# TiVo sends Cease and Desist to SumgMug over Thumbs...



## burnsy (Dec 12, 2001)

TiVo owns thumbs

http://www.valleywag.com/tech/smugmug/tivo-owns-thumbs-179216.php



> SmugMug CEO Don MacAskill tells me that his photo sharing site got a TiVo nastygram


----------



## McGonigle (Nov 7, 2001)

I hope they don't try to take mine. They're great! They help me pick up stuff and I don't think I would be able to drive without them.


----------



## TiVore (Nov 24, 2004)

Tivo should sue. Just on the basis of the site being so lame.


----------



## hfwarner3 (Feb 12, 2002)

TiVore said:


> Tivo should sue. Just on the basis of the site being so lame.


You are right. Their site sucks. I give it three thumbs do... uh ... umm ... nevermind.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

You mean I can get sued for doing this:

:up: :down:


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

skanter said:


> You mean I can get sued for doing this:
> 
> :up: :down:


Nope, you don't seem to be selling a product that violates any of TiVos patents.


----------



## john-duncan-yoyo (Oct 13, 2004)

rainwater said:


> Nope, you don't seem to be selling a product that violates any of TiVos patents.


Neither does the site in question. FWIW up and down Thumbs go back to at least the roman empire or Siskel and Ebert.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

rainwater said:


> Nope, you don't seem to be selling a product that violates any of TiVos patents.


How does Smugmug -- a photo site -- violate Tivo's patents?

Reminds me of when I opened up The Keyboard Collective in 1972; I immediately got a cease and desist order from The Drummer's Collective!

I had already registered the name, and a letter from my lawyer stating the facts (that "collective" is not a copyrightable term) ended the issue permanently.


----------



## bidger (Mar 30, 2001)

I think TiVo should get back to innovation rather than litigation. Clock is ticking TiVo.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

bidger said:


> I think TiVo should get back to innovation rather than litigation. Clock is ticking TiVo.


Why deal with your problems when you can divert attention to frivilous endeavours?

That can work for years.


----------



## hitbyatrain (Aug 15, 2004)

Well, the thumbs in question are green and red, and *do* look remarkably similar to the ones TiVo uses.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

john-duncan-yoyo said:


> Neither does the site in question.


I think you should look a little closer.


----------



## Fist of Death (Jan 4, 2002)

TiVore said:


> Tivo should sue. Just on the basis of the site being so lame.


What a lame response. :down:

Hey Tivo, the legal sword cuts both ways. Can you say "prior art"?

(here's your linky)
_Jean-Léon Gérôme (French, 1824-1904), Pollice Verso (Thumbs Down), 1872, oil on canvas, 39.5 x 58.625 inches, Phoenix Art Museum_


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

skanter said:


> How does Smugmug -- a photo site -- violate Tivo's patents?
> 
> Reminds me of when I opened up The Keyboard Collective in 1972; I immediately got a cease and desist order from The Drummer's Collective!
> 
> I had already registered the name, and a letter from my lawyer stating the facts (that "collective" is not a copyrightable term) ended the issue permanently.


they don't as long as they do not copy the way TiVo thumbs look on the remote or screen. I have not bothered to look at the site myself.
But this fallsinto the lawyer mess of our country in that TiVo has to have the perception of fighting any copyright/patent infringement or all of their patents get weaker over time.

The TiVo lawyer probably said, we will mostl ikley loose the action and actually it makes no difference if we win or lose but we have to make notice of anything so that our real cases do not get weakened.

so this most likely falls into the same place as when Disney had to send cease and desist orders to day care places that had Disney or Disney like characters used in the place


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

ZeoTiVo said:


> they don't as long as they do not copy the way TiVo thumbs look on the remote or screen. I have not bothered to look at the site myself.
> But this fallsinto the lawyer mess of our country in that TiVo has to have the perception of fighting any copyright/patent infringement or all of their patents get weaker over time.
> 
> The TiVo lawyer probably said, we will mostl ikley loose the action and actually it makes no difference if we win or lose but we have to make notice of anything so that our real cases do not get weakened.


 That's not reflective of anything in the law. NOTHING in Tivo's IP gets weakened by not suing smugmug. Really. It's pretty stupid and makes Tivo look like a bunch of morons.

BTW: smugmug is a great site with excellent customer service. I recall an article about someone taking them up on their "unlimited" storage.

Found articlelink here: http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/index.php?action=expand,9710



ZeoTiVo said:


> so this most likely falls into the same place as when Disney had to send cease and desist orders to day care places that had Disney or Disney like characters used in the place


 Mickey and a thumbs up are way different. This isn't even legally close to the same thing.

This isn't the "mess of our country" or the same as Disney protecting its ACTUAL IP. This is Tivo acting like a moron and they should be CALLED on it rather than defended. There was no need for this.

Whatever money Tivo is WASTING on this is a total shame. And it is wasted. I'd rather see the S3 team get the cash.

_ITV


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

TiVo has had several instances of people (mostly installers and home theater consultants) use the TiVo logo or a crappy look alike of it. Some have been documented in threads in this forum.

If TiVo expects to protect this very very strong trademark in their market, they need to make sure they cover any instance they can be seen as reasonably aware of.

since they have patents on thumbs up and down for DVR and remote control and it is a distinct part of the TiVo brand they defend them, even to the point of peripheral cases they may well loose as being a silly case.

but unfortunately in trademark cases here, a lawyer can cite instances of use and ask TiVo - why did you not send them a cease and desist but did send my client one. TiVo could cite the most reasonable reasons why but the damage is not in the explanation but the fact they had to explain it at all. so, and unfortunately in this country for things like smug mug that very likely had no concept of copying TiVo, TiVo does have to go through the motions so they avoid questions in the next case that might come up


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

ZeoTiVo said:


> TiVo has had several instances of people (mostly installers and home theater consultants) use the TiVo logo or a crappy look alike of it. Some have been documented in threads in this forum.
> 
> If TiVo expects to protect this very very strong trademark in their market, they need to make sure they cover any instance they can be seen as reasonably aware of.
> 
> ...


Nuisance . Whole thing is nuisance - your post and TiVo's attack on smugmug. The sad part of it is that innocent guy will have to spend money to defend himself. I don't care much about E* lawsuit - E* has money to spend, but going after the small guy is disgusting.


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

ZeoTiVo said:


> TiVo has had several instances of people (mostly installers and home theater consultants) use the TiVo logo or a crappy look alike of it. Some have been documented in threads in this forum.
> 
> If TiVo expects to protect this very very strong trademark in their market, they need to make sure they cover any instance they can be seen as reasonably aware of.
> 
> ...


The accuracy of the legal pieces of the above are 100% incorrect. A "very very strong trademark" is hilarious. A trademark is either "legally strong" or not. There are no degrees. I won't even bother with the rest of your post, Zeo.

This actions were wrong. Blame "the system" or Disney or whomever you want to try and justify them but Tivo is plain wrong here. And, if a lawyer for Tivo actually admitted -- I haven't seen it -- that Tivo has no expectation of winning then there will be some hell to pay.

Photorank, btw, can also be found on Flickr beta.

If someone else filed against Tivo with NO hope winning a suit, I'm sure you'd be the first one to rip them a new one. It's interesting that regardless, Tivo always seems to have some justification. In this case, your LEGAL basis for the justification is a total joke. No one would confuse the web with a DVR. It makes no sense. It needs no defense. There is no defense.

If you need to see a red thumbs down, see this post's icon.

_ITV


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

TiVo gets a :down: from me for this type of nonsense.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

None of you know what you are talking about. TiVo is _required_ to take affirmative action to protect its brand and trademarks, or they risk losing them. These things have value, and therefore management must protect them. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible and probably a breach of their fiduciary duty. It is as simple as that. Your personal feelings about the matter are irrelevant. If you want the world to be different, write your Congressman.


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

That makes no sense. I don't see Microsoft suing companies that make windows (for buildings) just because they have a trademark on "Windows."


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Arcady said:


> That makes no sense. I don't see Microsoft suing companies that make windows (for buildings) just because they have a trademark on "Windows."


oh and your windows analog is so on the money.

the fact that Samo, ITV and Arcady are the ones slamming this leaves me 100% certain of my position.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Arcady said:


> That makes no sense. I don't see Microsoft suing companies that make windows (for buildings) just because they have a trademark on "Windows."


No but they did force Lindows to change its name. So I'm not sure what your point is.


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

Lindows is a competing operating system. Thumbs up on a website has nothing to do with thumbs up on a DVR.

Next, Apple Computer will go to Washington and sue people for growing apple orchards. And Apple Records will sue people for taking bites out of apples. Both companies will be sued by Kellogg's over "Apple Jacks."

Someone needs to lock up the lawyers.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Arcady said:


> Lindows is a competing operating system. Thumbs up on a website has nothing to do with thumbs up on a DVR.
> 
> Next, Apple Computer will go to Washington and sue people for growing apple orchards. And Apple Records will sue people for taking bites out of apples. Both companies will be sued by Kellogg's over "Apple Jacks."
> 
> Someone needs to lock up the lawyers.


You do realize TiVo has trademarked Thums Up and Thumbs Down? If they don't fight any trademark violations I believe they lose the right to the trademark.

Plus, there is no information other than a blog about this? I hardly call that reliable.


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

ChuckyBox said:


> None of you know what you are talking about. TiVo is _required_ to take affirmative action to protect its brand and trademarks, or they risk losing them. These things have value, and therefore management must protect them. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible and probably a breach of their fiduciary duty. It is as simple as that. Your personal feelings about the matter are irrelevant. If you want the world to be different, write your Congressman.


 ONLY if there is reasonable consumer confusion.

Show me both thumbs and then show me consumer confusion. :up: :down: 

Tivo doesn't OWN the image of a fist with a thumb up. The romans, siskel, this forum, and millions of other uses. I've seen both thumbs up and don't see the confusion. Do YOU? Does anyone besides Tivo's lawyers looking to boost their department's budget?

Or do you believe Tivo has a case against the "Thumbs Up" diner in Atlanta, GA?

Tivo SHOULD protect its marks and its IP. However, Tivo shouldn't go about with nuisance cases for the hell of it. I'm ALL for legal protection. This is a joke. It's a SCARE tactic and nothing else. Breach of fiduciary duty? You're kidding me, right? I've done this for a living and without consumer confusion, there is NO breach, no nothing but a bunch of lawyers looking to make some hay after the Dish fight.

Let's take a gander what goods and services Tivo's mark actually applies:
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer hardware, computer software enabling personalized, interactive television programming and accompanying manuals sold as a unit; computer peripherals for personalized, interactive television programming; remote controls for televisions and television peripherals for personalized, interactive television programming
IC 038. US 100 101 104. G & S: Subscription television broadcasting services; transmission of cable television and interactive audio and video services, and cable television transmission of personalized and interactive television programming; providing telecommunications services

IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Entertainment services, namely providing personalized and interactive television programming and entertainment information

P.S. Zeo, once again when YOU give legal opinion I laugh. "slamming you" is a joke. I'm disagreeing with your legal opinion which doesn't seem to be based on actual knowledge of the law.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Arcady said:


> Next, Apple Computer will go to Washington and sue people for growing apple orchards. And Apple Records will sue people for taking bites out of apples. Both companies will be sued by Kellogg's over "Apple Jacks."


They came close - Apple sued the Beatles over their record label and won.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

interactiveTV said:


> ONLY if there is reasonable consumer confusion.
> .


so people were reasonably confused between Apple corps of the beatles and Apple iTunes music store ?

the point is, reasonable is for the lawyers to argue and TiVo has to have lawyers argue resonable on even fringe cases to make sure it has shown reasonable action in protecting its trademarks.

get enough lawyers working on something unreasonable and anything might be "reasonable" and that has happend too many times already


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> They came close - Apple sued the Beatles over their record label and won.


No, Apple Corps sued Apple Computer, even though the two companies had come to an arrangement years ago. The judge ruled (correctly) that Apple Computer is not producing music just because they are selling music (on iTunes.) Apple Corps already received millions of dollars from Apple Computer in the original settlement. The lawyers just saw a new opportunity to cash in. Luckily, it did not work this time. Apple Corps is also required to pay all of Apple Computer's legal fees. Too bad the loser doesn't have to do that in the US - we'd see fewer frivolous suits.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Arcady said:


> No, Apple Corps sued Apple Computer,
> 
> Too bad the loser doesn't have to do that in the US - we'd see fewer frivolous suits.


so still we had to figure out reasonable between an old Rock Band and a hip computer company.

but yes, if the party that brought the suit had to pay lawyer's fee for the other side if they lost that would cut down a load of noise out there. I definitely agree with that andit would be a reasonable reason to give when asked why you did not take every and any perceived trademark infringement to court


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

ZeoTiVo said:


> so still we had to figure out reasonable between an old Rock Band and a hip computer company.


 Actually, a court had to figure if Apple had violated a SETTLEMENT with Apple corps.

Please, Zeo, take a LOOK at the images and all other images of thumbs up used on the net then come back and justify Tivo's actions.

Smugmug is a nice company with excellent customer service, not some multi-billion gorilla.

_ITV


----------



## JasonRossSmith (Jul 21, 2005)

:down:  Ptttttbbbbblllllpppptttttt

To all the posturing.

The world is a silly stupid place. Let the lawyers worry about it.

Don't freaking care as long as my box works.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

I wonder if TiVoJerry turned them in...


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

interactiveTV said:


> Actually, a court had to figure if Apple had violated a SETTLEMENT with Apple corps.
> 
> Please, Zeo, take a LOOK at the images and all other images of thumbs up used on the net then come back and justify Tivo's actions.
> 
> ...


yah, I was kinda rolling both the old settlement and the new case into the broad statement of mine.

initially it was just "reasonable confusion" between Apple Corps and Apple Computer that led to the old settlement where they agreed to some restrictions (I have not looked up) and that Apple Computer paid some money, being the second to use the name. That to me is the same kind of silliness here of how consumers might reasonably confuse an online photo service with a DVR maker over something like thumbs.

Still there seems to be some reasonable merit in the Apple vs Apple as a settlement was reached then. Now the new apple case was nitpicking over whetehr the Apple logo was being used for the iTunes store or was the logo being attached to the music itself, which would have violated the restrictions of old. I think the courts ruled sanity that people would know it was Apple computer that had made the technology nad had nothing to do with the music itself directly.

in a good world, nietehr the Apple case nor this thumbs thing would have to happen - but it is a bad world that nurtures many lawyers who have to err on the side of going after anything that impacts a trademark, be they big or small.

my point is this is not about smugmug from a legal perspective. It is about letting marginal cases go by and then having a weak case if some day you need to sue another DVR maker who maybe uses thumbs at an online scheduling web site and not on the remote and claim that using thumbs online has been done by bunches of companies.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

interactiveTV said:


> Or do you believe Tivo has a case against the "Thumbs Up" diner in Atlanta, GA?


For someone who has "done this for a living" you certainly put a lot of emphasis on bizarrely off-target examples and what you or I "believe."

If TiVo sent this site a cease and desist letter, then its lawyers felt that the site's usage of substantially similar logos could dilute the value of TiVo's trademarks. Pure and simple. The suggestion that this is attempt to "make hay" by lawyers run wild is laughable. The business in question could not begin to pay for TiVo's lawyers time.


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

ChuckyBox said:


> For someone who has "done this for a living" you certainly put a lot of emphasis on bizarrely off-target examples and what you or I "believe."
> 
> If TiVo sent this site a cease and desist letter, then its lawyers felt that the site's usage of substantially similar logos could dilute the value of TiVo's trademarks. Pure and simple. The suggestion that this is attempt to "make hay" by lawyers run wild is laughable. The business in question could not begin to pay for TiVo's lawyers time.


 My guess is that it came from in-house. "Make hay" wasn't in reference to making money but creating busy work, setting the 07 fiscal year budget for the in-house team internally for Tivo.

If you REALLY believe a cease and desist letter is sent only when substantial dilution is the belief, you really haven't done this much.

You have ANY idea how much legal work is done for the "wrong" intent? I don't believe for a MINUTE that Tivo's lawyers felt there was any inkling of reasonable consumer confusion. I've asked Zeo to take a look at the two thumbs up in question and give his honest, consumer opinion. Feel free to do the same. Obviously, reasonable people can disagree but let's actually get your opinion.

Something like over 50% of briefs that are prepared are never actually filed. It's busy work. My way out example was just that. What else will they futz with next?

I'm not saying outside counsel sent the letter or did it for the billable hours. Maybe outside counsel sent it but I'd bet it originated in-house and I'd also bet that budgets internally for the next fiscal year are being set very soon. There's no great conspiracy, no black helicopters, just business as usual.

Lawyers don't look at ROI. Legal is a cost center for 99% of companies. That doesn't mean they don't need to justify their head count, budgets, or play in the internal corporate politics that is a constant dance. Make hay isn't about $$$$ in the winning a suit sense. I mentioned DEPARTMENT BUDGET so your laughable comment is nice but a straw man arguement and makes no sense. Your refuting a phantom concept.

Again, I ask, as a reasonable consumer, are YOU confused between the thumbs in question? One on the internet, the other on the TV? One facing one way, the other facing right? I'm curious.

_ITV


----------



## john-duncan-yoyo (Oct 13, 2004)

rainwater said:


> I think you should look a little closer.


Nope still haven't found anything resembling a TiVO on that site besides the thumbs.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Here's a few more sites TiVo can sue: 

http://tvplex.go.com/buenavista/ebertandroeper/today.html
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_clo...s_one_thumbs_up_one_thumbs_down.php?id=662484
http://www.myccr.com/SectionGear/GearReviews.php


----------



## tazzftw (Mar 26, 2005)

Well this lawsuit will fail. I've been to the site before (some amazing photos there), and to say that they're stealing Tivo's thumbs is really stretching it.

Sure, you can rate a photo with a thumbs up or thumbs down, and the up is green and the down is red. But that doesn't seem to violate anything, or at the very least isn't trademarkable.

Is the problem with the colors? How can TiVo say that they own the rights to say that something good is green and something bad is red?

The thumbs are a different design, and you can't trademark that.

As others said, it could simply be TiVo covering all grounds. But they aren't going to win.


----------



## eskovan (Sep 30, 2002)

Years ago (the late 80s  ) Videonics made a consumer edit controller called the Thumbs Up Video Editor.

Here's a picture of one.

Looks like Videonics is no longer a going concern, I wonder if the trademark lapsed...


----------



## itsmeitsmeitsme (Nov 13, 2003)

Tivo has given this site some free advertisement. I'd never heard of this site and probably wouldn't have, had it not been for this. Just my opinion, but I think the case is frivolous.


----------



## Mamoth (Jun 21, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> oh and your windows analog is so on the money.
> 
> the fact that Samo, ITV and Arcady are the ones slamming this leaves me 100% certain of my position.


Bro, I have watched you post over the years and you'd defend TiVo if they were caught funding terrorism.. saying something about how it's their right on how they spend their money. Just the fact that *you * are defending something (especially TiVo) makes me want to jump to the other side. You have to be the biggest TiVo zealot in this community... but then you attack others for their views. Talk about hypocritical.

Maybe take a break from posting... or a permanent leave. Your constant typos and run on sentences are enough to make anyone go out of their minds.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

siskel and ebert's companies actually have a copyright on the thumbs up and down thing. At least thats it says during the credits of the Ebert and Roper show.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Mamoth said:


> Bro, I have watched you post over the years and you'd defend TiVo if they were caught funding terrorism.. saying something about how it's their right on how they spend their money. Just the fact that *you * are defending something (especially TiVo) makes me want to jump to the other side. You have to be the biggest TiVo zealot in this community... but then you attack others for their views. Talk about hypocritical.
> 
> Maybe take a break from posting... or a permanent leave. Your constant typos and run on sentences are enough to make anyone go out of their minds.


and I lump you in with tehm. Have fun ignoring me


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> and I lump you in with tehm. Have fun ignoring me


I won't call you names or accuse you of hypocrisy, but a few extra moments to spell, grammar, and sanity check your posts couldn't hurt. Everyone makes mistakes, but I've always felt quality trumps quantity when it comes to the written word.

Just saying


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

You know, Zeo is not really that strong and absolute a defender of TiVo anymore, which is the best indication that I'm right about how badly they are doing.


----------



## Mamoth (Jun 21, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> and I lump you in with *tehm*. Have fun ignoring me


HAHAHA

Can't even get 2 sentences right. Way to go. Thanks for proving my point.

And you lumping me in with them is indeed a compliment. Especially if you disagree with their point of view. Thanks for the words of encouragement.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

well that was fun.
I spelled them wrong just to see if that would be most of the replies main focus. 
Sad to say it was. 

Do I typo a lot of words? Yes I indeed do, but then I am thinking more about the content then the style. If you want no typos and attention to details of grammar then read my technical designs or other business documents I generate. If you want actual content on TiVo then read my posts, typos and all.

I have never actually been a deliberate defender of TiVo, others labelled me that after my content on TiVo did not agree with their view. I have only ever put down the content I was honestly thinking at the time. Some of it jibed with what TiVo was doing and I would call others on things I thought wrong in their posts and then I was this "defender" of TiVo. I think people who label other posters that way have way more of an agenda than the posters they are trying to label. The group I was lumping people into was the one of lableing other posters rather than trying to have an honest discussion.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> You know, Zeo is not really that strong and absolute a defender of TiVo anymore, which is the best indication that I'm right about how badly they are doing.


maybe more of an indication that over time you are seeing I am honestly discussing TiVo without any agenda.


----------



## Mamoth (Jun 21, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> well that was fun.
> I spelled them wrong just to see if that would be most of the replies main focus.
> Sad to say it was.


Yea.. I'm sure that was your intent. Your track record of this type of activity really supports it. /boggle

And if you notice.. that was only 1/2 the post I made... not the *main* focus.

And I'm sure when you said "Do I typo a lot of words? Yes I indeed do, but then I am thinking more about the content *then* the style" you were actually trying to not have any typos but still didn't manage it.



ZeoTiVo said:


> Do I typo a lot of words? Yes I indeed do, but then I am thinking more about the content then the style. If you want no typos and attention to details of grammar then read my technical designs or other business documents I generate. If you want actual content on TiVo then read my posts, typos and all.


I'm sure you are a model employee and perfect in everything you do.

You giving use "TiVo content" with illegible content... what is the point of even posting if folks can't even make it through your post without having to translate your posts from gibberish to English. What is the point of trying to convey a message when folks can't even read or understand it.



ZeoTiVo said:


> I have never actually been a deliberate defender of TiVo, others labelled me that after my content on TiVo did not agree with their view. I have only ever put down the content I was honestly thinking at the time. Some of it jibed with what TiVo was doing and I would call others on things I thought wrong in their posts and then I was this "defender" of TiVo. I think people who label other posters that way have way more of an agenda than the posters they are trying to label. The group I was lumping people into was the one of lableing other posters rather than trying to have an honest discussion.


I have never told you I disagree with your stance on any issue. Heck, I haven't even said I disagreed with you here. But your defence of everything TiVo does is mind numbing. No matter what TiVo does, you think it's the greatest thing since the invention of the wheel.

Do us all a favor. Just stop posting.



ZeoTiVo said:


> maybe more of an indication that over time you are seeing I am honestly discussing TiVo without any agenda.


I highly doubt this. There just is not that much to "defend" as of late with TiVo... but you manage to find it.. no matter what the topic.

Someone had to say it.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Mamoth said:


> Do us all a favor. Just stop posting.


agenda heard and ignored. Note the lack of typos so you get my meaning.
anyone on a public forum who feels he has to tell others to stop posting is definitely not getting how to use a public forum. Please ignore me.


----------



## Mamoth (Jun 21, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> agenda heard and ignored. Note the lack of typos so you get my meaning.
> anyone on a public forum who feels he has to tell others to stop posting is definitely not getting how to use a public forum. Please ignore me.


Calling it an agenda when I bring out obvious flaws in what and how you (and only you) post makes me have an agenda... suuure. If I was doing it over and over (such as some people do when they defend TiVo over and over and worship the ground they walk on... *cough*) ... those people have agendas.

Your agenda is heard and ignored.

Go on about your business.

Someone had to say it.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

Zeo, might I make an honest suggestion: Try SpellBound for Firefox or the Google Toobar for either IE or Firefox. Both can provide spell checking for web forms.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

gonzotek said:


> Zeo, might I make an honest suggestion: Try SpellBound for Firefox or the Google Toobar for either IE or Firefox. Both can provide spell checking for web forms.


Why go to that trouble? Just use the spell checker built-in to the bulletin board software. (Although, I will admit I don't like the new version of the spell-checker as much as the old one.)


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

drew2k said:


> Why go to that trouble? Just use the spell checker built-in to the bulletin board software. (Although, I will admit I don't like the new version of the spell-checker as much as the old one.)


Because I don't like the forum spell-checker . I don't like how it pops up and (this may be a unique situation with my browser) the content area of the pop up shifts over to the right, outside of the visible area of the window, making it difficult to see/use the 'all' buttons.

Also, either of the add-ons will work on sites that do not offer spell check. And they're generally faster. Spellbound highlights misspells as you type and allows in-line editing and uses a dictionary that resides on the local pc(versus phpspell's remote lookups), while Google will highlight them with one click and then allows for in-line editing(and although it also uses an online resource for lookups, it's Google and that's usually pretty darn fast).

But still, even the forum spell check is better than using nothing at all.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

gonzotek said:


> Zeo, might I make an honest suggestion: Try SpellBound for Firefox or the Google Toobar for either IE or Firefox. Both can provide spell checking for web forms.


I do agree my typos are most likely annoying. In my other replies (not aimed at you at all BTW) I had a different topic  I'll use the Google spell check for the sake of readers.

on an ironic note the Google spellcheck noted your misspelling of _Google Toobar_


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Mamoth said:


> Someone had to say it.


and many can ignore it


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> on an ironic note the Google spellcheck noted your misspelling of _Google Toobar_


Like I said, everyone makes mistakes!


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

gonzotek said:


> Like I said, everyone makes mistakes!


Sorry for the self-quote and apologies in advance to Shanan, but here's further proof of this statement: TiVo News #87

An exercise for the (remaining) readers:
Can you spot any obvious grammar mistake(s) in the following text?


> You get to set your own ratings system, creating a safe universe of kid-friendly programming that reflects your values. All while you still get to enjoy your favorite shows. Because TiVo KidZone always keeps the parent's Now Playing List separate (and safeit's password-protected) from the kids', you'll never be surprised by what you're little ones are watching.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

gonzotek said:


> Sorry for the self-quote and apologies in advance to Shanan, but here's further proof of this statement: TiVo News #87
> 
> An exercise for the (remaining) readers:
> Can you spot any obvious grammar mistake(s) in the following text?


well just to show I can form sentences that are grammatically correct

-- by what you're little ones are watching.

you're = you are whereas your was meant.


----------



## cbordman (May 14, 2001)

Tivo should expect a cease & desist from Ron Popeil for this little excerpt:

Automatic Transfers mean you can now have your favorite shows on your Windows®-based desktop and ready-to-sync to your favorite compatible portable video device by the time you wake up in the morning! Think of it as a Season Pass recording for your portable*Just set it and forget it* (or perhaps "dream about it" is more apt).


----------



## TiVoShanan (Jun 13, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> well just to show I can form sentences that are grammatically correct
> 
> -- by what you're little ones are watching.
> 
> you're = you are whereas your was meant.


oops, yup, that's bad.

Humans can make an error in 87 issues, I guess.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

I thought you were going to be talking about all the sentence fragments.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

TiVoShanan said:


> oops, yup, that's bad.
> 
> Humans can make an error in 87 issues, I guess.


and it is one of those slippery ones that a spell check tool would not catch but a grammar tool might .. or might not depending on the tool.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> I thought you were going to be talking about all the sentence fragments.


----------

