I've often wondered if it would be possible to copyright the (C) copyright symbol, or register the (R) registered trademark symbol and then telling people that they can no longer use those symbols. Anybody every tried?

    How about getting a patent for the business process of using the patent process to protect a minor or obvious invention for the purpose of stifling legitimate competition? You could then send cease and desist letters to all of the companies who use bogus patents to step on open source developers or kick around small companies with cool software or other products.

    --
    Send/track messages to 100K people: www.xPressAlert.com
  66. Australia is a first world country, you dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Australia is a first world country, not a third world country. It has a stable economy, it's a democracy, the people aren't starving and it's generally a nice place to live, hence, it's a first world country. Go to geography class. Crocodile Dundee gave Australia a similar stereotype to what John Wayne gave to Americans. Everyone thinks Americans all own guns and everyone thinks all Australians can wrestle alligators and carry around huge knives. Oh, and it's spelled boomerang, you wanker.

    (Fosters? Australian for piss!)

  67. If Yahoo Serious was a serious actor by way2muchsense · · Score: 1

    instead of a glorified circus clown, I'd take this a bit more seriously. Truth is, Yahoo! is an acronym.

    Another question that might clarify this, what would prevent me from changing my name to Yahoo notSerious? People can't register their first names as trademarks, can they?

    1. Re:If Yahoo Serious was a serious actor by vinnythenose · · Score: 1
      As I understand it you can register words as a broad sweeping trademark. Yahoo is simply a slang word. It would be like me trying to register the word dog, I could do it in reference to a company called Dog in say, the tactile proliferation business, but not in general.


      Be warned, take all I say with at least a handful of salt, I could be wrong, long time since I looked up trademark laws, and I know, tactile proliferation just sounds silly.

      --
      --- I used to moderate, then I read the -1 articles and decided having to filter through them was not worth it.
  68. He'll lose by sirgoran · · Score: 1

    On several levels.

    1)Neither one is in competition. One is an Internet search engine, the other a "comedian."

    2)The names are spelled differently. One with the "!" and one without.

    3)One is a successful multi-million dollar company, the other a down and out loser looking to jump-start his sagging and failing career.

    Personally I found his brand of humor to be insulting. I'd rather have my eyes taped open and be forced to watch Roseanne for a week straight than watch Young Einstein.

    Goran

    --
    Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
    1. Re:He'll lose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, you do not understand trademark law. Revel in your ignorance, Goran!

    2. Re:He'll lose by sirgoran · · Score: 1

      Actually I do understand the law.

      Case in point. Story of a small hamburger stand in NC (If I remember the state):

      There are two companies by the name of Burger King.

      Both sell hamburgers

      Burger King of Nation-wide fame tried to force single store Burger King to change it's name.

      The court found that while both were in the same business, the single store had the name before the corporation. But as long as the single store did now try to use the same logo's, markings, and color designs, they could both use the same name.

      Yahoo! and yahoo can continue to use similar names in the same field as long as Mr. serious doesn't try to pass himself off as the search engine, and vice versa.

      Shove that up your ass coward.

      Goran

      --
      Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
  69. Get your facts straight... by isa-kuruption · · Score: 2, Informative

    fsck writes "Australian actor Yahoo Serious is fighting Internet portal Yahoo! for the trademark to the word Yahoo, registered with the Australian Trade Marks Office in August.


    fsck, actually, according to the webpage, the LAWSUIT between Yahoo Serious and Yahoo! was filed in August, not the trademark by Yahoo! which was originally filed in 1996. Yahoo Serious may lose since he is supposed to (under trademark law) oppose any filing well before the 4 year period. At least, that's the way it works in the U.S... im sure australia has a similar case.

    1. Re:Get your facts straight... by dragons_flight · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you read the part of the article about the lawsuit itself, you might note that he's been filing "notices of opposition" with the Australian trademark office in a timely manner over the last 4 years. This qualifies him to bring suit.

  70. Oh dear so 'Serious' might be trademarked ? by cheekymonkey_68 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does that mean that SERIOUS Sam might be in breach of Yahoo Serious trademark.

    I don't want to play as 'Slightly Serious Sam' or 'Mostly Harmless Sam'

    Dammit I wanna be Serious Sam and I want some serious fragging now.....

    1. Re:Oh dear so 'Serious' might be trademarked ? by GiMP · · Score: 1

      As serious is an adjective, I believe it can hardly be considered as "confusing" with Yahoo Serious.

    2. Re:Oh dear so 'Serious' might be trademarked ? by Banjonardo · · Score: 1
      Sorry, but Mostly Harmless is already taken.

      I am positive that I've seen that in some computer game somewhere......wasn't it a setting in DOOM?

      --

      -----

      Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton

  71. I just hate... by Kengineer · · Score: 2, Funny

    .. these stupid april fool's day articles. Nobody believes them, why do they keep getting posted? Get a life people!

  72. XP by operagost · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I wonder why the Catholic Church hasn't sued over their new OS yet.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    1. Re:XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chi Rho ain't XP, sorry. And it is a pre-schism sign; possibly even pre-Christian (used as an abbreviation of chresten, necessary, rather than christos, savior).

  73. Obligatory Simpsons Reference by Webere · · Score: 1


    Obligatory Simpsons Reference (taken from www.snpp.com):

    ---
    [a slide shows "Yahoo Serious Festival"]

    Lisa: I know those words, but that sign makes no sense.
    ---

    IMHO Yahoo (the man) does have some claim to the word Yahoo as related to entertainment in Australia.

    1. Re:Obligatory Simpsons Reference by ocie · · Score: 1

      And don't forget the country music show parody of Hee-Haw called...

      Yahoo.

      --
      JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
  74. Plenty of interjections to choose from by jodonn · · Score: 1

    I notice that www.yippee.com is still available.

  75. hey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    young einstein was pretty good , thanks very much!. Showed off my home state too :-)

    Can't say much about his later films though.

  76. People still play cricket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    white clothes and everything? wow.

  77. seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I cannot take this seriously...

  78. not an issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he already owns http://www.yahooserious.com, i just don't see what the fuss is about

  79. miss-print in first name by theBunkinator · · Score: 1

    We apologize for any inconvenience cause by a miss-print in the first name of the individual above. The correct spelling is Ahyoo, not Yahoo.

    Sincerely,

    Ahyoo Serious?

  80. One conflict: by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 1

    The tagline for this movie would certainly be a trademark conflict with the "YAHOO!" mark.

    --
    __
    Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
    1. Re:One conflict: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, the the "YAHOO!" is even in red.... the only difference is that it's all caps.... and not all "bouncy"

      hmmm.... can we say countersuit...

      no really I'm serious

  81. something to think about by mickeyreznor · · Score: 1

    Has nothing to do with this case, but....
    in the future, will we have to check in to the trademark office before we name our kids?

  82. What's this stuff about crickets? by FriendlyPrimate · · Score: 1

    I don't understand the hub-bub... So the guy was a cricket, big deal. I eat crickets for breakfast.

  83. Re:Well he shouldn't have attracted Yahoo's attent by Glytch · · Score: 2

    I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! seized royalties from this guy's sales of previous and future work.

    Too easy. Way too easy.

  84. Blessid Union of Souls by steveo777 · · Score: 1

    "Hey Leo! She likes me for me!"
    I'm not as much of a fan of pop-rock as I used to be, but I seem to recall that excuse-for-an-actor DiCaprio(TM) Trademarked his name after this song hit the charts a few years back. Of course, I may be wrong.
    Kinda off-topic, but it's not the first time somebody did this.

    --
    This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
  85. Mostly funny, but kinda serious too... by mystery_bowler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    (I just know I'm going to get flamed for this statement) Just from reading the posts so far, I think a lot of people are missing the point.

    Yahoo!'s trademark gives them the necessary leverage needed to keep others from associating their name with products/services/activities/etc that have nothing to do with Yahoo!. As a result, Yahoo Serious (who apparently still has a career in Australia) runs the risk of legal troubles if he uses his legal first name to promote his movies. Imagine him making a movie that has a corresponding movie poster with wording like "Yahoo Presents...[movie title]" or a title like (in class Earnest fashion) "Yahoo Goes To The Outback." Yahoo! could, if they so desired, sue Yahoo Serious (or, more likely, whatever production company made the film) for trademark violations, since their trademarked name was used in the promotion of a product they had nothing to do with.

    To put a spin on an anology someone else used on this subject, having the name Scott does not, indeed, give you the right to own scott.com. But if Scott Tissue got a trademark on the name "Scott", they could possibly sue you for making a homepage titled "Scott's Web Site", simply on the implication that Scott Tissue might be associated with the site due to the use of a trademarked name.

    I still think Yahoo Serious will lose this legal battle, but it still kind of stinks that companies can trademark such phrases (instead of something a bit more obvious, like a logo).

    --

    My sigs always suck.
    1. Re:Mostly funny, but kinda serious too... by oojah · · Score: 1

      This should only apply if you infringe on their trademark in the specific area that it applies.

      Thus, if I decided to create a company to create food and called it "Scott" then I could get a trademark on the name "Scott" even if Scott Tissue exists and also has "Scott" as a trademark. They are different markets so this is possible.

      Roger

      --
      Do you have any better hostages?
    2. Re:Mostly funny, but kinda serious too... by Telecommando · · Score: 1

      This should only apply if you infringe on their trademark in the specific area that it applies.

      It should, but it doesn't necesarily happen that way. Fed-Ex sued a coffee shop that called itself Federal Expresso. They tried changing their name to something like Ex-Federal Expresso and Fed-Ex still wasn't satisfied. I heard they eventually had to change their name to something else but I an't confirm it.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    3. Re:Mostly funny, but kinda serious too... by mystery_bowler · · Score: 2

      Yes, you have a point there. I'm not familiar enough with Australian trademark law to say that their laws work the exact same way, but I'm sure they are at least similar.

      I suppose I'd have to be more educated as that what Yahoo!'s trademark covers before I can make an opinion as to whether or not Yahoo Serious has a shot in hell of winning a legal battle. Assuming this isn't just a publicity stunt, I'd hope his lawyers have informed him of such specifics. If that's true, then I'd guess that Yahoo!'s trademark extends to the entertainment markets.

      --

      My sigs always suck.
    4. Re:Mostly funny, but kinda serious too... by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      I heard they wanted to change it to cUPS.

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
  86. Deep Regret by Root+Down · · Score: 1

    That's an upgrade from the prior stance of the Australian government. They had previously gone only so far as to express 'deep regret' over the incidents. This will hopefully lead to a better relationship between our nations. Now - can we talk about Paul Hogan...?

  87. After Young Einstein..... by TheChuckMaster · · Score: 1

    yahoo serious should pay US for loss of time and intelligence for watching that film. And what kind of actor has only three films to his name? This six year old has a more impressive film career: http://us.imdb.com/Name?Hartwell,+Taea Better to be a baby in the Frighteners than a lead role in a Yahoo Serious movie.

  88. Re:Another Concern - Dick Smith by zsau · · Score: 1

    That is the most billiant marketing idea in the world. I gotta get me some dickheads!

    --
    Look out!
  89. Its about TRADEMARK not domains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My name is Scott. Does that mean I can sue the owner of scott.com? Nope.

    No, you can't steal scott.com. But they can't TRADEMARK "scott" either. Yahoo! applied for a trademark in the ENTERTAINMENT FIELD in Australia in August. That trademark would prohibit Mr. Serious (who changed his name in 1980) from being able to market himself or his production company, his films or any other products /services he offers.

    Mr. Serious is NOT attempting to hijack yahoo.com, and he could probably care less about domains, so long as he is able to continue to use his own domain yahooserious.com, and whatever the australian one is.

  90. Re:Well he shouldn't have attracted Yahoo's attent by Root+Down · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! seized royalties from this guy's sales of previous and future work.

    You mean that crap made money?

  91. Yahoo? by Skynet · · Score: 1

    Is this guy Serious?

    --
    Execute? [Y/N] _
  92. Jonathan Swift, houyhnhnms and yahoos by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    Jonathan Swift's use of the word "yahoo" should probably be mentioned. In Gulliver's Travels, he visits the land of the Houyhnhnms, noble, moral, horse-like creatures. He hears about the miserable, uncivilized, hateful Yahoos, and is, of course, mortified to discover that Yahoo is the Houyhnhnm name for humans.

    I don't know if Swift originated the word, and, yes, I understand that trademark law is complicated, but it strikes me as annoying and unseemly for Yahoo to be claiming this word as their intellectual property. I wishYahoo Serious the best of luck.

    Me, I'd rather be called a Houyhnhnm.

  93. I Knew This Would Happen by SteveHeadroom · · Score: 1

    I predicted this back in January of 99!

    http://www.worldofcheese.org/news/article.asp?id=2 1

  94. Yahoo not equal Yahoo! by totallygeek · · Score: 1
    I am wondering if there is any distinction between Yahoo, Yahoo! and Yahoo.com. It seems to me that there would be, but not many people in judges' seats know about strcmp.



    On another note, I liked his movie about Einstein.

  95. Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he was serious about defending his trademark he would have had to file his case along time ago.

  96. yay leftist, knee jerk slashdot reaction by fortinbras47 · · Score: 1

    This isn't a copyright, this is a trademark, and the two are VERY DIFFERENT things. A copyright involves the creation of intellectual property, and this obviously is nothing of the sort.

    A fundamental aspect of trademark law (I believe) is trademark maintenance. As came up on the lego article here, lego couldn't allow all kinds of free software with "lego" in it because then they couldn't defend their trademark. Has he done anything to protect his trademark??

    1. Re:yay leftist, knee jerk slashdot reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think filing oppositions to their original application within the appropriate time, and maintaining that opposition since, counts as doing something.

      He's also still making one or two movies, so it's not as though he's just trying to cash in on something he happened to have lying around.

  97. I love the smell of ignorance in the morning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Ah, slashdot. Where people are idiots. Most of the people seem to say, "I have heard of this so-called actor. Screw him. Plus the one movie of his I did watch I didn't like. So double screw him." Or, failing that, they simply mess up the difference between copyright and trademark and fail to read the story. And don't forget the horrible analogies: Duh, my name is Bob so I can sue M$ for copyright violations then.

    Ok, people, here's the real scoop. This is a trademark issue. Someone pointed out the Apple computers vs Apple tours case. But failed to follow it through by paying attention to the article. Apple v Apple said that because they were disimilar services, there was no problem. In other words, I can make a shoe called the Apple, a freezer called the Apple, but not a computer called the Apple. Yahoo! wants to trademark Yahoo! in the entertainment field. Yahoo wants to keep his name in the entertainment field. If all Yahoo! wanted to do was be a computer portal, then Yahoo wouldn't have an issue.

    I believe, although I could be wrong, that all actors that join the SAG must have a unique name. Which is why some actors change there name or use a middle name.

  98. But Tahoo is not Yahoo by Flakeloaf · · Score: 0

    Remember tahoo.com, with its short message "Tahoo is not Yahoo"? It's now a Japanese search engine.... how long is it going to take for the real Yahoo and the real Yahoo! to shut them down :)?

    --

    Am I the only one who heard Roxette to sing "I'm gonna get blitzed for some sex"?

  99. Re:That sounds like Apple Computers v Apple Record by singularity · · Score: 3, Informative

    I believe that lawsuit was a result of an agreement made between the two that said that Apple Records was to be used for anything "that makes sounds." Adding sound capability to their line of computers (something they probably never thought of when they made the agreement) got Apple into trouble.

    It is at these fringe overlaps that people get into trouble. As others pointed out, Yahoo! Movies is a good example.

    No, no one is going to confuse a bad actor and a web portal, but people can confuse Yahoo! Movies with Yahoo Serious Movies.

    --
    - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
  100. All puns aside by ackthpt · · Score: 2
    I must be psychic, in a random and sloppy way, since I was just thinking about Yahoo Serious and what he's been up to, just a couple days ago.


    Young Einstein was, as anyone who recalls when it made the brief tour of U.S. theaters, a major non-event, the proverbial lead balloon. Plugged as a huge success in Australia and the next really mindboggling thing to make your eyes spin and brain explode, it was advertised strongly. The reviews were humbling and the attentance moreso. I did see it and though it was, "OK".


    Interesting to see he's still up to his odd perspective and doing things, but expect little enthusiasm for his work in the U.S.


    As for copyright infringement, IMHO & IANAL, he's waited a pretty darn long time. Usually to be victorious in such cases, one must react quickly.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:All puns aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm... but The Castle and The Dish, also great and big Australian films, also didn't find huge success in the mainstream US theaters. Same with Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels from the UK.

      I don't know whether to blame the cinemas or the audiences :)

  101. Not so funny for Yahoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite the cracks to the contrary, this might not bode well for Yahoo! if it's found out that Yahoo Serious and his trademarked work was the inspiration for the name Yahoo!.

    As someone who was there at the beginning, I can tell that Young Einstein was a favorite of certain people...and that Yahoo Serious came up in naming conversations for Yahoo!....I leave you to make you own conclusions.

    In the end, if YS is successful, Y! will likely do a payoff of some type to avoid the hassle.
    But it's still nice to know the truth once in a while.

  102. Give the guy a break by skribe · · Score: 1
    His birth name is Greg Pead. Yahoo Serious is actually an improvement.

    skribe

    --
    Blog
  103. Re:Good morning! by adewolf · · Score: 0

    At least you have a project and work. Some of us have been out of work for months.
    Adewolf

    --
    "The Brady Bunch is back...working homicide"
  104. be fair by wishus · · Score: 2

    What about the chocolate drink?

    1. Re:be fair by fognugen · · Score: 1

      I believe you are actually referring to Yoo Hoo.

      unless that was a joke, in which case, all apologies.

    2. Re:be fair by wishus · · Score: 2
      I believe you are actually referring to Yoo Hoo [drinkyoo-hoo.com]. unless that was a joke, in which case, all apologies.

      No, it wasn't meant to be a joke. I'm just an idiot with a bad memory. :)

  105. Copyright your personal info by nick_burns · · Score: 0

    Is it possible to copyright all your personal info such that if it gets distributed to someone such as people who send out annoying mail and email without your permission, you can charge a royalty. It's time we get paid for our own personal information, not someone else.

  106. Bully Hill, Herrell's by Mozo · · Score: 1

    As an upstate NY'er, I can confirm that Bully Hill winery is still going strong, although Walter S. T***** passed away recently. The wines have actually steadily improved, and they have a nice restaurant now. The final salvo in the name controversy was that Walter named the road that the winery is on "Greyton H. Taylor road," and he *is* allowed to put the address of his winery on the label. I imagine that at this point Taylor wine is sufficiently sick of the whole thing to not bother trying to sue anyway....

    Another in the "name wars" saga is Herrell's ice cream in Boston. Steve Herrell started "Steve's" but then left the business. When he decided to return to the business as a competing ice cream store, he had to name it "Herrell's" for obvious reasons. The question is: is the man on the Steve's logo Steve Herrell? I imagine it used to be when he ran the place, but it would be funny if it still was him!

    --
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= John Reinert Nash -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    1. Re:Bully Hill, Herrell's by irksome · · Score: 1

      Steve Herrell tried to expand (or franchise) his "Steve's" Ice Cream to Ann Arbor, MI. Sadly, the store closed in about 1990, possibly earlier. I'm not sure how long it was around before it closed. Too bad, they had good ice cream :(

      -

  107. people that should have been shot in Genoa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This Australian lawsuit if it loses shows corporate domination in the USA????? This is just the first mistake of in a completely illogical and factually incorrect argument.

    I'm not being nitpicky here, the fundamental points of your argument are COMPLETELY flawed. This is TRADEMARK law not COPYRIGHT law, and the two are vastly different. Copyright law deals with the creation and protection of intellectual property. Nobody (at least nobody sane) is saying "yahoo" or "yahoo serious" are intellectual property.

    Trademark law protects consumers from being confused and hurt by knock-offs. If you go to MacDonalds, you know you'll get a fairly cheap, not terribly good, but not lethal burger. If you can stop and think for a second and imagine a world without trademarks, you would see how horrible this would be for all involved, especially consumers.

    You could create mailings saying you're from GreenPeace and you are taking donations... and then contribute it to the Republican National Committee... heh, the environment group is a different GreenPeace!

    All computer monitors could call themselves Sony, etc.... pricewatch would be renderred useless as a bajillion different things could be named AMD athlons... Can you imagine how DANGEROUS online buying would be? You could order an AMD Athlon and get..... some old 386 chip NAMED an AMD Athlon, legally!!!!!

    Yup, if some two bit Austrlian actor doesn't succeed in a legally basis publicity stunt, we all be kicked out of the middle class by evil corporations, because .... I mean jeez, not a single sentence you have written here makes any sense at all.

    1. Re:people that should have been shot in Genoa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yup, if some two bit Austrlian actor doesn't succeed in a legally basis publicity stunt, we all be kicked out of the middle class by evil corporations, because .... I mean jeez, not a single sentence you have written here makes any sense at all.



      Actually it made a lot of sense (at least it was easier to understand the spelling and grammar), though it's easy to get picky on the details. Publicity stunts don't usually involve 5 years of mostly unpublicised courtroom fighting.



      Certainly this is a trademark issue, and an insight into Australian court practices rather than US ones (but Oz courts and lawmakers are often more sensible and less open to monetary influences).



      Yahoo has some claim to that name in the realm of movies. But it's not entirely a question of whether he has claim or not; rather, if ANYONE else can lay legitimate claim to it, can Yahoo! just waltz in and grab it for themselves? Could he be sued by them if he wants to continue using that name in movies or merchandise? Can any online content-provider just expand their offerings as necessary, until they own their name in trademark in every business where the normal folk forgot to nail it down?



      Yahoo has used the name 'Serious' more prominently in his own business and production ventures, but 'Yahoo' in relation to making movie entertainment in Australia IS something that could easily be associated to him. He's not trying to claw back to fame on their publicity, if anything he's trying to stop them from being able to sue him should he find success again under his own (bizarre) name.

  108. Re:Yahoo Serious already lost the fight. In August by Pseudonym · · Score: 5, Informative

    First, the story is that Yahoo Serious is appealing the August decision.

    Secondly, Yahoo! the company has registered a trademark in Australia for use in, amongst other things, "Entertainment services including television programmes". On the face of it, he may have a case that using "Yahoo!" as a trademark in the entertainment industry would be "confusingly similar" to his name, even though he has not trademarked his name.


    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  109. jon swift? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I thought Jon Swift had the copyright for 'yahoo'...

  110. Re:its no laughing matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw Young Einstein. I agree, it's no laughing matter.

  111. Lisa Simpson said it all by Tyrannosaurus · · Score: 3, Funny

    On a movie theatre facade: "Yahoo Serious is Young Einstein"

    Lisa Simpson: "I know those words, but that sentance makes no sense to me!"

    --

    ---
    Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
  112. Seriously by kob43 · · Score: 1

    So...the next time I act Serious am I going to be sued?

    --


    Kiss my bass.
  113. This is the comedic high point of his career! by Sonicboom · · Score: 1

    Oh... he can't be Serioius
    ...but he is. *lol*

    This man has never done anything funny until now.
    I think I'll copyright "First Post" or change my name to William Spork or something equally stupid and try to copyright it. Granted he was Yahoo Serious before Yahoo! - the portal came into existence... but there's no grounds for infringement here.

    Yahoo! - the portal = entertainment
    Yahoo - the comedian = not entertaining.

    --
    [Connection closed by foreign host]
  114. I have respected this actor for many years by WillSeattle · · Score: 1

    And his existence on the Net/Web certainly predates that of Yahoo! in all reasonable perceptions. Back when I was an author publishing in Australia and New Zealand, I remember his strong establishment of his trademark, long before the .com explosion was a glimmer in any of our eyes. Under international law, and considering his global reach even then, his true right is obviously much stronger than the current usurper, regardless of how much money and how many lawyers they may have.

    One might hope he uses his rights under the DCMA to subvert their web engines and redirect them to various other places.

    It's only fitting ...

    --
    --- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
  115. hm... by sinator · · Score: 1, Funny
    The levels of comedy to this are astounding.


    Thus marking the only time anything involvign Yahoo Serious was every considered funny.
    --
    Three Step Plan:
    1. Take over the world.
    2. Get a lot of cookies.
    3. Eat the cookies.
  116. Why Mr. Serious changed his name by Hector73 · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to IMDB, his birth name is Greg Pead ... must have been a rough childhood.

  117. That's about the right pace for cricket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (92 years * 365 days)/7000 runs = ~4.8 days for each run

  118. More Y. Serious lawsuits by buckeyeguy · · Score: 1
    Yahoo Serious started at the wrong end of the scale... he should have gone for the obvious personal-image encroachment by American comic Carrot Top. That is, unless Yahoo has changed his appearance since the Einstein movie.

    Buckeyeguy then decided, in a flash of inspiration, to change his name to Google Bullpuckey.

    --
    I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  119. Mr. Serious' movie credits by charon_on_acheron · · Score: 1

    I just went to the Internet Movie DataBase, imdb.com, to see what movies Yahoo Serious has been in. As it turns out, he has a long history of film-making, spanning decades. Here is a synopsis:

    His starring roles:
    Mr. Accident (2000) .... Roger Crumpkin
    Reckless Kelly (1993) .... Ned Kelly
    Young Einstein (1988) .... Albert Einstein

    His producing roles:
    Mr. Accident (2000) (producer)
    Reckless Kelly (1993) (producer)
    Young Einstein (1988) (producer)

    His directing roles:
    Mr. Accident (2000)
    Reckless Kelly (1993)
    Young Einstein (1988)

    His writing roles:
    Mr. Accident (2000)
    Reckless Kelly (1993)
    Young Einstein (1988)

    His misc. roles:
    Reckless Kelly (1993) (music designer) (supervising film editor)
    Young Einstein (1988) (supervising film editor)
    Young Einstein (1988) (stunts)

    Yes, an actor of this great volume of diverse works is surely worthy of having his self-selected name reserved for all history for his enjoyment alone.

    1. Re:Mr. Serious' movie credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you look up the other Peads involved in the production process?

      He pretty much made his movies as a family business. He's a character, so it's hard to see him appearing in much else (I believe he has been in a couple of things, the IMDB being pretty lax when it comes to non-US material).

      It's not unusual for Australian movies to be made as an in-house-type production. The Working Dog movies are bigger (they can probably afford it after success in other areas) and the crew don't star in their own movies, but they still take on a lot of the production roles on them, with finance coming from the state governments or film finance corporation or whoever.

      The big Hollywood-style professional crew type movies are more commonly found when we're making actual big Hollywood-style movies because it's cheaper here than in the US.

  120. Another potential "Serious" suit by steevo.com · · Score: 1

    Perhaps he should sue U.S. Comedian "Carrot Top" for stealing his hairstyle.

    1. Re:Another potential "Serious" suit by Legion303 · · Score: 1
      Perhaps he should sue U.S. Comedian "Carrot Top" for stealing his hairstyle.

      I think you misplaced your quotes:

      Perhaps he should sue U.S. "Comedian" Carrot Top for stealing his hairstyle.

      Ahh, much better.

      -Legion

    2. Re:Another potential "Serious" suit by steevo.com · · Score: 1

      My bad.

      I stand corrected.

  121. Jonathan Swift should sue! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    In "Gulliver's Travels", yahoos were wild, hairy humans. I say his descendants sue the pants of both parties.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  122. Hmm... by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2

    I wonder if the estate of Jonathan Swift can sue both their asses, as Gulliver's Travels came out more than a century before the filming of Reckless Kelly.

    Incidentally, great film.
    Kelly: "Dog, go get dan. GO GET DAN!"
    Dog: "Cornflakes."
    Kelly: "Stupid Dog!"

    --
    Hey freaks: now you're ju
    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they had a current right to the name, then they could sue yahoo.com for stealing it and attempting to claim it as their own in a trademark.

      Or at least they could get the trademark removed, which is what Mr Serious wants anyway. And as long as he's not trying to claim the name as his own exclusive right too, he'd be okay.

  123. To Americans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...'Cricket' is grasshopper-type bug which comes out at night and rubs its legs together, making a 'chirping' sound.
    Or Jiminey Cricket.

  124. I disagree... by mrbuckles · · Score: 1
    The levels of comedy to this are astounding.

    The level of comedy vis-a-vis anything done by Yahoo Serious could never by described as astounding.

  125. It's worse than that by Pope · · Score: 2

    Children's Television Workshop is currently squatting on all domains of "TheLetterA" through "TheLetterZ" .com, and have been since 1998!

    Obligatory Simpsons refernces.
    Marquee: "Yahoo Serious Film Festival"
    Lisa: I know those words, but that sign makes no sense

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  126. I can see it now... by PhreakinPenguin · · Score: 1

    I am serious...and don't call me Yahoo!

    /insert other Airplane! reference here

    --


    My sig of choice is Marlboro
  127. Leon, the proffesional by ppetru · · Score: 1

    "Boss, there's a guy in here. He's Serious."

    --

    Petru
  128. Excellent - It is quite obvious by mergy · · Score: 1

    I have spent many nights wondering how Yahoo Serius, that 80's icon that stood for the brief interest America had for Australia in the decade of Men at Work and Paul Hogan, is thinking now that Yahoo! has clearly infringed on his reputation for huge financial gain.

    Beware Baskin Robbins, I hear there is a certain squirrel that has a brown moose friend that has some questions on an ice cream you vend that clearly is based on his name.

    BEWARE!

  129. Macdonalds as well, don't we love the Americans... by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Yup, similar thing happened in Scotland a few years ago.


    MacDonalds (the global burger people) tried to stop a local butcher in Scotland from selling beefburgers on the grounds that people might get confused between their shops and product with this wee man selling 'MacDonald's burgers' from his shop in the local village. Err... MacDonald is a pretty common name in Scotland.

    MacDonald's (the global concern not your wee man round the corner) took a lot stick for that in Scotland. Telling a local he couldn't trade under his family name. The judges threw it out of court. Makes you wonder really, had the lawyers for MacDonald's (global burger company) ever taken a breathe and paused for a moment to wonder where the name of their founder had come from?

  130. Oh well. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2

    "Yahoo!" should change their name to "Oh well..."

  131. New name? by nytes · · Score: 1

    Maybe it would help if Mr. Serious changed his last name to Dot-Com.

    --
    -- I have monkeys in my pants.
  132. When/where did Yahoo! directory start? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to recall way back before the www took off that you could do a "finger yahoo@(iforgotwhere).edu" to get back a list of Internet resources. Does this vague memory bear any resemblence to Yahoo!'s orgins? If so, when did that start? Probably not before Yahoo Serious' 1980's debut.

  133. listed on www.yahoo.com by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Still he doesn't seem to mind being listed on www.yahoo.com. (I assume)
    http://dir.yahoo.com/Entertainment/Actors_and_Actr esses/Serious__Yahoo/
    In other words, "I need money". Just because he was outdated when long before the internet got cool.

  134. Yahoo! will win. by Decimal · · Score: 1

    Yahoo! will win against Yahoo Serious for the Yahoo trademark in court. Yahoo! has much larger visibility, and I'd bet they have *far* more money.

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  135. So many ignorant people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Point 1:

    Yahoo Serious trademarked his name. In the U.S. ( and more than likely in Australia, too ), one of the responsibilities of a trademark-holder is to enfore that trademark. This means if someone is infringing on it, the trademark-holder must try to stop them. If they don't at least try, then they may lose all rights to the trademark.

    Point 2:

    Many here have mentioned that both entities should be able to use the name "Yahoo" since one is a web portal and one is a comedian. The point everyone seems to have missed ( did they read the article/brief? ) is that yahoo is more than a portal. In their filing, they are listing "Entertainment" as one of their business domains. A comedian, I am sure, would have filed under a similar domain. Therefore, there is a conflict.

    So to everyone who's whining about people trademarking "Linus Torvalds" and "the letter 'D'": Get a grip, and become informed before spewing forth your idiocy.

    On a final note, before y'all criticize the guy for his career, please direct us to *your* latest contribution to entertainment...hmmm, I thought so.

    Thanks,
    Thomas

    sig: All typos are intentional. Didn't you know that?

  136. Re:Australia is a first world country, you dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, Australia is a second world country. The first world is the OLD world. Even the US is not actually a first world country.

  137. Yahoo Serious Festival by bnitsua · · Score: 1

    I know those words, but that sign makes no sense.

  138. What's in a name? You'd be amazed! by leonbrooks · · Score: 2
    It is true that he writes, directs and produces motion picture films in which he stars

    Which is enough. Dunno about the USA, but here in Oz you can use your own name (all or a subset) as if it were the name of a company or a registered business name. This makes your name IP, kind of, no trademark required. If your name were also Yahoo, say, Mr Yahoo Eight One Two Three Ninc, you would also have a claim if Yahoo tried to register a name in any of your fields of endeavour. However, neither you nor Mr Serious could claim against each other. This prevents a million Johns from suing each other.

    This raises an interesting legal question: could a Yahoo representative change his name by deed poll (to, say, Mr Yahoo Representative) and peppercorn-employ Yahoo!-the-company to present a website in his own name? Offhand (and BTW, IANAL), I can't think of an argument against it.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  139. yahoo serious.... by kbeast · · Score: 1

    is seriously a fuckin' idiot.

    he's movies sucked, too.

    .kb

    --
    Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right-- But They Make Me Feel A Whole Lot Better
  140. Blatant censorship by leonbrooks · · Score: 2
    Yahoo! should probably change their name to OhShit!

    Agree, but ``OhNo!'' or ``Oops!'' or ``Aaaaaaargh!'' would probably fit through more filters. OTOH, Microsoft might then sue ``the new Yahoo!'' for that on behalf of their users, who frequently employ all of the proposed replacement names in earnest...

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  141. not if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the copyright belongs to the RIAA or Disney

  142. yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you'd probably get it, you can probably get a patent for shitting nowadays

  143. Re:Worship me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I quite agree... this imposter is a ridiculous, pale shadow of myself. I rarely attempt to be so witty... especially in an attempt to attack a logged in poster that isn't nearly as worthless as cm, or a spork.

    - The AC Avenger

  144. Baseball player? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's all I know, and they named chocolate after him

  145. Re:Only possibly the worlds greatest sportsman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bradman was the greatest sportsman in both meanings of the word.

    I don't know of anyone in any sport whos average at the top level is close to 50% greater than anyone else's ever.

  146. The Funniest Thing About This... by RoninM · · Score: 1

    ...is that the article calls Yahoo Serious an actor. Bwahahah.

    --
    If a corporation is a personhood, is owning stock slavery?
  147. Like harrods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the london shop tried to sue every shopkeeper in the world whose name was harrod or herod or harald...

    The new zealand town of otorohonga changed its name to harrodsville in protest some years ago...

  148. A less annoying, european version of carrot top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really liked Young Einstein. But the trailer for his newest movie is really lame. He has let "them" type cast him as a zaney, bumbling funny man who invents gadgets. Apparently the new flick will be nothing but a very lame version of Ernest Goes To Camp. Galland

  149. makes you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if Yahoo the man gets a big cash settlement from Yahoo the company, kinda makes you wish you were called "Ebay Brown", "Hotmail Jones" or "Microsoft Simpson"!

  150. Re:That sounds like Apple Computers v Apple Record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and was probably also (IIRC) the origin of the "Sosumi" system beep on the Macintosh, introduced with System 7. Apple called it that as a slap in the plantiff's face.

    clawson@lowendblah.com
    Substitute "mac" for "blah" above.

  151. In other news by dbrower · · Score: 1
    Australian vegetarian/vegan site "carrottop.co.au" has filed suit against an American comedian for calling their faith into disrepute.


    -dB

    --
    "It if was easy to do, we'd find someone cheaper than you to do it."
  152. Re:Macdonalds as well, don't we love the Americans by ipxodi · · Score: 1

    Just so we're straight:
    The Global Burger company = "McDonalds"
    Your friendly neighborhood butcher = "MacDonalds" (note the first "a")
    If what you say is true and not an urban legend of some sort, I'm not sure why McDonalds Corp. would even try to force the butcher to change its name or how the UK legal system could possibly rule that there was potential confusion. UNLESS the butcher was intentionally trying to take advantage of the name buy using a similar logo, etc.

    --
    load "windows7" ,8,1
  153. Re:Another Concern - Dick Smith by ipxodi · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of a politician here in New Hampshire named Dick Swett. Didn't help his campaign though -- he lost.
    I find it amazing that someone would encourage others to call him by a name that is, well... somewhat distasteful -- I mean, he could have stuck with "Richard".

    --
    load "windows7" ,8,1
  154. So Long, and thanks for all the fish by stux · · Score: 1

    Mostly Harmless is from The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, By Douglas Adams..... he's dead now :(

    As in

    Planet Earth:
    Mostly Harmless

    Or words to that effect, sorry, been a while...

    Don't Panic (in large friendly letters ;))

    --

    ---
    Live Long & Prosper \\//_
    CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
    Jedi & Last *-fytr
    1. Re:So Long, and thanks for all the fish by Banjonardo · · Score: 1
      I knew I had seen it somewhere.....

      God, did I love that series.....too bad he's dead now. I remember when he died.....downloaded the whole audio series.

      --

      -----

      Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton

  155. The Electronic Dick by stux · · Score: 1

    Commonly referred to as "Dick Smith's"

    The Electronic Dick
    Dicky's

    Etc...

    --

    ---
    Live Long & Prosper \\//_
    CYA STUX =`B^) 'da Captain,
    Jedi & Last *-fytr