What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.146 Comments
- thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+219the title is misleading, making it seem like a site owned by microsoft revelas a security hole in firefox.
- Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+73http://www.ie7.com/ is the site mentioned in the article.
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -1/+62http://internetexplorer7.com/ leads to some obscure download site.
http://explorer.com/ is a domain squatter
http://ie7.org/ is a domainsquatter
same for http://microwsoft.com/
they should learn from http://www.gppgle.com/ - itanshi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+66not to encourage myself to be modded, but damn this is old news
- IpHa, on 10/12/2007, -5/+49How could there be lawsuits? As far as I know this is completely legal.
- wisedude, on 10/12/2007, -4/+47This has been submitted ten times..... Also, it wasn't done by mozilla, a fanboy of firefox did this
- attila, on 10/12/2007, -12/+54Haha, that's great! Cue the lawsuits..
- coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+38When I saw "FIrefox Hole" and took it into context I thought that there was a security problem. Also it confused the hell out of me.
Funny story though. - skyhighrockets, on 10/12/2007, -8/+45So basically, Microsoft doesn't own ie7.com, and they want it. Thats about all the article says.
Who really cares? - i440, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38There was never a (legit) http://www.ie6.com/ ...
- borninda818, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36http://www.ie6.com/
http://ie5.com/
http://ie4.com/
http://ie.com/
Microsoft doesn't use any of these. Why should ie7 be different? - JeremyBanks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30IE8.com - IE13.com are all taken, mostly by domain squatters.
I'm taking the hopeful outlook that there won't be an IE13. :P - thatsmyaibo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27I don't know if you all remember this kid by the name Mike Roe Soft. He was a 17 year old who got sued for making that his domain.
http://andrewsinclair.org/archive/microsoft_sues_mike_roe_soft.htm - hobophobe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Unfortunately the article states the domain is registered in the UK, which is outside the jurisdiction of US law.
- anthonyretro, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24I still find it hard to believe that Microsoft can own the rights to the letters i, e, and the number 7.
If this were to go to court, our legal system would closely resemble an episode of Sesame Street. - wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14ABC? CBS? NBC? FOX?
And let's not forget...
3M - eplawless, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14When was Internet Explorer 7 trademarked? Does the Internet Explorer trademark apply for all future products?
Do you think that this will make enough of a difference that Microsoft will see any sizable decrease in profits at all? - deMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Repost. Again.
- mabhatter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10except this site has been around quite a while... looks like it was registered in 1999. so these guys aren't squatting at all. Microsoft only offically named IE7 within the last year... You can't squat on unnamed products.
- PAJK, on 10/12/2007, -10/+20This seriously rocks. What's so great about it is, M$ can't file any kind of lawsuit, because ie7.com is not reaping any profits, and therefore surely cannot be considered cybersquatting.
What bloggers should do is link to ie7.com in their blogrolls, to ensure that it goes up in the search engine results. - attila, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14lpha, there could be lawsuits if Microsoft trademarked "IE7" (and they probably did). Considering 'Internet Explorer 7' is affectionately referred to as IE7, I would surmise that it makes good business sense for them to trademark it. Microsoft is a smart company, despite what some people give them credit for, and I don't think they would let something signifnicant, like trademarking the name of one of their flagship apps to slip their mind.
- duality, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I got a good laugh out of Anthony's comment.
Unfortunately, you may also remember that there is a company in the UK which has the trademark where you put a G in front of the word "mail". I realize that in the U.S., Intel was denied the right to trademark the number 486, and UPS was denied the right to trademark the color brown, but I don't exactly know how things might play out under UK law.
Oh yeah. Apple is trying to trademark the word "pod" right now, with or without the i in front of it. Did I leave any others out? (Darn it, lakawak beat me to that last statement by 3 minutes, and he already has a negative digg to that post.) - wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10But this one made it because GregD submitted it. The friend's feature popularity contest for digging needs to be fixed.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11***** I should go grab ie8.com and squat!
- jjesusfreak01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Well, when you accuse someone of cybersquatting, there are a couple things to think about. Does the person have a legitimate use and claim on the address. If you registered, "Micro-soft.com", and you owned a company that made small plush toys, you might have a good claim on that domain, especially if your company was named Micro-soft (plus, you could theoretically try to TM Micro-soft, then you would definitely be in the clear). If the person has this sort of claim they should be left alone. Then you move on to the real cyber squatters who register domains just to get traffic. Now, you may be saying, "Stick it to MS, they deserve it", but remember, not all domain squatters are little guys sticking up for their favorite browser. Some of them are large corporations that make money by putting useless search info on the site you accidently went to. Now wouldnt you rather a legitimate company (or the one you were trying to get to) owned the domain. It would solve alot of problems. My father worked for a small startup, and when they registered thier domains, they made sure to get just about anything that you could accidently type when trying to get to their site, as to avoid this problem. MS has a more difficult job because there are people actively trying to squat from them, whereas small companies dont have this problem as much. If you want a real world example of why this is a problem, try to remember the early days of Whitehouse.com
- ThePilgrim, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Man, so hard to pick the bury option
It is Lame
It is a Dupe
It is Inaccurate
http://digg.com/search?area=all&age=all&sort=new&search-buried=1&s=ie7.com&submit=Search - renegadeafk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7it says on the site that it's not affiliated with mozilla right on the top...
- brianjameskirk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@ thatsmyaibo: +dugg for the hilarious line in that blog, "Maybe I should register MikeRoeChip.com, which appears to be available right now."
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And you are confused rightly. It wasn't done by Mozilla. It was just done by some random guy.
- attila, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8The point is, there can be reprisal by Microsoft to stop the cybersquatter, which this apparently is, as the domain was registered in 1999. The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act subjects anyone who "registers, traffics in or uses a domain name that is identical to, confusingly similar or dilutive of" an existing trademark to up to US$100,000 in damages.
- dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Nope,
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/
- Ben - Peeps, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I love pledging my allegiance to software too, because that's what it's all about.
- EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+910 times? I don't remember Ferris being....errrr
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+16Wow! A dollar sign! How clever! Did you just come up with that yourself?
- noGoodNamesLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"If this were to go to court, our legal system would closely resemble an episode of Sesame Street."
IE7.com is brought to you by the letters "F" and "U".....
Had to be said, sorry. :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"they should learn from http://www.gppgle.com/"
Indeed, but they didn't get http://www.giigle.com - Philbert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I still don't get why the word "hole" is even in the title. I too thought it had something to do with a security flaw, then read the article and found there was nothing related to holes of any kind.
- todd987, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Brilliant!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -22/+26Awww Microsoft is crying and calling mama lawyer. Stop bullying him Firefox!
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Considering they didn't use the www.ie6.com domain name, I highly doubt that they were planning on getting the ie7 name, and I'm fairly sure that if they wanted to get it, they could very easily.
- Escamillo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So what?
Apple doesn't own www.tiger.com, www.panther.com, www.leopard.com, etc.
Apple doesn't even own www.osx.com.
(But MS does own www.windows.com.)
This is a nonstory, other than that it illustrates the immaturity of a particular Firefox fanboy. lol - mc7winkie, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14marking as dupe.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5CYBERSQUATTED!
- iAlex, on 10/12/2007, -12/+15Firefox is much better!
- zeiben, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, time for Microsoft to adopt some other naming strategy:
IE CS2
IE Core 2 Duo
IE prancing pony
IE X cougar
etc. - Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I think it's a play on foxhole. As in Firefox is entrenched in the foxhole on ie7.com. ***** if I know though. I didn't write the title...
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Really? People like you used to say netscape for life.
- jadeshade, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"the title is misleading, making it seem like a site owned by microsoft revelas a security hole in firefox."
Even worse, it's a PUN! - Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@pilgrim
You submitted this one story since you've been here:
http://digg.com/videos_comedy/The_10_Best_Will_Ferrell_Skits_of_All_Time_2
and yet a quick search reveals this:
http://digg.com/search?area=all&age=all&sort=new&search-buried=1&s=10+best+will+ferrell+skits&submit=Search - dhughes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3 www.vista.com is not used either.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 142 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is