Connie Loizos wrote a piece with the kind of headline just guaranteed to get a link from this blog: Trademark Battle Reaches Height of Ridiculousness:
As TechFlash reports, seven-year-old Jobdango, a Portland-based jobs site, suddenly wants three-year-old search engine startup Zoodango to find a new name after it successfully pressured another startup, Goddango, to drop its dango. (Jobdangoâ€™s CEO filed for a trademark of â€œdangoâ€ in August 2007 and received a notice of allowance from the U.S. Patent and Trademark office last year.) . . .
Indeed, Zoodango has recently begun the process of changing its name to GeoPage â€” though it says itâ€™s because a large media partner didnâ€™t like Zoodango. Meanwhile Goddangoâ€™s CEO says he caved soon after being contacted by Zoodango about his two-year-old outfit because he already had enough to worry about, trying to start a company and all.
Well, his judgment in the don’t-use-early-stage-capital-for-trademark-litigation category is good.
But “GeoPage”? Why on earth would anyone call an Internet business a name so allusive to one of the most ubiquitous emblems of obsolescence, amateurishness and bad business judgment, as that?
Then again, why someone would choose an awful name like Zoodango in the first place is beyond me — no, it certainly doesn’t make me think of a search engine I’ve never heard of (must be a “family” thing?). But it also sounds more like a benefit dance held between the Monkey House and the tiger cage in some too-warm Texas location.
I’ve… I’ve been on the road a lot.