<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Wins American Blinds Legal War of Attrition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html</link>
	<description>Internet Marketing News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:00:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bidding Directory</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31579</link>
		<dc:creator>Bidding Directory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31579</guid>
		<description>Google will rule the word. I cant wait for google phone.:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google will rule the word. I cant wait for google phone.:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ana</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31542</link>
		<dc:creator>Ana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31542</guid>
		<description>We agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion. And, considering our rather shallow pockets and limited legal resources, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.digitalaxle.com/2007/09/continuing-its-.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;we have officially decided not to sue Google&lt;/a&gt;. The incentive is still there, though.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion. And, considering our rather shallow pockets and limited legal resources, <a href="http://blog.digitalaxle.com/2007/09/continuing-its-.html" rel="nofollow">we have officially decided not to sue Google</a>. The incentive is still there, though.  <img src='http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Al Scillitani</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31541</link>
		<dc:creator>Al Scillitani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31541</guid>
		<description>The funny thing about the case was that American Blinds was bidding on their competitors names while the lawsuit was going on. 
Looks like that recently changed and now they are bidding on &quot;blinds&quot; in broad match.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The funny thing about the case was that American Blinds was bidding on their competitors names while the lawsuit was going on.<br />
Looks like that recently changed and now they are bidding on &#8220;blinds&#8221; in broad match.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Howlett</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31537</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Howlett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31537</guid>
		<description>This is amazing.  Unless there was a backoffice deal to pay off American Blind or Google had some dirt on them, this settlement just does not make sense.  Why would American Blind make the concessions they did?  It makes them look like the guilty party and they clearly are not.  Neither should they be punished because the lawsuit was frivilous because it was not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is amazing.  Unless there was a backoffice deal to pay off American Blind or Google had some dirt on them, this settlement just does not make sense.  Why would American Blind make the concessions they did?  It makes them look like the guilty party and they clearly are not.  Neither should they be punished because the lawsuit was frivilous because it was not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Beal</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31531</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Beal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:18:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31531</guid>
		<description>@Steven - supposedly they didn&#039;t make any settlement. I suspect Eric means that Google threw a ton of money at their legal team to make it go away. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Steven &#8211; supposedly they didn&#8217;t make any settlement. I suspect Eric means that Google threw a ton of money at their legal team to make it go away. <img src='http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31527</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:29:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31527</guid>
		<description>Did Google pay American Blind? I thought the article is saying they didn&#039;t have to pay anything. I&#039;m sure they do have a budget to pay to make lawsuits go away. Are we assuming that&#039;s happening behind the scenes in this case?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did Google pay American Blind? I thought the article is saying they didn&#8217;t have to pay anything. I&#8217;m sure they do have a budget to pay to make lawsuits go away. Are we assuming that&#8217;s happening behind the scenes in this case?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Beal</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31525</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Beal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31525</guid>
		<description>@Eric - yep, I&#039;m sure they have a huge budget assigned to defending these claims.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Eric &#8211; yep, I&#8217;m sure they have a huge budget assigned to defending these claims.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Lander</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html/comment-page-1#comment-31523</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Lander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/09/google-wins-american-blinds-legal-war-of-attrition.html#comment-31523</guid>
		<description>I think the key to this is summarized beautifully in your final statement.  Google is no longer search, it is advertising.  As an advertising company, they couldn&#039;t afford to take a hit like this -- and they paid to make it go away.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the key to this is summarized beautifully in your final statement.  Google is no longer search, it is advertising.  As an advertising company, they couldn&#8217;t afford to take a hit like this &#8212; and they paid to make it go away.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

