Slashdot Mirror


Judge Denies TigerDirect's Request for Injunction

wallykeyster writes "As predicted in previous discussions the judge has ruled against TigerDirect's request for injunction to prevent Apple from using 'Tiger' in their advertising." I heard that both people who still held respect for TigerDirect no longer do.

18 of 378 comments (clear)

  1. They still have a shot. by wls · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next up, TigerDirect sues Microsoft for using the word Direct in DirectX.

  2. Watch Out... by MarkMcLeod · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tony the Tiger, you're next!

    1. Re:Watch Out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Grrrrreeeaaat!

  3. This is dumb. by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The number of trademarkable things is increasing daily, as more people go into business making more products.

    The number of words in the English language, however, remains the same.

    Just a namespace collision isn't evidence of trademark infringement. That requires (or should require -- I gave up on learning the details of IP law once I realized that it made no sense) one company to choose their name specifically to leech off another successful name.

    Tigerdirect has been around since before Apple picked the name Tiger.

    Apple wouldn't want anything to be named after such a shitty company.

    So what's the deal?

    1. Re:This is dumb. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bullshimble!
      The English language is evolving.com all the time, and new words are addendumated every year into the lexicolon.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:This is dumb. by SpeckledJim · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who'd have thought it? George W Bush posting on Slashdot.

    3. Re:This is dumb. by Have+Blue · · Score: 5, Funny

      lexicolon

      I know you were joking, but this is seriously the best word ever. We can use it for the entire vocabulary of horribly abused words on the Internet and cell phones.

  4. Re:Even the judiciary loves Apple. by skingers6894 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IP rights? To the name "Tiger"?

    Right.

  5. Pardon? What intellectual property? by dscho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How could a term like "Tiger" in any non-judicial sense (such as common sense) ever be accused of being an intellectual property?

  6. Re:Does that mean... by DoraLives · · Score: 5, Funny
    I can say "Tiger" again?

    Only if you say it indirectly.

    --
    Is it fascism yet?
  7. Re:Unnecessary comments by cowscows · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I generally think the editor's comments are annoying attempts by them to try and sound funnier and smarter than they really are.

    But this one at least made me smile. Lighten up. It's their website, not yours. They've been adding commentary like this for years, most of it's dumb, sure, but that's how the world works.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  8. Re:Does that mean... by gvc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yes, but you still don't have enough free vocabulary to relate the opening scene from The Flintstones. As you may recall, Fred puts the tiger out but it re-enters the house, not through the door but through the winspire.

  9. Re:Does that mean... by antic · · Score: 5, Funny


    My neighbor used to call me the same thing, until I stopped leaping out of the bushes in his front yard and scratching at his face.

    --
    'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
  10. Re:I have mod points by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    So where can I moderate Cowboyneals comments on this story?

    In your hosts file.

    Something like this should suit you nicely :)

    64.236.24.28 slashdot.org

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  11. Re:I have mod points by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now Im in a wierd position, I would *love* to moderate you for that comment (up incase youi were wondering) but I cant because Ive commented, but you wouldnt have made that comment if I hadnt commented, so I couldnt have moderated you if I hadnt commented. Oh well :)

  12. Funny by Zebra_X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the tables were turned, I'm sure apple would do the same thing to tiger direct. Apple has quite a colorful litigeous history.

  13. This is not personal. They have to protect it. by tempshill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On trademark infringement, companies don't sue other companies to try to cash in. They do it because if they don't attempt to protect their trademark, courts will rule that it isn't a trademark anymore and isn't protectible. Aspirin, Zipper.

    1. Re:This is not personal. They have to protect it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Yeah? You and whose army .. oh."