Going to court the day before Tiger hit the market was rather bad timing for TD. They have know for a long time that 10.4 was going to be called Tiger and could have taken action over a year ago. Makes them look like they simply wanted the PR value.

As for their position on Google, I have a feeling that they are paying Google for a high position and they are generally in the top 2 or 3 - which is nothing to moan about. Any hot news story related to a TIger can bump them off - including their lawsuit.

I'm not a Mac Zombie and I have bought from TD in the past. In all fairness I think the average non-computer loyalist will think TD is acting rather stupid.

How about a little editing before you post?

"and threats of loss business"


"Tiger Direct customers, no the other hand"

So the company name is called Tiger Direct. I wonder if Tiger Balm should sue Tiger Direct on the same note? I agree with the writer about the difference of a computer reseller/retailer and an OS. I think Tiger Direct might actually get some more attention because of this law suit than any marketing efforts they ever contributed. Call the toll free number 888-666-7900 every now and then and listen to the angry voice. Hopefully by paying the phone bill, Mr. Carl Fiorentino will realize how much more he has to pay to learn his lesson.

As you allude to in this story, Mac zealots are a pain in the backside - by design. I know, I am one. My rationalization for my sometimes bending over backwards to defend Apple (and BTW, I was doing it long before Mr. Jobs' return) is that they always seem to be under attack by complete idiots.

The Tiger suit is patently absurd. No court will side with Tiger Direct, regardless of when the challenge was initiated. I don't believe their timing was suspicious; I'm sure they were waiting for the reality of a shipping product to bolster their case. But no court will buy the argument that there is a confusion between a reseller of goods and a computer operating system. Tiger Direct is wasting everyone's time. If they're pissed-off about losing the top "Tiger" spot on Google, well, cry me a river. My sympathy is reserved for those are a little more deserving. This is in contrast to the Rendezvous case, where the litigants actually had a case, and Apple was wise to settle.

Couldn't get past three paragraphs... I LOVE TMO but this guy has to go.

Jobs would sue if someone used the word "Apple" in the title of a software. Eye for an eye

Don't read it. If you are going to criticize his writing at least back it up with some reasons. Obviously, you are no literary genius, so layoff.

As for myself, I enjoy Vern's articles and think he conveys his thoughts well.

Tiger Direct just wants to ride Apple's coattails for a while and only a fool would confuse OS X Tiger, and Tiger Direct.

When I think of Tiger, I think of Tiger Woods. Tiger Woods probably has more name recognition and value associated with his name than Tiger Direct and OSX combined.

As in windows, tiger is a basic term and therefore cannot be held as a specific patent. If, for some rediculous reason, you could hold the patent on tiger that patent should go to the first use of Tiger in the patent system, maybe the Detroit Tigers? Or maybe it should go to Italy since the word tiger is orginally Latin.

Furthermore, suing because of a loss in a Google ranking is groundless and dangerous, would Tiger Direct be so ready to sue 5Tigers.com (#1 in the Google rank) or tigerhaven.com (#5).

"I'm not so sure that Tiger Direct is merely the opportunist many might think it to be."

No. They are. Their claim is frivolous in every way, and if this successfully gets to court, Tiger Direct will be laughed right out of it. If they were sincere, then they'd be suing every company that uses the word 'tiger', not just Apple right before the release of OS X Tiger. And even then, they'd still have a frivolous claim.

Oh, and this isn't about whether or not a person uses a Mac. Not even Reality Check or the other Windows zealots were crazy enough to say Tiger Direct had a legitimate claim.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Couldn't get past three paragraphs... I LOVE TMO but this guy has to go.

Gee guest, for someone who loves TMO so much, you can't even be bothered to register.

I like Vern's stories. They always a breath of fresh air that make me stop and think, which is good especially in the last few days of the shotgun blast at TMO of pro vs. con Apple/Mac/Jobs/iPod bickering that has been going on.

Keep up the good work, Vern. And Guest, if you want us to take your gripes seriously, take away the cloak of anonymity.

As I only use Google, I was curious to see the results of searching for "tiger" in Yahoo! and MSN Search - why someone would use either of these search engines is beside the point. Sure enough, OS X Tiger was the first result for both Yahoo! and MSN. In addition, TigerDirect is the 5th result on Yahoo! However, what really makes this case interesting is TigerDirect's placement on the MSN search engine. When I searched for "tiger," TigerDirect's website was the 176th result - on the 18th page of results. If we discount the eight references to Apple, this still leaves TigerDirect as the 168th result for a "tiger" search under MSN. On that search, TigerDirect is placed after such esteemed sites as "Tiger Claw Hidden Desk Fasteners," "The Blind Tiger Brewery," "TigerBill's DrumBeat," the band "Baby Tiger," and the blog "blondetiger.net." Obviously, TigerDirect has not devoted a great deal of effort to placing itself high on the MSN search (and who would, for that matter?), so I don't see why it has the right to claim that Apple displaced it on that search engine. If someone randomly decided to type in "tiger" while looking for computer products, it's doubtful that such a person would keep browsing until the 17th or 18th page of results. If, on the other hand, someone remembered some advertisement about "tiger" related to computers, it is much more likely that they would enter a string along the lines of "tiger computers," "computers tiger," etc. (without the quotation marks). If they search using that method, they will find TigerDirect's website as the first result - sounds like TigerDirect doesn't have the case, there. I'm not saying that TigerDirect doesn't have a case (I personally don't believe they do have a case, but I'm just looking at the facts here). Rather, I'm saying that distorting the truth doesn't put TigerDirect in a good light - complaining about search engines is obviously a gray area, especially when TigerDirect does not reveal the whole truth.

Google's PageRank grades sites based on the number of links to them.

TigerDirect has an affiliate programme, paying sites a commission on purchases made through links to their sites. Unsurprisingly, this creates enormous numbers of links from credible sites, thus boosting Tiger's PageRank.

Because of this, TigerDirect still has a higher pagerank than Apple's Tiger page. Since people searching for Tiger are more likely to want Apple's than TigerDirect, you could reasonably say that this is not "correct" behaviour since people searching for Tiger Direct would probably type both words in.

Tiger is suing because they expect their PageRank to go down as more people link to Apple's Tiger site. This is probably true. However, at the time of the lawsuit, their site is actually higher in PageRank than Apple's, and so this is going to be difficult if not impossible to sell to a judge, even if we ignore the fact that Tiger is a generic word and trademark rights to it are weak as a result.

Tiger Direct should have initiated this lawsuit much earlier if they expected to win. However, it's timed perfectly if they want publicity from it, and that's what they're getting. I somehow doubt there are many TigerDirect customers who are concerned about "The Tiger Family of Marks", as TigerDirect's press guy puts it. But publicity they have, and often it does increase business.

I think they were probably right to sue for publicity's sake, but their lawsuit won't get anywhere thanks to the impossibility of protecting such a generic word outside of a tiny niche.

D

Seems to me the quote is from the son, but the listed birth year is the father's …

Vern is the biggest reason I keep coming back to TMO. His writing is creative and thoughtful.

I love ya Vern! Keep up the great work!!!

and that's only that - the way it works. If Tiger Direct feels it has a valid claim, let them make their case in court. But at least understand that even with little hope of any gain, they have a need to protect their trademark and name, otherwise dilution would make later claims far less likely to succeed, even if it was to be more appropriate.

Apple has done the exact same thing in the past - remember that free greeting cards site that was slammed with a C&D letter from Apple Legal?

So - even if Tiger Direct knows it will lose; even if Tiger Direct would rather not jump through this hoop - they must. If you are unhappy with it, speak to your senators and congressman.

Quote

hardfaught wrote:
If you are going to criticize his writing at least back it up with some reasons.

Well, there was that one time he wrote a poker game analogy, in which the two people playing 5-card stud drew cards. And one had six cards. Sorry, Vern.

After all, in 18 months, Apple will be coming out with yet another cat-named OS, and yet TD will still be named Tiger direct. Most likely, 18 months beyond that, there will be yet another iteration, or perhaps the "big cat" theme will go away entirely with OS XI. I think they should let it drop and suck it up for a a couple years, and it will fade the same way Puma and Cheetah did, and the same as Jaguar is rapidly fading away even now.