<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sams.com Is NOT Sam&#8217;s Club But.. Ad Is</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 18:20:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard A. Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/#comment-11668</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard A. Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 02:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotweekly.com/?p=3720#comment-11668</guid>
		<description>I would think this would just be them being helpful in trying to make sure people make it to the site they are looking for (if they were looking for Sam&#039;s Club) Although using the &quot;affiliate link&quot; could make it a bit shady.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would think this would just be them being helpful in trying to make sure people make it to the site they are looking for (if they were looking for Sam&#8217;s Club) Although using the &#8220;affiliate link&#8221; could make it a bit shady.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/#comment-10330</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:53:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotweekly.com/?p=3720#comment-10330</guid>
		<description>&quot;there’s a large range of technical books sold under the ‘Sams’ name– I’d argue they have a trademark of their own to claim.

&quot;I wouldn’t argue that they have their own trademark to claim for ’sams’,&quot;

Guys,

No danger of any TM infringement claim from the Sam&#039;s publihing group.

From the About US page on http://www.informit.com/:

InformIT is the online presence of the family of information technology publishers and brands of Pearson, the world&#039;s largest educational publisher. 

InformIT is home to the leading technology publishing imprints Addison-Wesley Professional, Cisco Press, Exam Cram, IBM Press, Prentice Hall Professional, QUE, and Sams.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;there’s a large range of technical books sold under the ‘Sams’ name– I’d argue they have a trademark of their own to claim.</p>
<p>&#8220;I wouldn’t argue that they have their own trademark to claim for ’sams’,&#8221;</p>
<p>Guys,</p>
<p>No danger of any TM infringement claim from the Sam&#8217;s publihing group.</p>
<p>From the About US page on <a href="http://www.informit.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.informit.com/</a>:</p>
<p>InformIT is the online presence of the family of information technology publishers and brands of Pearson, the world&#8217;s largest educational publisher. </p>
<p>InformIT is home to the leading technology publishing imprints Addison-Wesley Professional, Cisco Press, Exam Cram, IBM Press, Prentice Hall Professional, QUE, and Sams.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie Zoch</title>
		<link>http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/#comment-10322</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie Zoch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotweekly.com/?p=3720#comment-10322</guid>
		<description>I wouldn&#039;t argue that they have their own trademark to claim for &#039;sams&#039;, but is it OK to display an ad for a confusingly similar mark off of the forward of the Sams.com domain is the question? I didn&#039;t run across the ad on any other Sams pages, just the sams.com forward page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t argue that they have their own trademark to claim for &#8216;sams&#8217;, but is it OK to display an ad for a confusingly similar mark off of the forward of the Sams.com domain is the question? I didn&#8217;t run across the ad on any other Sams pages, just the sams.com forward page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.dotweekly.com/sams-com-is-not-sams-club-but-ad-is/#comment-10321</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:12:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotweekly.com/?p=3720#comment-10321</guid>
		<description>Err... there&#039;s a large range of technical books sold under the &#039;Sams&#039; name-- I&#039;d argue they have a trademark of their own to claim.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Err&#8230; there&#8217;s a large range of technical books sold under the &#8216;Sams&#8217; name&#8211; I&#8217;d argue they have a trademark of their own to claim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

