Comments on: When Bloggers Attack!

By: My Google Reader Shares - April 24, 2009 | OBannons Leap

My Google Reader Shares - April 24, 2009 | OBannons Leap — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:38:18 +0000

[...] When Bloggers Attack! [...]

By: Search Engine Marketing News - April 20, 2009 | SageRock Digital Marketing Blog

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:30:10 +0000

[...] When Bloggers Attack! Morgan’s lawyer, Joseph Beckman sums it up in a very polite way stating Morgan [...]

By: Terry Howard

Terry Howard — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:49:18 +0000

If Goldman Sach accepted bailout money that would make any tax payor effectively a shareholder in the company. Not that I think that is some legal stance of merit, but interesting to think that who are they complaining about? Their own ownership, that's who. They need to suck it up and deal with their much much much bigger problems. Terry Howard's last blog post..Social Media Marketing: Network Responsibly

By: SOB Business Cafe 04-17-09 - Liz Strauss at Successful Blog - Thinking, writing, business ideas … You’re only a stranger once.

Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:54:31 +0000

[...] When Bloggers Attack! [...]

By: Diana Singleton

Diana Singleton — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:33:57 +0000

I think Morgan has done the right thing. He offers their website on the top of the page and expresses the fact that he isn’t associated with the bank. What more can you ask for? Unless you want to infringe upon our civil liberties and yadda yadda yadda.

By: Alan Bleiweiss

Alan Bleiweiss — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:42:47 +0000

If only factual information is posted to the site, then the only question is whether the domain name itself would need to be changed, rather than the site taken down. as Owl states, I too think it may be a landmark case, though there are so many sites out there of this nature that precedent may have been set – I just can’t recall if that’s the case.

If the courts shift and don’t allow detractor sites to remain online, one of the last and only true “big” defense weapons consumers have that don’t require big bucks would be gone. So I doubt that would occur.

Alan Bleiweiss’s last blog post..Deceptive SEO Tactics – The Case of the $798 SEO Guru

By: Owl

Owl — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:22:37 +0000

I actually cannot see this being much of a big deal. There was a case several years ago between Nissan and a man with the same last name. You can check it out by going to www.nissan.com and you'll see a reference to the case across the top. This stuff has been going on for a long time, Mr. Nissan has every right to the name. The Goldman Sachs issue is a tougher one, he is technically using their name. I sense a landmark case. Owl's last blog post..Putting Some Thunder into Your Message

By: Jessica Gottlieb

Jessica Gottlieb — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:30:21 +0000

I'm taking notes and snickering. The more attention GS pays to it, the more folks will see it. I'm sure glad I'm not in PR. Jessica Gottlieb's last blog post..Birth Rape And Infant Mortality

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:27:17 +0000

The big problem is that Goldman Sachs’ lawyers opened up the reputation can of worms with their cease and desist letter. That basically brought the site to the attention of everyone. Whoever created the site is what I call a “determined detractor” — just look at the other “666″ site’s they’ve created!

You’re right about the legal precedent here. Trademark laws protect the owner from someone using the mark to confuse or pretend to be the company in question–that’s clearly not happening here, so it’s just bullying by Goldman Sachs. And it appears to have backfired, big time!