Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

rudebaguette.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 164 posts

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#61

Post by macspoofing »

gklitt wrote: post #41

I find myself playing devil's advocate against all the hate being slung at SEOMoz in these comments. Coming at this dispute from an impartial viewpoint (never heard of either of these companies before this story), it sounds like it could potentially be a valid case of trademark protection. The two companies sound like they're in a similar industry, and the names are undeniably similar. I'm not that familiar with the…

The reality is that Moz does seem to have a case. Both companies are in the same industry, probably targeting the same clients. At the very least, it is a grey area.

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#62

Post by andrewdumont »

MartinCron wrote: post #31
andrewdumont wrote: post #8

Pulling over my comments on the matter from Inbound.org. Anji mentions a partnership in his post that I wanted to put come context behind. > When Anji reached out to us initially, they were CapSEO. At the time, I had no idea Doz existed, or that CapSEO was rebranding. As Anji and I talked, the discussion was around the functionality of CapSEO, which I saw as complementary. Later the discussion moved to their plans to…

There's obvious confusion and brand dilution of Moz that can come as a result, and it's our duty to protect our trademark I just can't agree with this assertion. There is not a legitimate fear that you're going to lose trademark protection just because someone is using a similar (but obviously different) name. This isn't the same thing as Xerox or Kleenex turning into a general noun, this is just shameful bullying.

It's not a fear, it's a legal obligation. If we don't protect our trademark in instances like this, where we are aware of infringement, we can be legally estopped from protecting our trademark in future cases.

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#63

Post by macspoofing »

dohertyjf wrote: post #28
jennita wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just the name. Doz in and of itself has no meaning similar to Moz. The issue is the combination of name + tool focus.

Jen you might want to disclose that you work for Moz :-) Full disclosure: I'm Jen's friend.

You're a good friend.

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#64

Post by masklinn »

dohertyjf wrote: post #47
programminggeek wrote: post #37

Here's my favorite part, moz was originally probably used because SEO's favorite directory was/is the open directory project or just "dmoz" as it is known to SEO's. And, in the early days, a great SEO strategy was to volunteer to manage/moderate a category, so that it would be easier to get your own or clients' sites approved. I'm not sure if Rand was one of those SEO people playing that game, but it's ironic that "m…

Here's a post that Rand wrote about the origin of Moz in SEOmoz - http://moz.com/blog/what-does-the-moz-in-seomoz-mean EDIT tl;DR based off the [moz] that was so popular years ago that stood for openness and transparency. DMOZ and others are included in this history.

> tl;DR not based off DMOZ

Uh?

> We're building off the history of organizations like DMOZ, Mozilla, Chefmoz, etc

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#65

Post by benatkin »

mindcrime wrote: post #16

Wow, Moz does not come out looking good here. Doz and Moz are not the same word, don't mean the same thing (I'm not even sure either word actually means anything ) and are only similar in the most superficial possible way. Moz should quit fvcking around with lawyers and filings and trademarks and whatever legal bullshit and just focus on innovating and being better at what they do.

That's what they asked doz to do. From the article:

> I understand why you're upset. This is not the kind of thing you want to worry about. You want to be building product and getting customers. Not disagreeing about trademark law. I'm very sorry that we're in this situation.

Isn't it ironic?

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#66

Post by Afforess »

MartinCron wrote: post #50
ValentineC wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, as someone who's only heard about Moz/SEOmoz recently, I did think that they were related to Mozilla in some way. On the other hand, it could be trademark law that's screwed up, because I understand that there may be dilution at stake if they don't defend their trademark.

there may be dilution at stake if they don't defend their trademark I don't buy it. Give me an example of a company that lost trademark protection because they merely allowed another company with a similar name to exist and I'll eat my hat.

It doesn't matter, you have the responsibility to defend your trademark at every opportunity. If in the future, the court looks and sees that you didn't try to defend your trademark, even in grey or obviously incorrect cases, they could decide that it was no longer a trademark. Trademark laws suck.

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#67

Post by rajahafify »

Its funny to see Moz employee defending their company. This is HN. Most people here is highly opinionated and most has made up their mind. Nothing you say can ever justify what your company did.

Just do what Opera did and take back your lawyer letter. Don't make this mess any bigger and you'd do fine. If you want, you can prove that Moz can do SEO better than Doz.

SEO is irrelevant these days though. Product is what matters

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#68

Post by masklinn »

nathas wrote: post #60
pseudonym wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That actually makes me more disinclined to use Moz-- this isn't a snap-retort by an overeager in-house lawyer looking to earn their fee, this is the COO claiming that "Doz" is a trademark violation because it ends on "oz". It's flat-out depressing, and giving overt hints about "Change your name or we'll sue" ahead of time doesn't make this any better.

I just feel that shifts from a "we're going to legally bully you" to "cmon, we let you know". If someone were to get a notice saying, "Hey, we're going to drop a bomb on you in 3 months. You might want to leave." and continues to live there stubbornly, then complains a bomb got dropped on them, whose fault is it? Clearly it doesn't mean you didn't get a bomb dropped on you, but it kind of nullifies your right to comp…

> whose fault is it?

The fault of the guy who dropped the bomb?

> it kind of nullifies your right to complain about it.

No? If you believe the "bomb" is bullshit bullying and there is no cause for you to leave, why would you leave?

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#69

Post by pseudonym »

nathas wrote: post #26
akg_67 wrote: post #13

Very interesting. If Moz and (D)oz are close, how about Moz and Moz(illa)? Lets start out as SEOmoz and when we become big enough, we can change our name to Moz so that Mozilla doesn't come after us when we are small. As SEOMoz has changed the name to Moz, may be Doz want to rename to SEODoz. What a racket!

Mozilla and MOZ provide pretty different products. If your in a different category, it's often not "reasonable". It's the same with Mojang's "Scrolls" vs Bethesda's "Elder Scrolls". It's silly, but because they're both in the video game category, it was a problem. If someone sold a product named "Scrolls" that was a gummy candy that looked like a scroll, it would probably be fine. The law is unfortunate either way.

If you're going to paint with a wide brush, "SEO Software" and "Browser Software" fall under "Software" in the same way that "Sandbox RPG Video Game" and "TCG Video Game" fall in the category of "Video Game". I feel there's not an actual likelihood of confusion in either case, but I would argue that there isn't one between Moz and Doz either.

Re: How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

#70

Post by Bill_Dimm »

MartinCron wrote: post #50
ValentineC wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, as someone who's only heard about Moz/SEOmoz recently, I did think that they were related to Mozilla in some way. On the other hand, it could be trademark law that's screwed up, because I understand that there may be dilution at stake if they don't defend their trademark.

there may be dilution at stake if they don't defend their trademark I don't buy it. Give me an example of a company that lost trademark protection because they merely allowed another company with a similar name to exist and I'll eat my hat.

Here is a list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized...
Post reply on HN