Your site doesn't look anything like the OMG! Yahoo site.

Here are some of the similarities between the two sites:

• You both us the OMG acronym (pretty sure you weren't the originator of that one)
• You both survey the pointless celebrity landscape (again you aren't alone here)
• You both incorporate the color pink (do you hold the rights to the color?)
• You both use text (damn)
• You both use hyperlinks (crap)
• You both use photos and videos (you just can't seem to win here. how can everyone be getting away with stealing your rights to imagery and videos as a concept?)

How unwarranted your whining seems.

The overall design/layout between the two sites is extremely different.

Based on your complaints you should be posturing about sending scary letters to every blog site on the web.

It is pretty funny that you put a screenshot of the Yahoo site on your site which seems to clearly illustrate the opposite of the point you intended to make.

Good luck.

Posted by diabolicalbutter | June 23, 2007 1:44 PM
___________________

um, i'm a little confused what's "infringed" here too... "omg" as an acronym was around long before this site was, so it's not that. pink was a color long before there was the internet. and this bright 80s pink is definitely predates the author's blog. Oh, btw, there have been celebrity news rags long before "omgblog" existed or the people started using the internet instead of BBSes. If you can get off Daddy's computer, go to the market and you'll see a couple. You should probably grow up a bit and just try to compete.

I can't blame you for being jealous, though. I'm sure even yahoo's failed websites draw much larger crowds than this website does or ever has. I only heard of this when some people were making fun of it claiming to be ripped off. Yes, that's right - people are laughing at this hugely exaggerated, intentionally unspecific claim. Their site looks so much more clean and polished and slick than yours. If I scroll to the bottom here, all I see is a pink vertical line for at least a page and a half with nothing on either side. Suck. Dude, you don't have anything here even worth ripping off. This post belongs on The Onion. 100% bullplop.

Looks like someone is just scared that there might be a little more competition. And you should be - you just put yourself on the map as a huge joke (and liar) and gave yahoo as much help as you could.

IP lawyer dude: how do you show actual losses if you don't have the numbers from *before*? "I only get 12 hits per month, and it *must* have been higher than that the month before. I just know it." Smooth.

Posted by dude | June 22, 2007 1:36 AM
___________________

Actually, you don't have to register the trademark to have protection under Lanham. The blogs seem similar enough to cause consumer confusion and operate in similar markets.

Go talk to an IP lawyer. You can probably get a free consultation. Also, start tracking your site stats NOW, so you can show actual damage.

Posted by IPlawrocks | June 19, 2007 10:48 PM
___________________

I've never heard of your site before now. And after reading your post I'm still not sure what you think yahoo did to you. Simmer down, princess.

Posted by corey | June 19, 2007 9:23 PM
___________________

Seriously, Call up a lawyer...they will talk to you for free initially and couldnt be more than a few hundred dollars to tell you what the reality is...Sure, someone says OMG is a common name u cant possibly stake claim to, but if OMG used on a celeb blog news website by you as ur title and then used by them on a celeb blog news website...u might have somethng!!! TALK TO A LAWYER!!!

Posted by JD | June 19, 2007 8:24 PM
___________________

I think you got ripped off - But all the other nasty comments here - I think people come on here just to be mean - It’s their only way to feel superior in their pathetic little world.

Posted by David | June 19, 2007 7:51 PM
___________________

you give yourself way too much credit and you're not even perez hilton

Posted by as if | June 19, 2007 5:19 AM
___________________

Shame on the person* who obviously came and read and maybe reads your blog and still be so negative about it all.

Posted by chris | June 18, 2007 10:19 PM
___________________

Geebus; I can't give you legal advice, but that seriously sucks. Screw Yahoo, I like Google better anyway.

Posted by Michelle | June 18, 2007 6:25 PM
___________________

This just isn't right. Yahoo is clearly stealing your idea and your hard work.

Posted by The Husband | June 18, 2007 4:19 PM
___________________

I'm sorry, but did you trademark "OMG" while the world was asleep? Yahoo made an online tabloid rag and used a ubiquitous acronym for the title. That's not ripping *you* off, it's creating crap with a commonly-used name.

And to assume that your site has become so popular that it would be impossible that the marketing folks who came up with the site name must have visited your site before is, to be blunt, egocentric to the extreme. Take a moment to google "OMG" and see what you find. Maybe Onestop Media Group should break out the lawyers and sue your ass? Please.

Posted by Daniel | June 18, 2007 2:26 PM
___________________

i sent them a nasty-gram. i hope all your other readers do too. this is what i sent:

Dear Yahoo, how come you ripped off Oh My God ! blog's idea, and look and colors. They have been running it since 2003. It is very wrong of you to engage in the direct thievery of the blog's name, punctuation, and color scheme. You have million dollar a year idea wizards....can't they come up with something on their own? Maybe you didn't know....maybe you should ask for your million dollars back!

Shame on you

Tony
San Diego

Posted by tony | June 18, 2007 11:12 AM
___________________

This is shocking, you have been totally ripped off! if i were you, spend a little cash get yourself a good lawyer, and get a huge settlment from yahoo. i wish you best of luck, love this blog, and cant believe yahoos flagrant disregard.

EAT EM UP FRANK!

Posted by zane | June 18, 2007 10:19 AM
___________________