Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   for shame.

   

   Daniel, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 6:22pm

   
   

   For some reason, I never really viewed Amazon as the type to try pulling shenanigans like this. I mean, I could see "Amazong" or "Amason", but "Amazee"? Who would honestly confuse that with Amazon? And even for someone who made the mistake of typing the wrong one, I think they would figure out their faux pas pretty quick.
   
   It's just a shame people waste money on this kind of ridiculousness.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   I was totally confused!!

   

   InanimateOne, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 6:27pm

   
   

   I went to Amazee today and spent 2 1/2 hours trying to find Britney Spears' new album. I'm an idiot. Thanks for setting me straight. Got it, Amazon.com!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Sue the Bastards!

   

   Litigious Goof, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 7:56pm

   
   

   Hopefully they'll go all in and sue Brazil and Rand-McNally next.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Re: I was totally confused!!

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 7:58pm

   
   

   If you were looking for Britney Spears new album, I can see how you would confuse Amazee with Amazon.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 8:55pm

   
   

   I thought amazon was a social activist website.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   Azrael, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 11:54pm

   
   

   Judging by the mental level of their customers , the reason at the base of their compliant is totally justified.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Nozama

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 22nd, 2009 @ 11:57pm

   
   

   Attention all Social Activists:
   nozama.com... still available

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   demonsun, Apr 23rd, 2009 @ 6:34am

   
   

   You all are forgetting one thing, as a trademark holder, they are REQUIRED to defend their copyright. This is the only way they can do it. And as such its up to the courts and USPTO to decide.
   
   And that argument about where the name came from, doesn't matter in trademark law, merely this question. "Are the two names similar enough to cause confusion among the average consumers?" i.e. the idiot on the street test.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 23rd, 2009 @ 6:47am

   
   

   Someone help my memory here. I seem to remember long time ago when Amazon was just starting there was a long pre-existing small brick & mortar bookstore called "Amazon" somewhere in the U.S. If I remember right it was a feminist or lesbian bookstore (isn't it odd to name a feminst bookstore for a word that literally translates to "without breasts"? Anyway...)

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    Re:

    

    Mike (profile), Apr 23rd, 2009 @ 9:28am

    
    

    You all are forgetting one thing, as a trademark holder, they are REQUIRED to defend their copyright. This is the only way they can do it. And as such its up to the courts and USPTO to decide.
    
    Uh, first of all, you seem to confuse copyright and trademark. Second, you are not quite right. You are required to defend your trademark (not copyright), but that means going after those that actually infringe. In cases like this, where it's clearly different, you do not need to do this.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Caitlin, Apr 23rd, 2009 @ 3:11pm

    
    

    *laugh* After the whole Easter fiasco with the de-listing of gay, lesbian, and feminist literature, I thought Amazon was a social activist site, too~

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment