Gmail Under Trademark Dispute

fbform writes "As reported by this article on InternetNews, when news about Google's IPO broke on March 31, 2004, some companies (Cencourse, Precision Research and ProNet Analytics) made a beeline for the USPTO to get Gmail trademarked in their name, as Google's IPO prospectus said that its unregistered trademarks included Gmail. Google itself was fourth in line, and it was followed by the Gospel Music Association. This might be a very sticky issue because USPTO Trademark Administrator Sharon Marsh says 'The application process is first come, first served. Applications are processed as they're received, and the person second in line will get a refusal of registration from our examiner.' All of which means that between Google's delay in applying for the trademark, the other organizations' attempt at what can only be called cybersquatting, and the USPTO's bureaucracy, Google could well be denied the use of Gmail as a trademark."

Comments

I clame this first post in the name of...

[Anonymous Coward]

George W Bush!

Yeeehaaaa!

Re:I clame this first post in the name of...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well done brother, another victory for freedom!

Pretty redulous...

[Anonymous Coward]

Gmail is so wide spread, how can they not get the trademark? And fp?

Will, well anybody care?

[gorbachev]

oops, made a typo, bad.

Annoying, yes yes you are

[nurb432]

Is this your purpose in life? To run around and correct peoples typos?

Man you are annoying...

Re:Annoying, yes yes you are

[orthogonal]

Is this your purpose in life? To run around and correct peoples typos?

Man you are annoying...

Since a previous poster corrected your misuse of the possessive, I'll only need mention that you're missing a comma after man.

It always amazes me that Slashdot, a site of interest to technical persons, is so rife with grammatical errors. In a programming language, a misplaced or missing comma or apostrophe means an error, at compile time if you're ("you are") lucky, at runtime if your (possessive) luck runs out. In a config file, the missing comma might open up a security vulnerability, cause a script to fail because it properly parsing the improperly formatted data, or prevent a user from logging in.

In a legal document, a missing comma can entirely alter a the meaning of a phrase, resulting in an usurprise adverse ruling, a denial of a patent, or unexpected obligations that turn profit into loss. In a scientific document, a misplaced dash or comma in an IUPAC name might result beneficial drug being replaced with in a deadly chemical; an inadvertent dash interpreted as a minus, might mean an aeronautical design that buries itself in the ground rather than taking wing as expected.

In written (or oral) communication, while one can rely to an extent on the built-in redundancies of natural language, bad grammar and misspellings result in garbled orders, misleading advice, ambiguous descriptions, and all manner of confusions.

I'd hope that Slashdot users, by nature of their vocations and avocations, would better understand that natural language communication is just a much a tool as a programming language, a chemical nomenclature, or a legal construct, and that precision in our use of tools is always important to doing a decent job.

Perhaps rather than whining about your typos being corrected, you might consider that all of us who took the time to read what you wrote had to take the extra time, when out wet ware syntax parsers balked, to figure out what you meant -- and that those who corrected you did you an even bigger favor by taking even more time to point out to you your error.

Why should each one of us reading take the extra time to pay extra attention to figure out what you meant to say, when you couldn't be bothered to take an extra minute to read what you wrote with your readers in mind, to make sure that you were communicating effectively and precisely?

Is your time and effort really worth so much more than the combined time and effort of every reader that we should have to put up with your unwillingness to check your own work? It's we who should be annoyed at your thoughtless errors, and you who should be grateful for the corrections.

True.

[Azureflare]

But can you legitimately say that hotmail is even comparable with gmail?

Gmail's web interface is second to none. I don't want to see this email service threatened. Actually, I would like it if they gave me @google.com for emails, because @gmail.com just sounds so... dirty.

Also, I don't know why people think slashdot as a whole is biased against MS. Sure the editors are. But I see more posts on MS vs. linux stories defending MS than attacking it.

Personally I think the idea that the community on slashdot is anti-MS is vastly over-exagerated.

Myself, I don't like Microsoft much, but I have to use their products. I'm glad they're starting to get their act together with SP2, and I'll be interested to see what they do with Longhorn.

What a stupid sig

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course that's not in question.
The whole debate is over whether there is any consciousness there, much less computational power exceeding that of a mouse, or in the case of some of the more extreme anti-abortion views, a blob of undifferentiated cells.

I say it is a stupid sig, not because it is in support of a position I consider stupid, but because it isn't even addressing the main point of contention (the whole "child" thing). But I guess a sig that actually tried to attack that issue would be a bit too large to fit in /.'s sig limits.

I will pass on the "favors"

[nurb432]

This sort of forum does *not* warrant the time to proofread a comment for grammatical purity, nor do any of it's readers deserve the effort on my part.

I agree that if this was a legally binding document, or a block of programming code, it would matter.

Slashdot comments are nothing like either.. So it doesn't matter *at all*.

You all need to get a life, and worry about things that are actually of some importance..

Re:I will pass on the "favors"

[orthogonal]

This sort of forum does *not* warrant the time to proofread a comment for grammatical purity, nor do any of it's [sic] readers deserve the effort on my part.

Then what makes you think your comments warrant our spending any time reading them, or modding then up? My comments aren't deathless prose, but I do take the time to preview them (several times) to check the html and the grammar and quality if the argument I'm making, and to spell check them.

That's part of the reason I tend get modded up a lot: I care about giving those who are generous enough to me to take the time to read what I have to say, a decent value in return for their time and effort.

If we who read your comments aren't worth your efforts, if the comments don't matter to you, why are you wasting our time? Why are you wasting your own time writing the comments?

Only you can answer that question

[nurb432]

You *are* reading them, as many others have in the past, so don't as *me* why... Look deep inside yourself for the answer to that mystery, grasshopper.

And good for you that you proofread. I don't feel its worth my time, as my point gets across regardless of any errors I let slip thru to due my carelessness.. In 'real life', I wouldn't let such errors propagate beyond my draft copy.

Here, it really just doesnt matter.