Making another comment is not how you stop it. You just cease the back and forth and it dies out. You aren’t required to read the replies on week old posts. Only on MikeSouth.com by commenter jilted lololololol

You right pieces that could certainly be considered nitpicking. You responded to the critique and then changed your reasoning several times.

Can we please drop this. The one last place where there is any kind of real discussion about this industry and this is what it is reduced too, AGAIN. lol ONLY IN PORN

After “Jesse Jane” can’t get that exact name, why do you assume that “Jesse” isn’t her next choice? Why would she rather have “Jessie Jane” than “Jesse”? The spelling might be more important to her than the having the full name being homophonically the same. She’s well enough established that “Jesse” in porn would be presumed to be her. So you seem to be leaping again and saying because you think “Jessie Jane” or “Jessi Jane” would be her next choice then it must be true. That logic again leads back to how far Digital’s reach goes from just owning the one name? “Jess Jane”? That idea kinda has to be defined for this point of ‘tangential/homophonic ownership’ to make sense.

I honestly don’t have a good answer. The parameters of our debate seem pretty clear, Mike said Digital owned “Jessie Jane”. No one can find evidence of that and I want to know if Digital owns that just by virtue of “Jesse Jane”, how far does that extend. It seemed like what we were arguing about was pretty clear, so I don’t know what you are asking. This is a back and forth conversation you keep engaging in, so to act stumped as to what I’m doing engaging in it seems pretty silly. To be more concise I’m not trying to prove anything I guess, engaging in a debate as are you.

Wrong a number of times

@lurking: I am just stating a FACT that Jesse Jane is a trademark of digital playground not Jessie Jane as mike stated in his post. it’s right here in black and white..
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4802:qu5pz6.21.2

everything you have stated so far is just YOUR OPINION. you have not provided any PROOF of anything you are saying to be TRUE. now, You could be right ..you could be wrong.. IDK… but, until you provide PROOF of what you are so sure you are right about… than I am going to stick with my fact and anonymous opinion…

By the way, you are nothing more than an anonymous commenter who says is not associated with this industry in any way, yet you continue to act like an expert on it.

you just love to throw your so called “qualifications” and “know it all attitude”. in peoples faces desperately looking for praise and to be told how much smarter you are than the rest of us.. well I got news for ya… I don’t know you from adam and you are no more qualified than I or anyone else on here in your opinions… your “qualifications” mean zip..

I have also proved a few times that you have been wrong a number on some things you have stated to be facts. pretty sure Michael Fattorosi could back me up on that one… 😉

so again, until you can provide PROOF, instead of all words and OPINION on what you are so sure you are right about.. than I am going to stick with my fact and anonymous opinion on this one. I hope that’s ok with you not that I care what you think…

ps.. most people in this industry aren’t the brightest so what you stated about why this and why that in your comment means nothing… provide the PROOF.

@Commonsense

Please explain why if Erik is ‘right’ why Jesse dropped the Jane.

Why Jules Jordan who didn’t fall off the pumpkin truck yesterday and her other advisors in a place to know much better than two anonymous commenters who haven’t stated a single qualification aren’t insisting she add an ‘I” and keep the jane?

@erik2690

if you seriously want to know GO ASK AN ATTORNEY.

Now I seriously want to know …WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE?