<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Cisco Hate Puppies &#038; Children, too?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html</link>
	<description>News and Photos of Eric, Laura, Jason, Becca, Morgan, Scout and Twitch Nagel.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon,  1 Dec 2008 22:01:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html#comment-107</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html#comment-107</guid>
		<description>Fraser,

Yes... according to a post on Slashdot:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Cisco claims to own the rights to the "iPhone" trademark since they purchased Infogear in 2000. Infogear filed for the rights to the trademark in 1996.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

So maybe Cisco didn't trademark iPhone as an attack on Apple.  But this is NOT good PR for them.

Either way, it looks really, really cool.  Good thing my phone contract ends this year :D

If Cisco succeeds, I guess all those "iphone" domain names are near useless (well, except to Cisco, who will probably sue the owners to hand them over)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fraser,</p>
<p>Yes&#8230; according to a post on Slashdot:</p>
<blockquote><p>Cisco claims to own the rights to the &#8220;iPhone&#8221; trademark since they purchased Infogear in 2000. Infogear filed for the rights to the trademark in 1996.</p></blockquote>
<p>So maybe Cisco didn&#8217;t trademark iPhone as an attack on Apple.  But this is NOT good PR for them.</p>
<p>Either way, it looks really, really cool.  Good thing my phone contract ends this year <img src='http://www.netnagel.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>If Cisco succeeds, I guess all those &#8220;iphone&#8221; domain names are near useless (well, except to Cisco, who will probably sue the owners to hand them over)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fraser Edwards</title>
		<link>http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html#comment-106</link>
		<dc:creator>Fraser Edwards</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:02:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netnagel.com/2007/01/does-cisco-hate-puppies-children-too.html#comment-106</guid>
		<description>I hear what you are saying Eric - but haven't Cisco owned this trademark for years.  Back before there was an ipod etc?

Either way it looks pretty cool! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hear what you are saying Eric - but haven&#8217;t Cisco owned this trademark for years.  Back before there was an ipod etc?</p>
<p>Either way it looks pretty cool! <img src='http://www.netnagel.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
