TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

How SEOMoz sent us a takedown notice.

125 点作者 picsoung大约 12 年前

31 条评论

mindcrime大约 12 年前
Wow, Moz does <i>not</i> 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 <i>anything</i>) and are only similar in the most superficial possible way.<p>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.
评论 #5800409 未加载
评论 #5800500 未加载
评论 #5800584 未加载
评论 #5800529 未加载
评论 #5800450 未加载
评论 #5800522 未加载
MartinCron大约 12 年前
There's a particular irony that the Moz folks think that the Doz name is too similar to be allowed, when they're using an abbreviation for Mozilla that has been around for years and years.
评论 #5800551 未加载
评论 #5800340 未加载
评论 #5800509 未加载
akg_67大约 12 年前
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!
评论 #5800407 未加载
评论 #5800317 未加载
评论 #5800332 未加载
评论 #5800307 未加载
nathas大约 12 年前
A very important snippet from the comments from Sarah Bird (COO of Moz)<p>&#62; So, I did what I would want someone to do for me. In January, I called him to give him a personal heads up that we had a problem, that the brand felt too close for us. I told him we had a registered intent-to-use, and that we were planning on launching soon, just like him. I asked him to use a different brand for his future product or that we would have to cancel his mark. He explained to me that his product is different enough from ours that there wouldn’t be confusion. I urged him to talk to his lawyer and get independent advice before he launched his product.
评论 #5800361 未加载
andrewdumont大约 12 年前
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.<p>&#62; 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 rebrand to Doz, with a fuller focus on inbound marketing services (and software). This too is complementary, but not with the brand of Doz, as Sarah alluded 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.<p>I think it's important to have this context. It feel into our lap with no other option than the action we took, we didn't seek this out. We've taken every step to be transparent into why, and hope, still, that we can resolve this in a civilized manner. I've spent the past 8 years of my life doing startups, the last thing we want to do is derail a startup from their mission.
评论 #5800295 未加载
评论 #5800333 未加载
评论 #5800320 未加载
评论 #5800283 未加载
评论 #5800387 未加载
gklitt大约 12 年前
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.<p>I'm not that familiar with the specifics of trademark law, so I don't know what the legally appropriate outcome is. But after seeing some of the comments from SEOMoz employees, I would be interested in reading a full response post explaining their side of the story.
评论 #5800434 未加载
Kiro大约 12 年前
I will cancel our SEOmoz account tomorrow.
评论 #5800729 未加载
评论 #5801828 未加载
programminggeek大约 12 年前
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.<p>I'm not sure if Rand was one of those SEO people playing that game, but it's ironic that "moz" came from an open directory and is now fighting about trademarks.<p>What's next? Patent trolling? ;)
评论 #5800373 未加载
nhebb大约 12 年前
I know that HN has ring detection for up votes, but how about down votes? As of this writing, this post is only 1 hr old and has 98 points (which is higher than many of the posts currently above it) and 105 comments. yet it's dropping fast. It's a bit suspicious.
a5seo大约 12 年前
I don't understand why they didn't just offer him $50K to rebrand. That would be both GENEROUS and EMPATHETIC.<p><a href="http://moz.com/about/tagfee#generous" rel="nofollow">http://moz.com/about/tagfee#generous</a> <a href="http://moz.com/about/tagfee#empathetic" rel="nofollow">http://moz.com/about/tagfee#empathetic</a><p>Maybe it should be TAGFEEH +Hypocritical.
benatkin大约 12 年前
I don't think there's a conflict at all, and I hope the trademark office and/or the courts get it right. If you want to protect against indirect competitors rhyming with you, please pick a name that's longer than one syllable.
评论 #5800538 未加载
coldcode大约 12 年前
Check out all the variations on <a href="http://?oz.com" rel="nofollow">http://?oz.com</a>. Will you sue all of them for confusion? 3 letter word trademark arguments are pretty lame.<p>Actually some of the ?oz.com sites are pretty bizarre.
评论 #5800302 未加载
评论 #5800296 未加载
评论 #5800303 未加载
Timothee大约 12 年前
<i>"Even if it is a meritless suit like this one"</i><p>This statement lacks arguments supporting it.<p>DOZ is "Search and Social Media Marketing done by professionals" according to their website, and Moz is "Software and Community for better Marketing". IANAL but I feel like there could indeed be confusion between the two, especially considering DOZ was Cap<i>SEO</i> before, and Moz, <i>SEO</i>Moz.<p>So now it's a matter of trademarks and specifically timeline on who was first, but the details are not provided in the post.
pron大约 12 年前
They should compromise and get it over with: If SEOmoz think the Doz brand is truly a problem for them, they should pay Doz a fair sum to abandon their trademark.
sergiotapia大约 12 年前
God damn lawyers with their god damn copyright crap. Eh, you get what I mean.<p>I'm disgusted by this behavior. What happened to innovate?
评论 #5800359 未加载
MichelleRobbins大约 12 年前
First use (actual use, not intent to use) in commerce matters. A lot. And it seems like Doz has that. Also, they already own their mark (they did register it, seems there's confusion on that in this thread too). I know a guy that deals in this kind of thing literally every day - and after reviewing the marks and filings at uspto he says it's a pretty long shot that Moz will get the Doz mark removed. (actually he said "no way will Doz lose their mark") So unless those first use facts aren't actual facts....well I reckon we'll all wait and see how this plays out.<p>Someone somewhere in this thread asked for an example of a similar situation. I can personally speak to that. Long ago and far away I worked at a software company and we developed a web based traffic analytics platform - pre webtrends even! Anyhoo we didn't register the mark for it (young!) and we were contacted by someone who was trying to get their mark (same exact product name, similar functionality - a web traffic analytics program) registered. They told us we had to stop using the name, blah blah blah because they owned the trademark. Well, they actually didn't - yet. And we had first use in commerce. So we opposed their application, it was denied, we filed ours (which they of course opposed), but we ultimately owned the mark. Solely because of first use in commerce.<p>I don't know every detail of this unfortunate scenario, but from what I've read here and on the blog post, it's not at all a slam dunk for Moz. And it's unfortunate that they, and the Doz folks are having to spend time, energy and money on this.
scrozier大约 12 年前
I'm all for the little guy, and I know this must suck for CapSEO/Doz. But SEOmoz seems to me to have acted above board here. I think Doz erred, and suggest they rebrand and move on.
评论 #5800426 未加载
rajahafify大约 12 年前
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.<p>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.<p>SEO is irrelevant these days though. Product is what matters
评论 #5800516 未加载
评论 #5805203 未加载
评论 #5800540 未加载
jot大约 12 年前
Disclaimer: I once paid for three months of SEOMoz<p>How different would this thread be if it were Google, Microsoft, Salesforce or some billion dollar company that decided to launch an Internet marketing brand at Doz.com?<p>SEOMoz's openness has helped dozens of startups with posts like this: <a href="http://moz.com/blog/mozs-18-million-venture-financing-our-story-metrics-and-future" rel="nofollow">http://moz.com/blog/mozs-18-million-venture-financing-our-st...</a> You can't get much nicer than that to your competitors short of giving them money. IIRC the deck included there, from over a year ago, hints at future use of the Moz brand too.<p>Just because they're bigger than the company behind Doz.com doesn't mean we have to jump to the conclusion that they are the bad guys here. Their lawyer even went to the unnecessary trouble of offering to help doz.com which might have meant financially given a more dignified response.
carlsednaoui大约 12 年前
Moz employees, it would be useful if you mentioned that you're associated with Moz when commenting on this thread.
Sujan大约 12 年前
Slightly off topic, but does it feel 'fishy' and 'unfair' to anyone else that this was published 2 days after the rebranding was announced?
评论 #5800574 未加载
dohertyjf大约 12 年前
Note: definitely worth reading the comments, especially from Sarah Bird (COO at Moz), and the Inbound thread and comments - <a href="http://www.inbound.org/articles/view/how-seomoz-sent-us-a-takedown-notice" rel="nofollow">http://www.inbound.org/articles/view/how-seomoz-sent-us-a-ta...</a>
评论 #5800157 未加载
MrHater大约 12 年前
My comments from inbound.org (co-founded by Rand Fishkin) keep getting deleted... and I'm following their guidelines, too.<p>So I've been taking screengrabs - here's the latest:<p><a href="http://oi40.tinypic.com/2uyrluu.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://oi40.tinypic.com/2uyrluu.jpg</a><p>TAGFEE? What a sad joke.
mac88大约 12 年前
This story gave me some inspiration for a short parody… The Downfall style <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&#38;v=cqGKDInUh0w" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&#38;v=c...</a>
davemel37大约 12 年前
I wonder if there is precident with Three Letter Trademarks, where almost any variation can sound similar. (perhaps this is an argument for a longer brand name that Three letters.)
chopsueyar大约 12 年前
Remember Facebook having a problem with other *book sites?<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1635489" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1635489</a>
ppradhan大约 12 年前
when google came, i was constantly confusing it with yahoo... because both of the companies have two 'O's in their names.<p>us customers are so dumb.<p>finally, i picked a side and chose to use google. this had nothing to do with the fact that google's product was BETTER. i was simply duped into it. goddammit!
rajahafify大约 12 年前
I hate it when I download chromium on linux and gets a Raiden clone though.
sososocurious大约 12 年前
Hey SeoMoz,<p>Guck Off
just2n大约 12 年前
I have decided to rename my seach engine company from SEARCHMoogel to Moogel (pronounced "moogle") and file a trademark lawsuit against Google for being too similar. I'll let you know how it goes. I think we have a winning argument, here.
jhonovich大约 12 年前
Perhaps NBC can block ABC under the same grounds?