Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Google - Moderated - Information and discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (171)	10/2/2006 12:39:51 AM
From: marc ultra	Respond to of 348

<Judge dismisses suit against Google over trademarked terms in ads> This seems like a really big deal and from googling it I don't think it got all that much play beyond the Mercury News and a few other places. From what I remember of this issue there are really a ton of either accepted or potential key word ads that have been part of this controversy and could be a solid boost to not only GOOG but the others if the law comes down clearly on GOOG's side. Legally, from my modest understanding of trademark law, it seems like a a great issue in terms of there being solid arguments that can be made on both sides so it's great that GOOG is mostly coming up a winner on this. I guess the settlement over GEICO way back despite GOOG winning in the court battle may have been partly the Google guys not wanting to antagonize their idol Warren Buffet. Also of course with BRK they ran into an entity who had the cash to go toe to toe with GOOG in continuing the fight rather than all these complaining small fries. I imagine with these still disparate decisions it could even end up in the Supreme Court sometime. As usual they may have a problem in France or other parts of Europe which is a pain in the ass for everyone whether GOOG, AAPL, MSFT or whoever.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (171)	10/3/2006 2:25:28 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 348

an amazing article, off topic from google, except for the fact that gmail had this in their upper banner where the ads go, and I was interested and read it. I fly a fair amount on business and they probably scanned some travel emails and tagged this as interesting (which it is): Colliding midair with death, and living SÃO JOSÉ DOS CAMPOS, Brazil It had been an uneventful, comfortable flight. With the window shade drawn, I was relaxing in my leather seat aboard a $25 million corporate jet that was flying 37,000 feet, or 11,300 meters, above the vast Amazon rain forest. The seven of us on board the 13-passenger jet were keeping to ourselves. Without warning, I felt a terrific jolt and heard a loud bang, followed by an eerie silence, save for the hum of the engines. And then the three words I will never forget. "We've been hit," said Henry Yandle, a fellow passenger standing in the aisle near the cockpit of the Embraer Legacy 600 jet. "Hit? By what?" I wondered. I lifted the shade. The sky was clear; the sun low in the sky. The rain forest went on forever. But there, at the end of the wing, was a jagged ridge, perhaps a foot high, where the 5-foot-tall winglet was supposed to be. And so began the most harrowing 30 minutes of my life. I would be told time and again in the next few days that nobody ever survives a midair collision. I was lucky to be alive - and only later would I learn that the 155 people aboard a Boeing 737-800 on a domestic flight that seems to have clipped us were not. iht.com