The legal system may be convoluted as hell, but it still works. Corel will defend itself with the "this isn't exactly a unique idea" argument, and any reasonable judge will dismiss the case before it gets anywhere.
This is why companies have legal departments. Bogus lawsuits are a fact of life.
The sole purpose of government is to defend its holdings (land, population, other assets) from other nations. What it does for freedom and emocracy is irrelevent.
Australia is a republic, not a democracy. Citizens have enough power (so far) to punish their elected officials for this decision. If they don't, it's their own damn fault.
AOL's blocking of a website (no matter how hideous) may be grounds for a lawsuit. People purchase the online service expecting access to the Internet -- namely the Internet in its entirety. Unless AOL explicitly informs customers that they can block sites at their discretion, it boils down to truth in advertising. oh well
...but they still have a valid claim to aolsearch.com beyond a trademark dispute. AOLsearch's motives are questionnable at best. People purchase domains that are common misspellings of other names (i.e. Budweiser vs. Budwieser) knowing darn well what they're doing. African-American OnLine wasn't so naive when they bought aolsearch.com. I can think of variations that better reflect their purpose and can't be confused with AOL.
Let's not forget the free publicity that this has generated for African-American OnLine. Wish I owned aolweb.com right about now...
Slashdot Mirror
The legal system may be convoluted as hell, but it still works. Corel will defend itself with the "this isn't exactly a unique idea" argument, and any reasonable judge will dismiss the case before it gets anywhere.
This is why companies have legal departments. Bogus lawsuits are a fact of life.
The sole purpose of government is to defend its holdings (land, population, other assets) from other nations. What it does for freedom and emocracy is irrelevent.
Australia is a republic, not a democracy. Citizens have enough power (so far) to punish their elected officials for this decision. If they don't, it's their own damn fault.
AOL's blocking of a website (no matter how hideous) may be grounds for a lawsuit. People purchase the online service expecting access to the Internet -- namely the Internet in its entirety. Unless AOL explicitly informs customers that they can block sites at their discretion, it boils down to truth in advertising. oh well
...but they still have a valid claim to aolsearch.com beyond a trademark dispute. AOLsearch's motives are questionnable at best. People purchase domains that are common misspellings of other names (i.e. Budweiser vs. Budwieser) knowing darn well what they're doing. African-American OnLine wasn't so naive when they bought aolsearch.com. I can think of variations that better reflect their purpose and can't be confused with AOL.
Let's not forget the free publicity that this has generated for African-American OnLine. Wish I owned aolweb.com right about now...