Oh my!! This is serious!! :-)

A sign of the apocalypse?

That's not cyberbullying. That's legal bullying.

Sounds like one of them is in major PMS mode!

I am appauled and infuriated that this poorly written article was published without serious fact checking first. Way to slander a person.

N. Wedel

appalled  or appauled? or just apaul?LOL...aways happens to me when I point out someone's chice of words or spelling.Look for it...

A "debate" is more than one persons opinions/side of the story. Something's wrong with this picture. It sure looks staged to me. I'm shocked KERO/ABC isn't pulling it.

S. Weber

 That is my trademark infringement on "appalled." I'm cool like that.

Regardless, my opinion on this article still stands: poorly written, biased and complete slander.

I refuse to say PMS other than in written form as I don't want to get slapped. - n.l., ABC23

Followers of one of the blogs,I suspect? Great article Nick and if said blogger wants her "side' of this "story" out..resond to cnannel(see ,always happens) channel 23.After drying your eyes ,of course.

When I started my blog I did a thorough search to make sure I wasn't using a name that someone had already trademarked or was using for that matter. Not only is it just courteous but that's why we have trademark laws. It would be different if it was a different industry such as the popular theatrical show (Momologues). So I have to say she should have done her homework before naming her blog. I really don't see any merit to the article except maybe whining that she has to change the name of her blog.

This is not about one person being a "bully."  This is about federal Trademark law.  I can not believe that ABC KERO would run such a biased story.  The correct way for a "unbiased" news organization to run this story, would be to give both sides a chance to respond.  Ms. Loesch was not only not contacted through proper channels, she was not allowed time to respond to the reporter.  A decent reporter would have recoginized the legal aspect, and then contacted a Trademark lawyer for legal information regarding trademark law, regardless of whether or not Ms. Loesch choose to respond.  Of course, that would prove that Ms. Loesch is in the right, no matter how Ms. Hinson feels.  "Feelings" have no bearing on the law, that's why it's the Law.  To be honest, I've been an avid reader of Ms. Loesch's blog for a year or so.  Although she had expressed frustration over an until now unnamed "someone" infringing on her trademark, she never resorted to name-calling.  To label her a "cyberbully" for exercising her rights under federal law, that smacks of libelous slander.  Way to open yourself and your news organization up to a slander lawsuit Mr. Belardes.

Lawsuits about petty stuff such as this are whats wrong with this country. Just a cheap way to line your pockets and a lawyers too.

Spam Code: HF LAW

This isn't an issue of being bullied. It's a legal issue. I can't start a blog called Pedro Hilton and start talking about celebrity gossip or Sporting Illustrated and talk about sports. Before you start a blog these days you  really need to look into what you are calling it, especially if you want to complain to the media. This isn't a fluff piece of two women bickering over a name. If it draws more attention to Autism than that is great..but just change the name of your blog.

Wow, I'm begining to think that sagefever is either the author of the blog or the author of this article.  Do you have to rag on everyone's comments like a 13 year old girl? 

With that being said, I have been a TV reporter for 13 years.  Reading the article here and the new article posted on Dana's site, I must say that there has been poor reporting done here.  Facts were not gathered and it is becoming increasingly apparent that Ms. Hinson and Mr. Belardes have been friends and fellow bloggers for some time and she is using the media as a sounding board against someone who is very much within their rights.  Its stunning that on this article it says that Ms. Hinson has been blogging with that name since 2004 when on HER site it says 2005.  Its also very petty that she has to use the cyberbulling card.  Its not like Dana posted a rude, mean, condesending comment to her site or anything.  She had been trying to get ahold of Ms. Hinson for some time without any return calls or letters.  What was her next course of action supposed to be?  Let this woman use what is rightfully and legally hers?  I can't believe that there is even an issue here.  If I were Dana, I would never have even taken the high road writing letters and trying to contact Ms. Hinson first.  I would have taken back what was mine and what I paid for.

Here is some REAL information on your "article".  Go argue with Harvard.

http://www.cyber.law.harvar...

I'm not real sure where the issue is here.  A blogger earns a bit of a living with her creative talent and trademarks her site.  She discovers there is another site mimicking her trademarked name.  She requests numerous times to discuss it with the other blog author.  (That sounds fair, doesn't it?  She did want to discuss it one-on-one with her. Who knows what they could have worked out amicably?  But...) The other blog author repeatedly ignores those requests.  She is left with no choice but to have counsel contact the other blogger via certified mail, which has a cost to it.  Not too many lawyers protect trademarks pro bono, so there is a cost.  So, that is cyber-bullying?  What a world we live in.

Imagine what could have happened if the infringing blogger would have simply hit "reply" in those emails?

The other thing I wanted to mention is that the journalistic endeavor to discover the facts in this matter was sorely lacking.  I wonder what the connection might be between the reporter and the infringing blogger.  At first I thought it might simply be a matter of ineptitude on the part of the reporter, but after reading comments at a couple of places and following along with the discussion it makes me wonder.  Was it an issue of an unskilled reporter getting his feet wet or is there more than meets the eye?  Either way, let's hope the station reprimands the reporter for making wild accusations before getting the facts/other side.

Well, I think this is really pathetic. GROW UP women!!  Most blogging seems to turn into whining!

http://www.mamalogues.com/2...