Posts Tagged ‘cybersquatting’

Cybersquatting Victory: Chris Bosh Wins Some 600 Cybersquatted Domain Names and Turns Them Over to the NBPA

Friday, September 10th, 2010

The Miami Heat’s Chris Bosh hired an intellectual property attorney team to wrest control of domain names containing his name and other professional basketball players’ names away from a serial cybersquatter.

cybersquatting caseThen, in a decidedly unselfish move, Bosh donated the domains containing fellow professional basketball players’ names to the National Basketball Players Association for safekeeping and with instructions to give control of the domains to the rightful owners (those players whose names had been cybersquatted).

Bosh’s legal team was able to acquire approximately 600 domain names that had previously been unlawfully cybersquatted by a dishonest entrepreneur who was using the domains to generate revenue.

For more resources on cybersquatting look here:
• Domain Dispute Cybersquatting Lawsuits

Continue reading Cybersquatting Victory: Chris Bosh Wins Some 600 Cybersquatted Domain Names and Turns Them Over to the NBPA »

Cybersquatting Over Trademark Rights in Domain Names: Adultcon Says Exxotica’s Trademark is Generic

Friday, August 20th, 2010

In an article posted on Thursday on Xbix, the dispute between two adult fan-show giants, Exxxotica and Adultcon was highlighted. The adult entertainment companies are gearing up to square off against each other in court in a dispute over ownership and use of 19 allegedly infringing domain names.

domain name dispute cybersquatting lawsuitThe cybersquatting lawsuit was filed this earlier this summer in June by Exxxotica. Exxxotica is seeking the maximum statutory damage award ($100,000 for each cybersquatted domain name) under the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA).

The dispute between the adult fan-show companies has at its epicenter the Los Angeles Convention Center, where Adultcon has been holding shows for years. However, this year Exxxotica decided to expand its fan base (which normally is covered by Exxxotica shows in Miami and New Jersey) into the L.A. market by scheduling a show at the same venue Adultcon has been regularly hosting adult show events.

Continue reading Cybersquatting Over Trademark Rights in Domain Names: Adultcon Says Exxotica’s Trademark is Generic »

Analysis of Personal Jurisdiction in a Claim for Cybersquatting Under the ACPA and the Lanham Act

Monday, August 2nd, 2010

The Digby Adler Group LLC v. Image Rent a Car, Inc. decision rendered on July 20, 2010, presented a great opportunity to examine personal jurisdiction analysis in relation to a cybersquatting claim.

cybersquatting law trademark infringementThe case is Digby Adler Group LLC v. Image Rent a Car, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76309, 1-2 (N.D. Cal. July 20, 2010). Plaintiff Digby Adler Group LLC (Adler) originally filed suit in federal district court in the Northern District of California against Defendants Image Rent A Car, Inc. (Image) and Van Rental Co., Inc. (Van Rental), alleging cybersquatting, unfair competition, and false advertising under the Lahnam Act, as well as common law trademark infringement and violation of Section 17200 of California’s Business and Professions Code.

The instant decision was for a Motion to Dismiss or Transfer Venue to the Eastern District of New York and was issued by U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti.

Brief background of the parties involved;

Continue reading Analysis of Personal Jurisdiction in a Claim for Cybersquatting Under the ACPA and the Lanham Act »

Film Academy Targets GoDaddy in Cybersquatting Lawsuit, Over 100 Domain Names at Issue and up to $10 million in Potential Damages

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, (Film Academy) has recently filed a 134 page complaint against GoDaddy.com, for trafficking in unauthorized trademarks.

GoDaddy.com is a supergiant in the domain registration business and is also the same brain behind the memorable 2009 Super Bowl ad, which featured the star female race car driver Danica Patrick.cybersquatting lawyers

The Hollywood Reporter noted that the over 100 domain names targeted in the suit mostly involve the Film Academy’s prestigious and trademarked “Oscars”. Targeted domain name examples include 2011oscars.com, academyawardz.com, jaylenososcars.com, betacademyawards.com, oscarsunplugged.com, oscarshotels.com, oscarstravel.com, oscarsliveblogging.com. Continue reading Film Academy Targets GoDaddy in Cybersquatting Lawsuit, Over 100 Domain Names at Issue and up to $10 million in Potential Damages »

Domain Disputes Alert, UFC Dismisses Cybersquatting Lawsuit Over TheUltimateFighter.com

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010

domain name dispute cybersquatting lawsuitIt appears that TheUltimateFighter website is undergoing a transition in ownership. Today if you’ve typed http://www.theultimatefighter.com/ in your address bar it takes you, literally, to blank page that looks like a normal webpage that just won’t quite load. This is an aberration from the usual practice of domain parking, which registrars and domain owners usually employ when hosting a domain name that isn’t yet attached to content.

***Update*** transition complete, www.Ultimatefighter.com now correctly links to the Ultimate Fighter website.

The Ultimate Fighter trademark boasts a reality show, a movie ‘The Ultimate Fighter’ (2005), and a robust following. The reality show is now spanning 12 seasons. In it, viewers track the day-to-day activities of fighters who compete in a championship to become The Ultimate Fighter. Winning ‘The Ultimate Fighter’ competition grants the winner a six-figure / multi-fight contract with the UFC.

However, recently The Ultimate Fighter’s parent company, Zuffa, LLC, has been embroiled in a domain dispute battle with the owner of TheUltimateFighter.com domain name, Anton Resnick. This could explain the lack of content on TheUltimateFighter.com. Continue reading Domain Disputes Alert, UFC Dismisses Cybersquatting Lawsuit Over TheUltimateFighter.com »

UDRP Panel Recognizes that where a Registrant Reasonably Believed that what He was Doing was Legitimate, then Registrant’s Domain Name Registration Cannot be in Bad Faith

Friday, May 28th, 2010

An article entitled, Finally, a UDRP Panel Respects the Scope of the Policy, by Andrew Allemann over at Domain Name Wire, highlighted a recent ruling by the UDRP Panel, where the Panel exercised discretion in elaborating on the scope of its definition of cybersquatting.

The case is Human Resource Certification Institute v. Tridibesh Satpathy, and it is an example of a dwindling number of recent cases where an innocent domain name owner is allowed to retain his domain name even though it appears to infringe on a complainant’s service mark rights.

The Panel held in favor of Defendant and noted that;

“if the Respondent reasonably believed that what he was doing was legitimate, it cannot be said that his registration of the Domain Name was in bad faith.”

The Panel further elaborated on trademark law and cybersquatting;

“The Policy was designed to deal with a relatively narrow form of dispute between trade mark (and service mark) proprietors and domain name registrants, namely the deliberate registration of a domain name featuring the complainant’s trade mark or a confusingly similar variant of it with a view to causing damage or disruption to the complainant or his business or unfairly exploiting the complainant’s trade mark for the registrant’s own advantage.” Continue reading UDRP Panel Recognizes that where a Registrant Reasonably Believed that what He was Doing was Legitimate, then Registrant’s Domain Name Registration Cannot be in Bad Faith »

Greek Belly Dancer Cybersquatter Faces $10,000 Default Judgment

Friday, May 28th, 2010

The controversy centers on a Greek belly dancer and her former employment, Greek Restaurant Taverna Opa and its owner Peter Tsialiamanis.

The Argentinian belly dancer, Aisha Ismail was the first belly dancer at the Hollywood Greek restaurant. Interestingly though, Ismail was also a part-time computer programmer. She purchased the domain name ‘tavernaopa.com’ and when approached; she refused to sell it to the restaurant, even when offered $5,000 she rejected the offer, instead demanding $25,000.

Turning down the $5,000 turned out to be a poor choice for Ismail because in 2008, Taverna Opa sued Ismail for cybersquatting on its stolen domain name. After rejecting Tsialiamanis’s offer, she began to advertise for her new place of employment, the Greek Seafood Restaurant Milos, on tavernaopa.com.;

I will like to invite you to the new restaurant ‘Milos’ best and freshest seafood.”

Continue reading Greek Belly Dancer Cybersquatter Faces $10,000 Default Judgment »

Domain Name Owner Wins His Expenses In Cybersquatting Case

Wednesday, October 7th, 2009

A domain name owner recently won his expenses in a cybersquatting case in federal court. 

Domain Name Wire reports that Neon Network has been awarded its expenses after it won a default judgment in a declaratory judgment action under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) in Arizona.  Aspis Liv Forsakrings, an insurance company, originally filed a cybersquatting case under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) against Neon Network with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

WIPO found that Neon had registered the domain name in bad faith, and the aspis.com domain name was transferred to Aspis.

Neon Network then filed a declaratory judgment action in Arizona asking the court to determine that it had not violated the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act.  The judge issued a default judgment against Aspis and awarded Neon $1,547. 

The judgment can be viewed here, courtesy of Domain Name Wire.

Attorneys Handling Cybersquatting Cases Under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA)

Monday, October 5th, 2009

Traverse Legal’s internet attorneys are handling some of the largest Cybersquatting Cases ever filed – Contact us at 866.936.7447.  Our internet law lawyers can help you protect and defend your valuable domain names.

Internet law is complex because courts are not familiar with internet technology or the special laws passed by Congress to create special rights for companies doing business on the internet. Internet attorneys who specialize in internet law issues are critical in pursuing your legal rights.  For instance, domain names can be incredible assets for a business.  Like a well placed piece of commercial real estate, domain names can be the key to turning a dwindling business into a healthy and vibrant economic powerhouse.  A well thought out and developed domain name can increase sales, increase brand recognition, and extend a business’ reach across international borders.  Cybersquatting and cybersquatters seek to profit from the inherent value that domain names provide to trademark holders.  Cybersquatters and, more specifically, typosquatters will, for example, register domain names that are common misspellings or typographical errors of a business’ trademark to siphon off the web traffic and goodwill that a trademark owner has created in its brand and domain name.

Cybersquatting cases can be filed through two similar methods.  The first is the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).  The UDRP is a contract created by ICANN that every domain name registrant of a major top-level domain name (.com, .net, or .org) must agree to in order to register a domain name.  Under this contract, the registrant agrees to have disputes over the domain name, specifically disputes over the abusive registration of a domain name, decided by arbitration under the Policy.  These arbitration proceedings are typically brought in front of the National Arbitration Forum or the World Intellectual Property Organization.

The second method is the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA).  The ACPA allows a plaintiff to bring a cybersquatting case in federal court against a person that registers or uses a domain name in bad faith that is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark or the personal name of the plaintiff.  This remedy allows the plaintiff to seek statutory damages of up to $100,000 per domain name and attorneys fees in exceptional circumstances.  Additionally, a plaintiff can bring an in rem suit against foreign defendants to recover a domain name that was registered with a registrar or registered through a registry located on US soil, but monetary damages are not available in an in rem suit under the ACPA.

If you are faced with a cybersquatting case under the UDRP or the ACPA, contact one of our cybersquatting attorneys today.  You may be entitled to recover your domain name through a cybersquatting case under the UDRP or the ACPA.