Slashdot Mirror


Rupert Murdoch Claims To Own the 'Sky' In 'Skype'

Crudely_Indecent writes "Not content to own just news stories, Rupert Murdoch is now going after individual words! His BSkyB is fighting a legal battle with Skype, claiming that it owns the 'Sky' in 'Skype.' From the article: 'A spokesman for Sky confirmed that the company has been involved in a "five-year dispute with Skype" over trademark applications filed by the telecomms company. These are, the spokesman added: "including, but not limited to, television-related goods and services."'"

186 comments

  1. Hah! by sheehaje · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seems they own the word Douche in the word Douchebag too.

    1. Re:Hah! by Zeek40 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seems they own the word Douche in the word Douchebag too.

      I came here to call him a Douchenozzle, I stayed to sue you for trademark infringement.

    2. Re:Hah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      :-)

    3. Re:Hah! by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 5, Funny

      Next: Murdoch sues the UK town of Scunthorpe...

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    4. Re:Hah! by spiderwebby · · Score: 1

      isle of skye anybody?

    5. Re:Hah! by adam.ainsworth · · Score: 1

      Next: Murdoch sues the UK town of Scunthorpe...

      More like the Isle of Skye

  2. He's crazy right? by Tragek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought trademarks were related to the possibility of accidental confusion. If Murdoch thinks the average person will confuse BSkyB and Skype, he must have the most horrendous opinion of the average person!

    1. Re:He's crazy right? by teh+kurisu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      he must have the most horrendous opinion of the average person!

      The man behind The Sun and Fox News has a horrendous opinion of the average person?

      In other news, grass is green, *** is blue.

    2. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I completely understand and support this lawsuit. Yesterday I thought to myself "I'm going to watch Batman Begins on Sky Movies HD" but instead of going to my TV I switched on my computer loaded up Skype and started chatting to my sister. The brand confusion is obvious.

      I read somewhere that this has been going on for 5 years so Skype has been around at least 2 years before Ol' Rupe decided to sue. Aren't you required to sue over trademark infringements or you lose them?

    3. Re:He's crazy right? by PatrickThomson · · Score: 3, Funny

      If your *** is blue you need to see a doctor, man!

      --
      I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    4. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trademarks are not about confusion. The tort of "passing off" is about confusion, and is for the benefit of consumers. Trademark is about property-like rights being violated and for the benefit of trademark owners.

    5. Re:He's crazy right? by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's one aspect, but in this case Sky is eponymous, sort of like Windows is. So MS could trademark Microsoft Windows XP, but not Windows. Sky by itself can't be trademarked as it already has a meaning which in this case is irrelevant because only a ham fisted fascist like Murdoch would actually even consider those to be confusing.

    6. Re:He's crazy right? by BigZee · · Score: 1

      It is worth remembering that although the company may be BSkyB (as a result of the merger between Sky and British Satellite Broadcasting) they in fact use the name Sky as their brand name. Don't get me wrong, I think this is rediculous but the comparison should be between Sky and Skype.

    7. Re:He's crazy right? by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm just covering my ass. Read the fucking title!

    8. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read somewhere that this has been going on for 5 years

      Gee, I wonder where that somewhere possibly could have been? Lord knows you didn't RTFA, but maybe, just maybe, you read that this has been going on five years in the fucking summary?

      Aren't you required to sue over trademark infringements or you lose them?

      No, you have to use and protect your own trademark, not sue anyone who might possibly infringe. Otherwise, I could start a company called Coca Cola, not advertise, make or sell anything to anyone but my mother, wait a few years, then start making soda and say "No, I'm allowed to use their trademark, I've been using it for two years and nobody sued me".

    9. Re:He's crazy right? by vtcodger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ***Trademarks are not about confusion.***

      Maybe in Latvia or Nepal. In the US, confusion is an element. Johnson and Johnson's trademark on Band-Aid in no way constrains Stephen Ambrose or Randy Shifts from writing books called respectively "Band of Brothers" and "The Band Played On".

      May I be the first to nominate Rupert Murdoch as capitan of mankind's first interstellar expedition? No way to get the explorers back once they are launched? Yeah, I knew that. (I also nominate Donald Trump as first officer).

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    10. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! Stop using ***! I've trademarked that one too
      Yours truly
      RM

    11. Re:He's crazy right? by yumyum · · Score: 1

      Sky is eponymous

      I did not know that the sky outside was named after someone named Sky? Or were you thinking of another word instead of eponymous.

    12. Re:He's crazy right? by orrs · · Score: 3, Informative

      apparently the E.U. thinks so. The courts ruled in his favor. http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/41108-skype-vs-sky-whats-in-a-name/

    13. Re:He's crazy right? by Splab · · Score: 1

      Or just pick a safe word that is easy to remember.

    14. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      grass is green, *** is blue

      Best Viagra advertising slogan ever.

    15. Re:He's crazy right? by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      No he is not crazy. He is greedy. While insanity might bring you to heaven. This definitely goes in the opposite direction. ;-)

      However, he is the guy who owns Fox "News" and sky. So in general he has a massive media impact.

    16. Re:He's crazy right? by TroyM · · Score: 1

      Crazy like a fox! Oh wait, he's already trademarked Fox.

    17. Re:He's crazy right? by cparker15 · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!!!

      --
      Have you driven a fnord... lately?

      You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.

    18. Re:He's crazy right? by randomsearch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I thought trademarks were related to the possibility of accidental confusion. If Murdoch thinks the average person will confuse BSkyB and Skype, he must have the most horrendous opinion of the average person!

      You have clearly never watched his TV output.

    19. Re:He's crazy right? by wall0159 · · Score: 1

      If you've ever read/heard Murdoch's rants against the BBC (and other public broadcasters) it strongly supports the idea that he views the average person with utter contempt.

    20. Re:He's crazy right? by bioluminescence · · Score: 1

      I am from Latvia, you insensitive clod!

    21. Re:He's crazy right? by sorak · · Score: 3, Informative

      He also owns the company that sued Al Franken for "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right". It was laughed out of court because the title was obvious parody. I wonder if they don't have slightly different intentions. For example, I may lose the case, but you still have to pay legal fees, and devote time and resources to dealing both with the court battle and the public relations repercussions...OR...you can pay me to make this go away.

    22. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am from Clodnia, you insensitive Latvian!

    23. Re:He's crazy right? by binkzz · · Score: 1

      That's one aspect, but in this case Sky is eponymous, sort of like Windows is. So MS could trademark Microsoft Windows XP, but not Windows. Sky by itself can't be trademarked as it already has a meaning which in this case is irrelevant because only a ham fisted fascist like Murdoch would actually even consider those to be confusing.

      Unfortunately, that's not true. Windows is trademarked and any application that uses the word Windows in it is asked to remove it or face charges. Point in case: Windows/Total Commander.

      --
      'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
    24. Re:He's crazy right? by Teun · · Score: 1

      a recent ruling by the EU's Office for Harmonisation of Internal Markets saw Sky prevailing over Skype, with the latter's name and logo being judged too similar to Sky's..

      I assume it's mainly the logo, but this is something the EU parliament needs to keep a tag on.

      Skype intends to appeal.

      I hope so!

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    25. Re:He's crazy right? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      "I have always felt 'ouch you moron stop' was all the safe word that I needed"

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    26. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet he has been rewarded for take business decisions based on that view. Is he still wrong? I'd prefer to stick my fingers in my ears and say 'la la la' whilst taking a contrary view but .....

    27. Re:He's crazy right? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Did you forget about the Windows/Lindows lawsuit?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    28. Re:He's crazy right? by MBGMorden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's related to target industries. Windows is a trademark but that only applies to the computing industry. Microsoft could sue Novell if they came up with an OS called "Novell Windows", but they'd have a much harder time suing a glass cleaner named "Windows".

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    29. Re:He's crazy right? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      "The left has the most horrendous opinion of the average person" - Libertarian who doesn't make a trip to the grocery store without the preferred firearm of anime action heroes.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    30. Re:He's crazy right? by LordEd · · Score: 1

      How about Semprini?

    31. Re:He's crazy right? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      well that was something else, as not only did they have a very similar name, but they had created a desktop theme that looked very similar to windows xp at first boot.

      basically, the company was gambling on being confused with microsofts products.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    32. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you're doing it wrong. ;^)

    33. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am from Clodnia, you insensitive Latvian!

      I am from Clodonia & I'm suing your country for stealing our name!

    34. Re:He's crazy right? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      How on earth did they pull that off given the prior naming of "X Windows"?

    35. Re:He's crazy right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because Skype has only just started releasing software and advertising their name! It's JUST LIKE your example!

    36. Re:He's crazy right? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      There was a show "Sky King" in the '50s. It was about a rancher named Sky who did a lot of flying.
      The name might be Skylar King.

    37. Re:He's crazy right? by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Thing is Windows Commander is obviously referring to the Microsoft product, wheras as the word "Window" is a common word in computing for a certain GUI element. If someone were to sell satellite receivers as "Sky Butler" they would have a similar point.

  3. hey by Ryanrule · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whens he gonna die?

    1. Re:hey by oldspewey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sad fact: whoever comes along to replace him will be worse.

      It's called a downward trajectory.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:hey by Lythrdskynrd · · Score: 2, Informative

      You'd think that would solve things... but have you ever met his son?

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8227915.stm

      Same evil, just younger.

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

      You mean like Obama after Bush?

    4. Re:hey by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Not soon enough! Lets all wish ass cancer on him!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:hey by Thurguston · · Score: 1

      When somebody jams a wooden stake through his heart.

    6. Re:hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is already numbered among the dead that walk, a lich empowered by his arcane media empire to plague the world until Saturn claims Sol, Mercury stands still and Jupiter speaks of the seals of his power.

    7. Re:hey by xMilkmanDanx · · Score: 2, Funny

      He's not quasi evil?

    8. Re:hey by box4831 · · Score: 1

      Then Radiohead will come and make fun of him for being a crybaby!

      --
      Miller Lite tastes like water that's somehow managed to rot.
    9. Re:hey by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      But who could this be? It would have to be a genetically engineered clone of Murdoch, enhanced by a mad scientist to be even more evil than that which he was made from.

      But then the mad scientist would have to be more evil than Murdoch to bring such an abomination to life. With a more evil being in existence, there would be no need to create a Murdoch clone to run Newscorp.

      So Rupert Murdoch must have a mad scientist son who has been hidden from the world and will inherit Newscorp. It's the only logical possibility.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:hey by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      OMG I didn't even read that until now! O_O

      http://idle.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1753416&cid=33244486

      Look you can totally imagine him in a dirty labcoat with black rubber gloves and boots, and a crazy hairstyle! Look at the colors in his buzzcut! It's just waiting to sprout into mad scientist hair!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    11. Re:hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can we be sure he hasn't secretly been replaced by a robot already?

  4. take my love..... by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Funny

    take my land
    take me where I cannot stand
    I don't care
    I'm still free
    you can't take the sky from me

    (Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind.....)

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:take my love..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What are you sorry about? This is Slashdot.

    2. Re:take my love..... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I really like firefly, but that intro is almost as bad as enterprise.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    3. Re:take my love..... by russotto · · Score: 1

      you can't take the sky from me

      Mal Reynolds, this court sentences you to life without parole in the lowest level of the Maximum Security Lunar Underground Penitentiary.

    4. Re:take my love..... by tande922 · · Score: 1

      Long live the Browncoats!!

    5. Re:take my love..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      take my land

      take me where I cannot stand

      I don't care

      I'm still free

      you can't take the sky from me

      (Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind.....)

      On that very note, wasn't Firefly aired on FOX? And doesn't Rupert Murdoch own FOX? Just saying...... They did take the sky away from Firefly.... cancelled it while it was still in its infancy.....

    6. Re:take my love..... by tru3ntropy · · Score: 1

      Guess this means he will own the sky in skynet as well, its not looking good, think about it people!

      --
      In Google we trust.
  5. Is it too late... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to hunt down the doctor who dropped him on his head when he was born? You know, to get the doctor to put him back where he took him out from?

    1. Re:Is it too late... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      And I could have sworn it was to trap the doctor in the blue box, so that he can unleash his secret reconstituted dalek army

      Maybe its a different guy, bares a striking resemblance though.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    2. Re:Is it too late... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I say he wasn't dropped on his head hard enough.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  6. Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by XPeter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He employs Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, the entire Fox and Friends team; and blames the internet for the fail of Newscorp. Obviously he's an moron.

    --
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits" - Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by ian_from_brisbane · · Score: 1

      Obviously he's an moron.

      This is the funniest and most ironic thing I've read in ages. I don't read much.

    2. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by mldi · · Score: 1

      Well, it's for that very reason (first part of your statement) that he's doing so well. Have you seen those ratings for those programs? It's unreal!

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    3. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by locallyunscene · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He employs Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, the entire Fox and Friends team; and blames the internet for the fail of Newscorp. Obviously he's an moron.

      I don't care what he thinks(which is not much beyond making money). I do care what the hell he does as a non-trivial percentage of America follows his "news".

    4. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Obviously he's an moron.

      The key thing to understand about him is that Rupert Murdoch and his businesses don't support conservative causes because they believe in conservatism, they support conservative causes because they improve Rupert Murdoch's profit margins. For instance, he doesn't give a damn about gay marriage, but is happy to stir up controversy over gay marriage so that Americans will vote in politicians who will cut taxes on Murdoch and Newscorp.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by StikyPad · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sort of. Money is certainly an issue, but so is his conservative agenda. His "genius" is in turning a healthy profit by spreading his message, instead of *spending* money to do the same. Of course, that's not a completely new strategy; he just mastered it in the realm of television by hoisting a tabloid-style news channel under the banner of legitimate news. True, the FOX television network is (or was) known for its "racy" content relative to its competitors, but fun and games end where the news begins. The strategy of any network affiliate is to draw in viewers with the entertainment, then keep them around for the news. In the case of FOX, however, the local affiliates are more and more resembling syndicated broadcasters for the FOX News Channel. Outfoxed has a fairly factual description, albeit presented in a rather hysterical fashion.

    6. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by rickb928 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "The strategy of any network affiliate is to draw in viewers with the entertainment, then keep them around for the news"

      When you can reliably show me the difference between 'news' and 'entertainment' on any of the popular networks, let me know how you did it.

      CNN, for instance, happily shows us features on Lindsay Lohan, Lady Gaga, missing children wherever, remains of someone recently deceased that, disgraced persons walking out of/into jail, etc. The LEAST of their features are on substantive national issues or political debate. They consider political coverage to be features on Congressional ethics scandals and oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico.

      MSNBC is no different.

      The Comedy Channel at least offers more of a focus on political issues, and despite their attempts to make it snarky or at least funny, they end up with most of the cogent and insightful analysis. Not that U.S. politics is currently all that funny, but it is largely absurd, and hence ironically funny.

      I get why so many people hate Fox. It's the same reason I hate all the rest.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    7. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      Fox News is the biggest cable news network in the United States. If Newscorp is failing or underperforming (I don't know if it is, but you imply such and I'll go with that) then it's almost certainly not due to Fox News in general or Beck and O'Reilly specifically.

    8. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The key thing to understand about him is that Rupert Murdoch and his businesses don't support conservative causes because they believe in conservatism, they support conservative causes because they improve Rupert Murdoch's profit margins.

      This a myth that Rupert has pushed out himself. There is plenty of evidence that he is in fact every bit as conservative as his media outlets. He might not support every single conservative talking point as gospel but that doesn't make him any less conservative.
      He created the myth because if everyone realized how much of a demagogue he really was some company's would be hesitant to advertise in a Murdoch paper hurting his profit margin.

    9. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and he also thought buying MySpace was a good idea. He was obviously completely out of touch with how fickle the tastes of youth are.

    10. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's hard to pin him down politically since he supports a lot of things argued for by the left - poor education standards and poor health care hurt him as an employer and he's spoken on that topic a few times (ABC Boyer Lectures). He appears to believe that governments should be providing a lot of social services to his employees from those taxes he isn't paying.
      What does sell however is right wing sensationalist crap and page 3 girls, so that's what he does. It's said that he just keeps his newspapers because he can use them to influence people but it's probably a lot more than that, but there must be some reasons because they are losing money. He has plenty of other stuff though, the TV stations he sold in China last week probably earned him more in that sale than all his newspapers around the world put together are worth.

    11. Re:Who cares what Murdoch thinks? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I wasn't making a distinction between content (news vs entertainment); rather between providers. Local news -- or whatever you want to call it -- is produced by local stations for local viewership (historically, and, in most cases, currently). Part of the value that local stations get out of carrying their affiliated networks (NBC, CBS, FOX, etc) is that the network shows bring in the viewers, who then hopefully stick around to watch the local news. That's why, for example, so many local stations were protesting Leno in primetime -- it was decimating their local news viewership. Aside from those shows, and the occasional news clip, the local station is essentially independent from the affiliated network.

      Fox, in a departure from the typical arrangement, allegedly demanded that certain stories from FOX News Channel (FNC) be either rebroadcast and/or retold by local affiliate stations, under threat of losing their affiliate status.

  7. The expansion of IP/Trademarks by Manip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't it interesting how the scope of Trademarks and IP law keep expanding. The original concept of a trademark was to make it difficult for the competition to pass their products off as your products, it had this concept of a "reasonable person" being confused between mark A and mark B. I think when we have companies protecting dictionary words and words containing other words that they happen to have trademarked it has gone far further than the original concept.

    I wonder how long until someone protects the letter 'a' and then requires a cash payment each time you use that letter in your trademark? I know that sounds like an insane concept but if you asked people about what is happening today with IP and trademarks they would have told you that was insane too!

    1. Re:The expansion of IP/Trademarks by JPLemme · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Isn't that what Apple did with the letter "i"?

    2. Re:The expansion of IP/Trademarks by aug24 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's an old Goon Show where they trademark the word 'Help!' and they go around pushing people into canals...

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    3. Re:The expansion of IP/Trademarks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was like 10 I had the idea to trademark the letter A.

      I never followed through with it, you just brought it back to my attention.

    4. Re:The expansion of IP/Trademarks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am reminded of Nickelodeon's iCarly and CNN's iReport.

  8. More stupid lawsuits? by Haedrian · · Score: 1

    Whenever someone invented the trademark to protect the rights of the inventor - did they ever think it was going to end up with cases like this?

    1. Re:More stupid lawsuits? by Zeek40 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're confusing trademarks with patents. Trademarks are to prevent people from fraudulently claiming to be affiliated with a business. For example, lets pretend you started a successful, well respected business named 'Haedrian's Home Improvements' and trademark the name. If I try to cash in on your success by setting up a similar business named "Haeadrian's Home Improvements" then you could sue me for trademark infringement. It's to prevent me from ruining your business's reputation by doing shitty work for customers who aren't smart enough to realize that There's an extra A in my business's name and it's not the same company as yours. It doesn't matter if either of us invented anything.

    2. Re:More stupid lawsuits? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Infringing a Trademark - Passing your product off as someone elses, or connected to someone elses

      Infringing Copyright - Copying a complete or partial work without the artists permission

      Infringing Patent - Using a design for an invention without paying the patentor

      Trademarks don't protect inventors they protect company image

      Copyright doesn't protect inventors, it protects artists works ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    3. Re:More stupid lawsuits? by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Copyright doesn't protect inventors, it protects artists works ...

      Absolute RUBBISH! Copyrights protect the greedy multinational megacorps who squeeze "artists" for every breath they take and then rape any end-user who even *thinks* more than two consecutive notes from a tune.,br>,br>Seriously folks, get your facts straight before you post.

      .... and yes, before you all start WHINING, I do understand what copyrights are supposed to be protecting.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    4. Re:More stupid lawsuits? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      "it protects artists works "

      Note not the Artists ... just their works which were signed over to a MegaCorp ....

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  9. Sooo..... by wedsxcrfv · · Score: 1

    When is he going to sue Skynet?

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

      I wish Murdoch sued Skynet. That would hurt him... a lot.

    2. Re:Sooo..... by zero_out · · Score: 1

      Well, if the MAFIAA can sue bootleggers before a concert, and since we know when Skynet will go "live", he could probably sue anytime he wants.

  10. Why? by tycoex · · Score: 0

    Why isn't there a big uproar about all these ridiculous patent/trademark/copyright lawsuits in any form of mainstream media? If my congressmen for the next election ran on the platform of severely limiting software patents I know I would vote for him even if he also ran for eating babies!

  11. Yes but he also owns the merde in Murdoch. by kipling · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes but he also owns the merde in Murdoch.

    --
    -- open source? sounds like the real book --
  12. Yeah, and apple owns the 'i' prefix by zero_out · · Score: 1

    What a joke! That's about as silly as Apple claiming that it owns the 'i' prefix for electronics. That battle was already settled. At least in the U.S., anyway.

  13. No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scope of government itself keeps expanding. Every year there are more laws, more crimes, more spending, and more power concentrated at the top. Since the scope of IP is directly related to and derived from the scope of government, it's no surprise that as long as government keeps getting bigger, so will the scope of their laws.

  14. Hearst re-incarnate ? by Zoxed · · Score: 1

    This story increases my suspicion that Murdoch has a William Randolph Hearst fixation.

  15. I Trademark letter E on the internet $0.01 per use by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    I Trademark letter E on the internet $0.01 per use.

    You bill about $0.50 and site about the same for it's text.

  16. Fox in Firefox by xouumalperxe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What next? Saying he owns the fox in firefox?

    1. Re:Fox in Firefox by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      Shhh! Don't give him ideas!

    2. Re:Fox in Firefox by xouumalperxe · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh don't worry. They'll have to sue these guys out of existence first.

    3. Re:Fox in Firefox by alexo · · Score: 1

      > What next? Saying he owns the fox in firefox?

      Or the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?

    4. Re:Fox in Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that's Red Fox that owned that, but since he is dead, feel free to get your fox on.

  17. Scunthorpe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does he also own a 4 letter word embedded in the English town of Scunthorpe?

  18. someone needs to by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    take that self aggrandizing pompous ass down a notch or two.

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  19. Has anyone checked to see... by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1

    ...if Roopfert has a trademark on eating a bowl of dicks yet? Because I seriously plan on suggesting that he do exactly that.

  20. Rupert Murdoch believes limits are for others by Are+You+Kidding · · Score: 1

    How does this bozo think owning "British Sky Broadcasting" gives him a trademark for sky? If he gets away with this he will next go after British Airways and British Petroleum, followed by British Broadcasting Corporation and American Broadcasting Corporation.

    1. Re:Rupert Murdoch believes limits are for others by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Because he certainly does have a trademark on the word "Sky". BSkyB was formed by the "merger" between British Satellite Broadcasting and Sky Television. Sky is a marketing name they use for a lot of their products. They'd be utterly stupid not to have registered Sky as a trademark in all of the countries where they use it as a marketing brand.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  21. It'll all be gone... by tomdarch · · Score: 1

    Sure, Murdoch owns the "sky" in Skype, but you're not reporting on the fact that Stelios Haji-Ioannou and his "we sue over any use of the word 'easy'" wanna-be Virgin operation have laid claim to the "e" in Skype. That just leaves the "p", which, obviously, already belongs to Sean "P Diddy" Combs. But not to worry, the former Skype will be able to Trademark the null set, which is an extraordinarily powerful identity...

    1. Re:It'll all be gone... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      That just leaves the "p", which, obviously, already belongs to Sean "P Diddy" Combs.

      Ken Dodd had the "Diddy" long before that f***wit did. BTW, the linked mashup is horrible, but anything that makes that tit Combs look stupid (besides himself) is okay by me. :-)

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  22. Re:Hah! SK Hand Tools owns the SK in Sky! by elwinc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, Rupert! The good folks at SK Hand tools http://www.skhandtool.com/ have had a trademark in SK since 1921. I think you owe them 2/5 of all the revenues BSkyB have taken in since 1989.

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  23. Re:I Trademark letter E on the internet $0.01 per by mrsurb · · Score: 3, Funny

    You bill about $0.50 and site about the same for it's text.

    Well I'm trademarking superfluous apostrophes and you owe me big time!

  24. Hoist him by his own petard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So if Murdoch wins this, will he set a precedent that allows KY Jelly to sue him for the KY in SKY?

    After all, it might create confusion in the market, seeing as how they are both in the business of fucking you in the arse.

    1. Re:Hoist him by his own petard by ralfmuschall · · Score: 1

      Then Paul Graham will sue them both for the Y (i.e. S (K (S I I)) (S (S (K S) K) (K (S I I))) ).

    2. Re:Hoist him by his own petard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if Murdoch wins this, will he set a precedent that allows KY Jelly to sue him for the KY in SKY?

      After all, it might create confusion in the market, seeing as how they are both in the business of fucking you in the arse.

      Love the post man -- made me chuckle this morning.

    3. Re:Hoist him by his own petard by boniggy · · Score: 1

      Well them IM going to sue everyone that ever writes anything.. cause ill buy the copywrite on 1's and 0's... and since everything can be converted to binary... YOU ARE ALL SCREWED! muuaaahhhhhahahah

    4. Re:Hoist him by his own petard by NetNed · · Score: 1

      And then Kentucky will sue them all.

    5. Re:Hoist him by his own petard by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      the business of fucking you in the arse.

      Ya know, some people quite happily pay extra for that.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  25. Encouraged by past success by IRGlover · · Score: 1

    His previous victory in proving ownership of the Try in Tripe (with the caveat that only when the word is spoken) has seemingly encouraged this attempt.

  26. Sky channel by sepelester · · Score: 0

    BSkyB is the British Sky Broadcasting, formerly known as the Sky Channel, with the "Sky" part trademarked in television. I'd say he has a point, but noone says "Sky" anymore, especially after they started calling it BSkyB themselves. I dunno, do trademarks change or become invalid after rebrandings?

    1. Re:Sky channel by redmund · · Score: 2, Informative

      but noone says "Sky" anymore, especially after they started calling it BSkyB themselves.

      They refer to themselves as Sky all the time, in their own advertising. Ask anybody in the UK or Ireland who BSkyB is and you'll probably get nothing but a blank stare from 3/4 of them. They're known as Sky to the general public, they're referred to as Sky in rival advertising (e.g. not available on Sky!).

    2. Re:Sky channel by sepelester · · Score: 1

      Ah sorry. They stopped their broadcasts where I live several years ago, I guess I jumped to conclusions as we stopped referring to them as Sky. I guess they really have a valid claim after all.

  27. Re:Hah! SK Hand Tools owns the SK in Sky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sky & Telescope Magazine owned the word Sky in 1941, after assimilating two magazines, The Sky, published by the the Hayden Planetarium and The Telescope, published by Harvard University. Read about it here.

    Seems to me if anyone has a claim on the word, they would be near the head of the line.

  28. Isle of Skye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I hope Sky win, and then the Ilse of Skye can then sue Sky for all its worth (after all, the Isle of Skye was around first!)

    Thats the only reason I got sky, i though I would get a share in the island!

  29. Come on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sue James Cameron about SKYnet. He's gonna show you that there where no special effects in Terminator...

    (Capcha: Revolt?? In a posting about terminators??)

  30. mais oui! by KwKSilver · · Score: 3, Informative

    very good. for non-speakers of French, merde means crap.

    --
    If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
    1. Re:mais oui! by mmkkbb · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, it means "shit". Crottes is closer to "crap".

      --
      -mkb
    2. Re:mais oui! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, crottes is close to "turds".

    3. Re:mais oui! by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Actually, merde means what it means, whether or not the end-listener understands that meaning.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    4. Re:mais oui! by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      The listener certainly affects the meaning. What's bitte mean?

      --
      -mkb
    5. Re:mais oui! by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      As in crottes de merde?

    6. Re:mais oui! by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Oh please.

  31. Detestible Putrid Excrescence by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Has been Murdock's since the dawn of time.

    A man who will be mourned by no one.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      He may have fleas.

    2. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Funny

      They will not have him.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      The good die young.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    4. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by Teun · · Score: 1

      Fleas of a particular hardy breed.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    5. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by lengau · · Score: 1

      Oh god. He and Rush Limbaugh will be around for centuries!

      --
      I really wanted to change my sig to something witty, but all I could come up with is this.
    6. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what did Rush do? Other than say things you do not agree with?

    7. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by zblack_eagle · · Score: 1

      Yes, they are his children

    8. Re:Detestible Putrid Excrescence by Antarius · · Score: 1

      I misread that as:

      "A man who will be mounted by no one."

      And immediately thought "Well, that explains it!"

  32. reply from firefly by Coraon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    you can take the sky from me.

    --
    -Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
  33. My master plan by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    I will create a company called "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwyz0123456789", and will by default own copyrights to ALL english-based written communications!

    1. Re:My master plan by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      Or call it "www" and sue every website owner on Earth.

    2. Re:My master plan by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

      "www" is only good for websites, and even then only part of them. My idea targets anyone who's ever touched a pen.

    3. Re:My master plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copyright has nothing to do with this. We're talking about trademarks.

  34. "sky" an Old Norse word for "cloud" by squash_me_quickly · · Score: 1

    If "anyone" should be sued here it's Murdoch.... who is pretending that he has some sort of "claim" to the word sky.

    One should sue Murdoch on behalf of all descendants of the Norse people... it would make quite a class action lawsuit !!

    1. Re:"sky" an Old Norse word for "cloud" by boxwood · · Score: 3, Funny

      Haha

      I just envisioned an englishman trying to learn norse. He points up and asks the viking "what do you call that?" The viking gives him the norse word for cloud. But of course since its always cloudy and raining in england, the englishman never learns the norse word for sky, only the norse word for cloud.

  35. quickly! by stiller · · Score: 1

    Get me a dictionary and a cheap lawyer, so I can register all natural language words as brands, including their use as a prefix for another word. Can be costly, but I think I win in the end.

  36. Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A powerful, mean and hateful man - who's wealth and power have brought no comfort to his cramped and ugly little self. The paucity of his humanity is demonstrated with every pathetic grab he makes.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Dogtanian · · Score: 0, Troll

      A powerful, mean and hateful man - who's wealth and power have brought no comfort to his cramped and ugly little self.

      Nice as it would be to think that Rupert Murdoch died unfulfilled, his life a sham, I don't get the impression that by his own standards he's worked out nor feels that way. Quite the opposite, I'd say that by his own standards he's probably a massive success and enjoys that.

      From all the evidence I've seen, Murdoch is a man who has virtually no interest in anything beyond advancing his own business interests and power. Everything he has ever done indicates that he has no sense of morality or feels its absence. This is a man who has no principles, who has never stood up for anything except his own interests- and has stood up for *those* ferociously, regardless of their detriment to anything else.

      He has used his media empire to pursue, smear and attack anyone who stands in the way of those business interests, showing no sign of ever having cared about journalistic or political integrity in his life. I don't even believe that Murdoch really cares about the free market per se- he only supports it insofar as it aids his own advancement and will (e.g.) happily do what the Chinese government want if it benefits him.

      All this has made Murdoch a shrewd businessman, but worthless as a human being.

      The paucity of his humanity is demonstrated with every pathetic grab he makes.

      There are very few people I'd wish a slow and painful death from cancer to, but it would be the most appropriate end for one who has pursued his own interests regardless of what or who he destroyed in the process... put simply, the guy himself is a worthless and malign cancer on human society.

      Much as I'd also enjoy watching his business empire crumble while he is still alive, that's not going to happen. However, I wouldn't bet my life on it surviving his death- despite his children having their finger in many pies, some people think that the political tensions and power struggles between them may tear it apart after Murdoch's gone- especially as the co-owners of the parts that the Murdochs don't own outright will only tolerate such nepotism so far if it becomes damaging to *their* interests. We'll see.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    2. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by RenderSeven · · Score: 1

      From a review of CS Lewis:

      Over and over we see illustrations of the claim that no man (or woman) does evil in their own eyes. Like Sauron, depicted by Tolkien as a great single eye, those who commit evil in Narnia have lost any capacity for self-criticism. Sensitive readers will wonder to what extent in their own lives, they, like Edmund, are guilty of blaming others for their own failings. And at the same time, also like Edmund, they may wonder if they are totally blind to this fact. The great desire of Lewis's evil doers is dominance. As the poet W. H. Auden has noted, this kind of evil "is not satisfied if another creature does what it wants; he must be made to do it against his will."

      I'd argue that this applies well to Murdoch, but applies equally if not more so to his detractors. It's become quite fashionable to wail about the failings of the powerful, but the loudest complaints come from those that would impose their own petty little dictatorships on us all. If you're wishing anyone a slow painful death from cancer, I'd say that according to Devin Brown's definition above, you're far more evil than Murdoch

    3. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Jerry · · Score: 1

      You forgot "evil"

      --

      Running with Linux for over 20 years!

    4. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Over and over we see illustrations of the claim that no man (or woman) does evil in their own eyes.

      Well, that (depending on how you intended it) is either wrong or a strawman from the start.

      I sure as hell do *not* think of, nor present myself as a perfect human being.

      I do know that by my own moral standards, I'm a better person than Murdoch. This really isn't saying anything in itself.

      It's become quite fashionable [my emphasis] to wail about the failings of the powerful

      No it hasn't- it's always been that way to varying degrees. (That phrase is a nice way of associating your opponent with modern/woolly-minded-liberalism/bandwagon-jumping thought though, whether done intentionally or otherwise- either way it says as much about the viewpoint, thought processes and prejudices of the person uttering it as their opponent).

      Similarly, because a person is a prominent target does *not* mean that the criticism isn't justified. I'm sure there are other people as amoral and potentially worthless as Murdoch, but they're not prominent, don't have as much potential for damage and life's too short to waste one's breath on nobody tossers.

      the loudest complaints come from those that would impose their own petty little dictatorships on us all

      That's your (questionable) opinion and a tired and cliched ad hominem argument. I'm quite entitled to my opinion on Murdoch, didn't suggest more than that, yet you felt entitled to project your preconceptions about my position onto me. Your problem, not mine.

      If you're wishing anyone a slow painful death from cancer, I'd say that according to Devin Brown's definition above, you're far more evil than Murdoch

      I'm not sure that Devin Brown (whoever he is) is defining anything there. It strikes me that you're imposing your own interpretation onto *his* interpretation of Lewis(!) That makes it little more than your personal opinion (which you're entitled to), despite your attempt to bolster its moral and intellectual authority with a third-hand out-of-context appropriation of someone else's work whose (very indirect) application to your argument is questionable at best.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    5. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      How have you been here, since the 90's (UID 6400) and I haven't seen you before? I remember people with the same name as me!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    6. Re:Rupert Murdoch is the Larry Ellison of Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he likes pina coladas, and getting caught in the rain.

  37. Right, so... by ITBurnout · · Score: 2, Funny

    I own the "ass" in Fox Classics. So there.

  38. Inaccurate headline (as usual) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting that TFA only mentions Rupert Murdoch's name once and that has him as the owner of BSkyB, yet the headline on the original article (mirrored by ./) implies that he is suing Skype when it's actually some relatively unknown subsidiary.

    Well I suppose it attracts more readers than if the headline had said "BSkyB claims to own the 'Sky' in Skype".

  39. where is the $0.07 for the e USE? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    where is the $0.07 for the e USE?

  40. Re:I Trademark letter E on the internet $0.01 per by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can avoid using that symbol without any difficulty. A full book "la disparition" is without an apparition of that symbol.

  41. The world is not enough .. by niks42 · · Score: 1

    Can someone please get a grip of this man and remind him he is just a media mogul from Down Under, and isn't that dang important, or newsworthy. Somehow it smacks of self-perpetuating motion for a media baron to attract so much media attention.

  42. Re:Hah! SK Hand Tools owns the SK in Sky! by Posting=!Working · · Score: 1

    You think that is bad, wait till they have to pay another 2/5 for BS.

    --
    This sentence no verb.
  43. Oblig.... by spazekaat · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia....words own you!

  44. TWINE? Huh? by nikeair514 · · Score: 1

    I thought that was Tomorrow Never Dies? The World Is Not Enough could be semi-linked to the BP spill in the gulf though. All we need to do is call Pierce Brosnan and get a hot Asian chick to take out Murdoch on his stealth boat before he tricks the Chinese and the Brits to attack each other!

  45. Re:Hah! SK Hand Tools owns the SK in Sky! by ndixon · · Score: 2, Funny

    You think that is bad, wait till they have to pay another 2/5 for BS.

    Subscribers have been paying for that for over two decades now.

    --
    Oh, how convenient: a theory about God that doesn't involve looking through a telescope.
  46. Tell that to Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    try calling something leopard or snow leopard or tiger.

    though they got to use Apple even though the Beatles had it first

    1. Re:Tell that to Apple by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      try calling something leopard or snow leopard or tiger.

      You mean, like TigerDirect online store, or Tiger Airways, or Tiger beer, or Tiger car insurance company, or countless other things?

      So long as it's not a piece of software, you should be fine.

  47. Could Skytel have precedence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like they have been around a lot longer time than Skype, and maybe BSkyB (never heard of it before this article unlike Skype and Skytel). They have certainly been involved in communiciations a long time. I had a pager from them almost 20 years ago. And a quick Google search on business names with "sky" in them returns 63,000,000 results ...

    RO

  48. frivolous lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I think their point is to tie up resources, time and money by finding every way to make lawsuits.

  49. You mean in the mainstream media owned by Murdoch by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gosh, I wonder why Fox News owned by Ruport Murdoch isn't tearing Mr Ruport Murdoch a new one over this.

    And if you wonder why the BBC isn't reporting? Same deal. Us knows us.

    Don't expect unbiased reporting on the news, by the news.

    Depening on the mainstream news for news about mainstream news companies is like allowing politicians to vote on their own salaries. Board members to vote on board of director salaries. VVD members (dutch right wing party) to examine VVD members who mismanged a bank and werent overseen by the regulator who is a member of the VVD.

    Politics, maybe if we shot everyone who watches Idols, we would have a bit more scrutiny.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  50. Damn... by boniggy · · Score: 1

    ...and here i am about to register SkyBSky.com and Murlock.com... spose he will claim to own the "Mur" term too. bastard..

  51. Back of the line, Rupe by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Some muscle-bound guy in tights with a big 'S' on his chest has first dibs.

  52. Oh brother ... by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 1

    My 2 Yen.

    Murdoch is a complete whack job and a fruitcake.

    Unfortunately he also has power and influence, without which he would be ignored like the rest of the nut jobs.

  53. If I were a lawyer by Normal+Dan · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would use the candid camera defense. The idea is, this lawsuit is so ridiculous we must be on candid camera. Everyone involved would break out laughing saying "Oh, I get it!" and "OK, where are the cameras?" Then everyone on our side would proceed to believe it was a joke and not take anything Rupert's lawyers say seriously, etc.

    Then again, there's probably a good reason I'm not a lawyer.

    --
    A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
  54. Depends on whether Spyglass or Lionsgate buys it by tepples · · Score: 1

    When is he going to sue Skynet?

    Possibly after the sale of Skynet closes. (The Terminator was a Hemdale film distributed by Orion Pictures, which got bought by MGM Studios. As of a few days ago, Spyglass and Lionsgate are bidding on MGM. I'm rooting for Lionsgate, if only because of MGM's mascot.)

  55. Sky-Pee ? by Funnyfant · · Score: 1

    If he owns "Sky", then what's the correct product name pronounced ?
    Sky-"Pee" ?

    --
    -- You Gotta Do What You Gotta Do
  56. Re:Hah! SK Hand Tools owns the SK in Sky! by DeadDecoy · · Score: 1

    For that matter, Johnson & Johnson have owned the Ky trademark for their Ky-lube product since 1904. Though I think Rupert needs it more for the stick up his ass.

  57. well spent resources by glebovitz · · Score: 1

    I find it ironic that western industry is wasting resources over such useless crap, while China and India investing heavily in technology, manufacturing, and environmental science.

  58. Congradulations Murdoch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are an hero!

    Also: SKYnet.

  59. Misleading title, Rupert is probably not involved. by mcguyver · · Score: 1

    This seems like sensationalists journalism by /. because at no point does it say Rupert Murdoch is involved in this more so than the janitor of the company. I love /. (thanks for the free $40K from the va linux ipo) but appreciate facts over someones opinion. If anything, BSkyB should be kicking itself for picking such a ridiculous name. Seems like the dispute is over the ticker symbol here by a company that Rupert owns...is that really newsworthy front page material?

  60. Hey Rupert, here's some MORE WORDS containing SKY by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1
    • buttinsky
    • pesky
    • risky
    • skyjacking
    • skydive
    --
    Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  61. Murdock owns the ass by ohiovr · · Score: 2, Funny

    in asshole

  62. I was going to say.... by dogzdik · · Score: 0

    Is Rupert going to sue for the word arse - in arsehole?

    --

    .

    Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.

  63. Re:I Trademark letter E on the internet $0.01 per by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahaha. I didn't use this lttr at all in this commnt. Now what ar you gonna do about it? ;-)

    Fun fact: there actually was a French novel written without the use of "E". What's even more weird, it was translated into English without using "E" as well.

  64. I was gonna go with "con" in "conservative"... by Benfea · · Score: 1

    ...but that works too.

  65. What difference would that make? by Benfea · · Score: 1

    It's not as if there aren't millions more just as insane, evil, and stupid as he is.