The couple in question can prove that did not use the domain to make money as they've been accused of by heavyweight CS Lewis estate owners' lawyers.
[scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com ]
Then giggling. The case was just so darn silly. It falsely – bizarrely – claimed we'd been using the Narnia domain to make money; indeed, that being why we'd bought it. Huh? See, they have to prove a "bad faith" purchase to grab the domain. It took us two minutes to get evidence from our registration company that we had never tried to, nor made, any money whatsoever; think of the time and money the New York lawyer could have saved if she'd just thought of that brilliant move.
apparently the Edinburgh couple have been informed by their lawyers that a judge in Dallas was due to rule on the case yesterday but the decision cannot be made public until it is passed to Swiss-based WIPOThis could take another day or two
If it was so apparent that just owning the domain was in clear violation of trademark law, why do they get to sell the registration services on it? Isn't that basically the same as trafficking?
Never was quite clear on that part.
If it was so apparent that just owning the domain was in clear violation of trademark law, why do they get to sell the registration services on it? Isn't that basically the same as trafficking?
It isn't ever a black and white situation. It's an analogue scale i.e just a balance of probabilities.
I can't stand when a companies first reaction is a legal one.
Microsoft can't stand it when people insist on registering and using any and all
domain names bearing their trademarks, so they finally decided to sue to make
that sentiment known. Looks like it's arguably working for them, even though
it's pissing off various people.
It all depends on what side of the fence you choose to be on. Hopefully you're
not the one whose trademark rights might be infringed upon by another.
I won't be surprised if the parents are trying to use publicity to get people to
rally to their cause. As if that'll make a difference and get things to happen all
their way.
Where do the domain registrars stand in comparison to all of this?
Their registration agreement will give you an idea.
David
Maybe you didn't read the story but simple registering the a domain name is not in itself an act of trademark infringement. I do doubt the sincerity of the parents intentions, but since this company jumped the gun we will never know what they would have done with the site and if it really would have been infringing. At this point registering the domain cannot be called infringing.
[edited by: Demaestro at 3:56 am (utc) on July 29, 2008]
[if] owning the domain was in clear violation of trademark law, why do they get to sell the registration services on it
1) It's not clear that owning a domain is a clear violation. There are guidelines on this, and 'just' registering the domain doesn't necessarily constitute a violation.
2) The registrar makes money on every registration.... so why should the registrar care if the registrant gets sued/loses the domain? The registrar gets to keep the registration fee anyway.
Can you point to some fact that would show that suing their customers is working for them?
Oh, just search around and you'll find a couple. Look at WIPO for decisions for
domain names bearing Microsoft's trademark, and IIRC they settled a suit with
another company for using their Excel mark for spreadsheets.
It's fine to be maybe passionately outraged towards them, and it's fine to also
entertain opinions Microsoft may be ethically or morally wrong. But it does not
change the fact they have every legal right towards their intellectual property
like trademarks, and they have the unenviable responsibility to protect them.
Besides, every other mark holder also has that responsibility. If you have one
yourself and if you ever find someone having registered a domain name that's
commercially riding off it without your consent, feel free to share here how it
feels like by then.
Would you want to give someone an enforceable cause to sue you or worse,
even if you believe you're right?
David
Do you think that simply registering the domain is in itself a violation of the companies trademark?
Do you think that simply registering the domain is in itself a violation of the companies trademark?
Domain name registrations per se don't necessarily infringe a party's trademark
on its own. It mainly takes a couple of things like any "agreements" between
the mark holder and the domain registrant, domain showing ads of competing
products of the mark, etc.
Possibly one exception are what I call "uniquely famous" trademarks, such as
Microsoft and Narnia like the one discussed here. Those are so unique and so
famous people will likely and automatically assume any sites bearing the marks
are endorsed or associated with them, especially if used commercially.
For instance, someone might register ebaysellingtipsdottld to sell an ebook on
how to sell on eBay. Users who visit that site might think eBay is allowing him
or her to use their mark with their blessings when s/he actually isn't.
While some believe doing so can give added publicity to the mark holder, they
will decide on their own how their marks can benefit them and their customers
also. Customers mainly buy from that mark holder because they like it so much
to trust them solely for it.
Anyway, that registrant in that Narnia dispute can say all they want they got
the domain name as a gift for their son. But it so happens there's a couple of
things eventually showing they might not be as forthright as they want others
to believe.
HTH somehow.
David
