Comments on: Is Mike Arrington and TechCrunch taking legal action against Techcrush?

By: Lutz Winter

Lutz Winter — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 05:52:13 +0000

Hi, this is Lutz from Techcrush. A lot of misleading things were said about Techcrush and TechCrunch since yesterday. Valleywag even suggested there was a Cease-and-Desist. Well, Michael and us solved matters amicably, there was in fact NO C&D-letter and everything is just fine.
I’m going back to regular duty now…

By: Mathew Ingram: mathewingram.com/work

Mathew Ingram: mathewingram.com/work — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:16:59 +0000

Mike should lay off TechCrush — and Dead 2.0…

Update 2:
Apparently Mike and TechCrush have come to an agreement — TechCrush has changed its logo and everyone is as friendly as could be. According to a post at TechCrush:
We had contact with Michael Arrington on a possible trademark infringeme…

By: Deep Jive Interests » TechCrunch Trademark Tiff Ends Amicably (TechCrunch Lawyers Working Furiously To Secure Trademark?)

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:44:03 +0000

[...] TechCrunch Trademark Tiff Ends Amicably (TechCrunch Lawyers Working Furiously To Secure Trademark?) September 22nd, 2006 at 9:50 am by Tony Early this morning (eastern standard time), it seems like the whole trademark thing between TechCrunch and TechCrush has been nothing more than a tempest in a teapot, with the trademark tiff ending in very tempered way. [...]

By: duncan

duncan — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:58:01 +0000

I think my little quickly whipped up in photoshop graphic demonstrates the problem very, very well

By: Martin Wells

Martin Wells — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:26:07 +0000

I assume legal action is over the similarities in the name, which is perfectly reasonable. Not sure I see the problem.

By: Clique Communications: Online Community Marketing through Corporate Weblogs, Podcasts, and Internet Communities » Blog Archive » Is TechCrunch Trademarked

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:04:03 +0000

[...] Duncan Reilly has pointed out that TechCrush, who only recently launched, is putting a hold on things while they sort out some legalities. It would appear from this conversation at Deep Jive Interests, that Michael Arrington’s TechCrunch is the culprit. [...]

By: duncan

duncan — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 05:55:24 +0000

Thanks Tony, post updated.

By: Martin

Martin — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 05:08:32 +0000

Sheesh … TechCrunch and Arrington are getting a bit high and mighty.

Looking over at Deep Jive Interests …

“seems like TechCrush will follow each of TechCrunch?É¬¢?¢‚Äö¬¨?¢‚Äû¬¢s profiled web2.0 companies 6 months after the profile ?É¬¢?¢‚Äö¬¨?¢‚Ç¨?ì sort of follow up on that initial write up, and see how they?É¬¢?¢‚Äö¬¨?¢‚Äû¬¢re doing.”

What’s wrong with a bit of media watching, unless you’re watching Arrington and TC. Seems Arrington and thin-skinned go hand-in-hand.

I think TC has become to big for it’s own good – why is most of the focus usually on Arrington when it should be on what’s being covered?

I think we need some new blood covering web 2.0 – more the merrier, means less reliance on TC … means Arrington can deflate his ego and be just one of the pack reporting on Web 2.0.

By: Tony

Tony — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:45:06 +0000

Yeah, I can confirm it does have to do with TechCrunch, as I’ve been in contact with those dudes over at TechCrush.

We’ll see if they evolve into a different outfit (with name to match) over the next few days.

http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2006/09/18/
techcrunch-meets-its-fuckedcompanycom-maybe/#more-286
** Check out the comments section.

Cheers
t @ dji