What is Digg?125 Comments
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -2/+99"to be owned by a podcaster's trade group"
Shouldn't that be the netcaster's trade group? - thelastknowngod, on 10/12/2007, -25/+69this netcast thing is *****. just leave it alone. its only going to divide the market and create more confusion.
- timdietrich, on 10/12/2007, -5/+44touche!
- ShiverMeBoner, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28Why can companies own trademarks for words that are so ubiquitous and generic (apple, pod, windows, etc.)?
A pod holds peas. People eat apples, and they look outside their windows.
I should be able to use these words however the hell I want to without being sued. - MasterRa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Am i the only one who seems to remember netcast meaning a live stream? Or did i make that up?
- ShrimpCrackers, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25$30,000 to trademark Netcast? Geezus, I can do it here in the state of New York for literally $30, I work in a law firm. I hope that also includes marketing and other things because it doesn't cost $30,000 to trademark.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+37I don't like netcast. Neither did the people at the podcast expo...
- xeeton, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21A trademark doesn't even need to be registered to be enforcable by law. All you have to do is start using it. If you can prove you used it before someone else, you own it (but you also have to enforce it to retain it.)
The only reason why Apple is going after the "Pod" name users is to retain their right of the "iPod" trademark. If they don't at least try to enforce it, they automatically lose it. - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18"If they have money to waste on stupid ***** like this.. I am canceling my twit donation.."
You're getting dugg down for that but its a valid point. I'm guessing this money isn't coming from Twit donations but still, I think they could be worrying about something more important right now. - nace33, on 10/12/2007, -20/+35I have been the biggest fan of leo and I have to admit that this crusade of his to rid the world of the term podcast has totally turned me off about him and his podcasts...I am not proud nor do I like that but now I can't listen to him because I am so disgusted with such a rebelious move. The most important thing about podcasting is to get your content out there. Whats next, everybody buy a SanDisk player because Apple is selling too many Ipods. Talk about biting the hand that feeds leo. Apple isn't the crux of this movement but it is doing what it can to help it (FREE PODCASTS ON ITUNES!!!)...Yuck, I just threw up in my mouth.
- tastypastry, on 10/12/2007, -14/+27@SoonerPet
What you said was retarded. - fanboydcs, on 10/12/2007, -11/+24netcast? Come on, stick with the original name, its not like apple made that name, podcasters did...
- TSSaloic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12A Note To All:
1. The reason Apple sued myPodder was because it sounded too much like iPod, Apple has a Trademark for iPod. This is the same with Digg and Linux, all trademarks must be defended from customer confusion, if they don't they lose the Trademark it's simple as that.
2. I agree with some that Leo is taking too much time with the explanation of "Netcast" over "Podcast", and TWiT is suffering slightly (note: episode 70 it was acceptable because it was at Podcast Expo) along with the lack of John C. Dvorak in the last two episodes.
3. Revision3 and the TWiT.tv netcast network are NOT enemies, in episode 70 Leo and Prager made a mention of the pact between Rev3 and TWiT (Rev3 will not do audio except for Diggnation, TWiT will not do video except for MacBreak).
4. TSS rocked early on but when G4 took over it changed from less tech to entertainment until the change to AOTS when it became gaming oriented, until today where it is all enteranment.
End of note. - Jawshy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16They haven't trademarked it. Their loss.
- kallgaier, on 10/12/2007, -11/+21"Netcast" is stupid. Just plain stupid. Sorry Leo. Leave it alone! Next time, try "LeoCast".
---> P O D C A S T F O R E V E R ! - tyns, on 10/12/2007, -24/+33If they have money to waste on stupid ***** like this.. I am canceling my twit donation..
This is just ridiculous. - tobiasluetke, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Good theory but its not true. Umbrella terms are absolutely necessary for adoption because we ( humans ) can't communicate effectively about concepts, we need labels.
If you need a recent tech example take a look at ajax. The technology is from 98-99 but its usage exploded only in 2004 after someone slapped a label on it. Why? Because engineers and programmer teams could actually talk about the abstract technology.
Of course changing a term after its established is usually a bad idea...
I find netcast sounds too much like streaming. Podcast is just what it is. Casting to pods, not to the net. - cyclonus5150, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13PEOPLE - Apple didn't sue anybody - they sent a C&D letter to a company letting them know that they took exception to the name of one of their products because it sounded to my like iPod. They probably never had any intent to actually sue but probably just wanted to show that they're making an effort to protect their mark. Leo is taking a non-issue and making it into something for publicity's sake. It makes no sense whatsoever and the amount of people that actually give a ***** is on a laughable scale. Nobody outside of the teeny little blogosphere even knows who he is or are in the least bit concerned about confusing the term podcast with iPod + iTunes. Apple even noted in the C&D letter, since many of you haven't even taken the time to read through it, that they have no intention of claiming the term "podcast". There's actually quite a few bright ones up in Cupertino that see podcasts for what they are - free content that keeps some people coming back to iTunes. Apple has embraced podcasting more than anyone else in the industry and they've done a great job with podcast support in iTunes + iPod.
- thinkdifferent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Apple isn't fighting against the use of term "podcast" they were fighting against the use of the term "myPodder" which sounds too much like iPod. They also raised a concern about Podcast Ready trademarking "Podcast Ready" as it would limit other companies from promoting their products or podcasts. If anything they were trying to keep "podcast" from being trademarked so that it wouldn't hurt the community.
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Words DO matter because we are a verbal civilization. That is how we communicate symbols and ideas, so a 'buzzword' is useful in that it can transmit a wide range of evolving definitions as the things it is defining changes and matures.
A part of the reason podcasts have gotten popular is because there is a name for everyone to refer to rather than say they listen to or create an audio file which exists in some abstract way on the internet. - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Yeah, those conversations way too self-referential. That kind of talk hasn't come up in nearly 2 years when they were first defining Podcasting.
Netcast sounds like a BS technology from 1998 while Podcast at least refers to a technology we're all using, the MP3 player. - devzer0, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13The buzzword you use does not matter.
The BUZZWORD you use DOES NOT MATTER.
Say it to yourself.
If you want podcasting to become mainstream, or anything close, it's the *shows* that matter. No one wants to hear how cool 'podcasting' or 'netcasting' is. But if there was a show that was cool and exciting, well, that might arouse some interest. - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8He's 49.
- leopardhunter, on 02/18/2009, -8/+14Podcasting has stagnant growth. As discussed on the latest Twit, the early adopters have adopted.
The term "netcasting" might appeal to a broader audience in part because it's obvious what it is. We might be looking back on this moment as a turning point. - JeffS, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11What a waste of money. I'd rather see him fight Apple. Apple doesn't own the word pod. Line 6 does.
- badtz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I respect Leo+friends on all of their podcasts and the quality of the sohws. BUT ... I definitely think this idea of changing the name is utterly nonsensical and a waste of time! Just leavce it, and make your shows better!
- tmcc, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Uh, it costs at LEAST $325 for a federal trademark.
If you hire some ambulance chasers, your bill can EASILY reach $30k. - xeeton, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8The buzzwords do matter. It's one of the main components of making something marketable.
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13"They should change it to Netcast while its still early in the game."
I'm only with them if Apple is with them. If Apple keeps calling it a podcast, there will be a division. Leo took the first step, now Apple (or maybe MS?) needs to take the next one. - yensed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I can't believe he is doing this so quickly. Other then TWiT Network shows, Who has adopted using Netcast? I think its way to early and a waste of money to assume Netcast is going to catch. Leo and Scott should use that money to Fight apple.. Or at least use that money towards their IPTV networks...
P.S. Leo has trademarked TWiT and it didn't cost nearly this much. I'm sure even the Digg trademark didnt cost that much. - tadunne, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Podcasts probably do confuse people because they think they need an ipod to listen to them, but won't netcasts confuse people too? They'll just say: "uh, so I need to be on the internet to listen to it?, I wanna listen to it on my ipod!?"
- Araya213, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13I say we all call it Zunecast, that would really piss off Apple.
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"But the word is confusing. There are a lot of people that think you need a iPod to listen to podcast."
For the people that are confused do you think they will be able to subscribe to a show in the first place? The whole process needs to be easier and built in to wirelessly enabled music devices. - colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8"He is esentially the Godfather of the Podcast right now, and if he wants to rebrand this to keep it OPEN FOR OTHERS TO USE then let him and support his effort whether you intend to use it or not. Else come up with a better name. This is an important issue, and he is fighting Apple in this way."
He's not fighting anybody, because Apple hasn't sued anybody for using the term Podcast. He's kinda like the old man on the street corner talking to the voices in his head loudly about how Apple needs to be stopped, along with the term podcast. - gfailure, on 10/12/2007, -1/+549? My God, it seems like only yesterday he was 48.
- fox, on 04/11/2009, -2/+6is netcast referring to audio and video? or just audio?
I don't really care what name is used, not a big fan of either.
but for video, IPTV sounds good. - bubs, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14I think they need to drop the whole netcasting thing.. I used to enjoy listening to twit and macbreak, but now all Leo talks about is why everyone should use the term netcast and how evil apple is for defending their trademark.
Give it a rest already! - DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Yeah this is getting ridiculous, this myth won't die, despite the C&D letter being published.
Apple is not going to sue anyone for the use of the word podcast to describe a podcast.
Leo and Scott should know this by now, so I don't understand why they're still thinking about trademarking Netcast...
What's even more ridiculous is their idea that they could trademark the name and never sue anyone that would use the term.
You cannot trademark something to make it public domain, as it's going against the spirit of trademark laws which are there to define what names are NOT public domain and in which particular context.
Apple won't have to sue people with the word "podcast" in their podcast name, but they may have to go after a company that has a product/service/site called "Podcaster".
In a similar way, Leo and co. would have to go after a company with something called "Netcaster". If they don't seek to protect the Netcast trademark in that context, that other company may be able to trademark Netcaster and then Netcast as they could show that Leo & Scott didn't try to protect their Netcast TM in the first place...
An equivalent scenario could happen if Apple was to let a company use Podcaster as a brand name.
The trademark laws are screwed up, this is what we should complain about... - straxus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"Podcast is just what it is. Casting to pods, not to the net."
Pardon me for being rude, but what in the hell does that mean? What is a pod? An RSS reader? a portable music device? Is my computer a pod? I can listen to podcasts on my modded XBox, does that make it a pod too?
Seriously, maybe I'm just old and out of touch now (at the rate bloggers make up new term and definitions, I wouldn't be surprised) , but I don't know what the hell the 'pod' in 'podcasting' is referencing other than an iPod. - TheCount, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10"I hate Leo, his head has gotten too big, if it wasn't for all those ipod toting, itunes downloading podcast listeners, he would be totally unknown."
I take it you aren't aware Leo did TV and Radio for years (and still does) before this whole podcasting thing came along. He isn't unknown, and is certainly more recognized than you will ever be. - Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5did anyone read the rest of the article?
the average podcast has only 70 subscribers?
meanwhile, it says local TV news shows are the No. 1 source of news for most Americans... - ttntyler, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Waste of money.
- rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11What else did you think he was doing with your TWiT donations? Next, he'll run for office.
- thinkdifferent, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@theone3
They didn't sue for podcast ready. What they did was say trademarking podcast ready would be a bad thing for the community. They made no claims to ownership of a trademark of podcast. Just as trademarking netcast would be stupid (since only the trademark owner could use it), trademarking podcast or podcast ready would be bad for the same reason. Apple recognized that and suggested to Podcast Ready that they not trademark the term for that reason. - iKato, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Podcasting is confusing because people think they need an iPod to listen to it? Do people think they need to a Xerox copier to make a xerox? That they can't use a Canon copier or Toshiba? It's becoming a genericized trademark, people. There's no need for "netcast".
- acedeuce12, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That would be a New York state trademark. It's only $15 here in Arizona, but it has no effect out of state. A federal trademark is much more expensive. As I recall the filing fees alone are in excess of $750. Actually prosecuting it to issuance can easily cost $30,000 especially if it's challenged.
- PSPon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Microsoft wants Blogcast coined, so there's a three way tug of war... with podcast winning more than you can comprehend with 100% of your brain.
- DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"They'd let others use it."
Apple is letting other use it too, the instances where they'd have to sue are the same that Leo would have to sue for.
If Leo doesn't sue or send C&D letters in those same instances, he'll lose the trademark, possibly to another company over which we'd have even less influence than Apple.
Trademarks are not like Copyrights, you cannot trademark a name and make it public-domain.
fourcorners: Read the C&D letter sent to "Podcast Ready", it specifically states that Apple is after their product "myPodder" and that they are not going after their use of the word podcast... - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2IPTV isn't any good... it refers to a dying technology (television) which doesn't communicate a forward-thinking tech like IPTV is supposed to be.
I think video over the internet needs a name for itself... VODcast sucks, VIDcast sucks... the only decent name I've heard is Video Podcast......... - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5They'd let others use it.
But Apple is too. The whole thing about "Podcast" was a misunderstanding. Apple went after a site for another term, and people though it was over "Podcast". -
Show 51 - 100 of 124 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is