Will Apple sue PodTech.net? (My employer)

I think audiocast and videocast are perfect choices. netcast is so 90′s and podcast is misleading. audiocast and videocast are clear concise and easy to switch over to

How about Audcast and Vidcast. The cool thing is that Audcast kind of sounds like Podcast.

I opened this entry with more than 100 comments expecting there would be some substance to it. There is not. If a cease and desist letter exists (notice that the complainer has not posted one) it is directed at people who try to use the term Podcast for commercial purposes. ‘Podcast Ready’ may be a target because it seeks to compete with iTS in a way that might confuse downloaders. It should differentiate itself, making clear that it is an alternative, not iTM’s podcast service. As for the everyday use of the term ‘podcast,’ trademark protection is not about that. The general public is completely free to use the word ‘podcast.’

This thread did give Windows fanboys who hate the fact that Apple owns the digital download and digital players markets a chance to show their asses. Otherwise, it is a waste of time.

apple is becoming microsoft… shudder.

getting up in arms about the term “podcast” seems as well-grounded as getting up in arms about the term “blog.”

youre right!

What gets me is when people make a big fuss that ‘netcast’ and ‘audiocast’ are their views and their ideas. Podcasting is a stupid word and I have stated that on many occasions. It does nothing more than add more baggage to technology and more layers of jargon for people to penetrate / congratulate themselves on.

I can’t fucking believe people are just waking up to this.

Mosely Vs. Secret Catalogue.

This is will help decide all trademark dilution. The case is to solve the conflict on the interpretation of the FTDA- to see if there was economic harm to prove “dilution under the FTDA.” Trademark law is part of a broader law regarding English common law in the Trademark Act of 1946. But prohibitions against “trademark dilution” are not part of common law. The law passed by congress definitely needs to demonstrate “actual dilution” rather than the likelihood of dilution.
The key legal issue in this case regarding the meaning of the FTDA is “mental association” does not reduce the capacity of the famous brand to identify its good, which is what the FTDA requires. The Supreme Court decided regarding this issue that there is not enough evidence to support the judgment on the dilution count. If a consumer can distinguish from one product to the other then there isn’t enough evidence to support dilution on the trademark. Apple is not to smart to take on this supreme court decision.

http://media.libsyn.com/media/podcast411/411_060925.mp3

Rob,

I am disappointed in how much you really missed this story by.

I did some journalism work on this and got to the heart of the story – you can hear it at the link above.

Rob @ podCast411

Apple might as well insist podiatrists rename their profession to footology.

How would apple like it if we all started saying . . .

ZUNECAST.

See how they like their free brand-building going to the competition!

Totally Hapless.

There are several seemingly mutually contradictory strategies to be adopted:
1) Inertia. Example: podcast.
2) Respect Apple’s position and acknowledge their exclusive rights to dictate how the word “pod” may and may not be used. Example: netcast, mediacast.
3) Use the rename as an excuse to bring attention to Apple’s disgraceful conduct. Example: zunecast, stevejobscankissmyhairybuttcast.

We can unify all three strategies by calling it a p*dcast (pronounced “podcast”, and spelled with an asterisk).

Hey Robert, just drop the ‘O’ in the written version and keep the great logo and call it PDTech. Or like m00 says. Everyone who knew it before will still refer to it as podtech. Kind of like short form on a licence plate…

Time to start considering using the term MODCast “Media On Demand” Cast. It seems like a better option than VODCast or AUDcast which the description is to limiting by describing the type of program (video/audio). This is still short, simple, and easy to remember. It should also help clairify that you don’t need an “iPod” in order to download and listen to or view the media, which many consumer still misunderstand.

I agree that it would be pointless to try and change the use of “podcast” now – - it’s in the vernacular and minus perhaps a BIG marketing investment, that seems unlikely to change.

My inner geek is compelled to point out, tho, that the posting of media “casts” (aud/vid/whatever) to the net is NOT what’s new – hell, we’ve been doing that for well over a decade.

It’s the fully personal, customized, seamless, time-shifted aggregation of said media. There’s even already a word for it: broadcatching.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcatching

fwiw.

Or we could go further back revisit ‘Push’ … perhaps calling it ‘Pull technology’ ?

Pullcast… ah… isn’t this thread dead yet?

So RObert, now that the C&D letter was actually posted on this whole mess, are you planning on another post talking about how Apple wasn’t ACTUALLY going after them for “podcast”?

Or are you content to let inaccurate postings rule yet again.

You know how I tell you “You should do better with that fact gathering, you tend to burn yourself when you don’t” and you reply “Screw you, I’m not waiting, i know i’m right this time”, and you rarely are?

Has it ever occured to you that maybe your way kinda sucks here?

John: this is why I have open comments, so the record gets corrected by you. Yes, they are going after people who are using the word “pod.”

The point still stands. Last time I checked “pod” is part of “podtech.” And it also is part of “podcasting.”

The thing which distringuished _casting is the use of a feed, so it’s FEEDCAST!
How do I trademark that?

I still haven’t figured out why they’re called Podcasts anyway. Back in the first bubble they were called “MP3s”.

eeeek. Well I’m torn. I never liked how “podcast” was inadvertently associated with ipods. Anytime I’ve ever said the word “podcast” to someone who does not know what it is immediately assumes that you need an ipod to listen to it. This has never stopped me from using the termmm…it’s way too late. It has seeped into the vernacular and Apple couldn’t pry it out with a crowbar. And even though I never liked “vlog” as a word–your mouth just trips on it– I have to reject “vidcast” because it leaves out the “blog” aspect of what so many people out there are doing. I always went with “videoblog”, which leaves everything else to be described as “video on a website”. Clunky, I know, but that’s what it is. “Vodcast”? Jesus, no, please. What’s a “vod”? It’s still reminiscent of “pod”. Perhaps videoblogs should be called “me-casts”?

The only logical way to distinguish audio podcasts from video podcasts is to call them exactly that for as long as we’re allowed to, which will be forever because I doubt Apple will expend too much time & energy suing little people over “podcast”. Using “pod” within the name of companies and products not sanctioned by Apple is, unfortunately, another story.

All these terms (vidcast, vlog, podcast, webcast, pidcast, poo-cast) are completely random anyhow. We can call these shows-on-the-web anything we please. I think I’ll start calling my video podcast “pancake” because I really like pancakes.

Oh, fine, fine. I won’t. I’ll call it something non-pod-related that somehow describes what it is without giving a hint as to its content:

CompVid.

There.

Robert, if you seriously think that people are naive enough to think that comments get the same ranking as your headlines, then either:

a) People are dumber than even I thought

b) You have an even lower opinion of them than I had thought

c) all of the above.

As well, other than this case, which has as much to do with what mypodder DOES as anything else, I find it astonishing that we’ve not seen a massive flood of C&D letters. maybe a handful. At most.

By your accusation, Apple would be having to flood everyone from you to Birdseye. Yet, that doesn’t seem to be happening.

mypodder, being software that interacts with an iPod is really dancing on the line there, and that then brings all their other products into a big thorny trademark questions.

However, you didn’t bother to get ANY of the facts yourself. You saw a nice juicy headline, and Dvoraked it.

Way to go Snap-On.

I personally like “podcast.” Netcast, mediacast, webast… those just don’t sound as catchy. “Podcast” is like a whole new generation of flavors.

13 comments? Holy s**t.

Anyway. If the name is going to change, they need to drop the *cast* part too. It implies *push* technology, not *pull*.

*Cast* implies that you need to be there at a certain time or you will miss it.

I vote for *audiofeed*, or *issue*, or *web program* or just about anything else that does not contain *POD* or *CAST*!