On Jun 17, 2:46=A0pm, Knowledge <knowled...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 May 2008 20:31:45 -0500, jingus <jin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Knowledge wrote:
>
> >> By a stroke of luck I got hold of these two incredible URL'S sometime
> >> ago.
>
> >>http://www.sonyericsonwtatour.com=A0appraised
at $3,765,000
>
> >>http://www.sonyericsonwtatour.net=A0
appraised at =A0$ 637,000
>
> >> appraised at millions and millions, and millions!!!
>
> >> Will consider other equitable, and reasonable offers.
>
> >anybody considering this "offer" would do well to make themselves aware
> >of the anticybersquatting consumer protection act (acpa): =A0these
url's
> >have *zero* commercial value because the wta would shut you down for
> >trademark infringement.
>
> ImHotep folks,
>
> I'm here today to thank Mr. Jingus for raising some Red flags in my
> mind.
>
> I didn't really believe him back on the day he posted what he said
> above. So I contacted Network Solutions, the people who sold me the
> URL'S and asked them if I was in compliance with the law doing what I
> said I intended to do with these two sites.
>
> Some woman named Jan, assured me that I could use them as I liked
> since I had paid for them, and they were open at the time I requested
> them. I did not call Prepaid Legal as I said I had because there
> didn't seem to be any need to do that. Network Solutions is supposed
> to know these things; not me.
>
> Anyway, I received a letter from the WTA attorneys last Friday, asking
> me to stop using those two sites as I was in violation of what Jingus
> had said I was violating.
>
> So now I call prepaid legal for sure. I got a call from them just now.
> I sent them all the paperwork yesterday pertaining to the matter.
> So the attorney called me an hour ago and informed me that I was wrong
> and the WTA was right.
>
> She said it was in my best interests to immediately cease and desist
> using the sites as I was in violation of Federal law.
>
> Can you imagine that? I remember ten or fifteen years ago when people
> had website URL's that were close to big cor****ations, the
> cor****ations paid BIG money to buy them away. I guess that loop hole
> has been closed. As usual, I'm a week late, and a hundred thousand
> dollars short.
There was a brief period of time, early in the development of the Web,
in which people -- including some courts -- were inexplicably slow to
realize that trademark law would apply in cyberspace. For some reason
there was a collective, though tem****ary, delusion that it would be OK
for Joe Blow to launch a web site call mcdonalds.com, even though
everyone knew that Joe Blow had no right to slap a McDonald's sign on
his garage and sell burgers there. IMO the ACPA merely clarified
rather than changed trademark law, though it also provided a new cause
of action for damages against cybersquatters.
> Anyway, thanks Jingus for taking the time to warn me.
>
> I also want to apologize to the WTA for any inconveniences I may have
> caused them. :-(( I appreciate the manner and spirit in which they
> contacted me.I will call Network Solutions in a few minutes and tell
> them to shutdown the two web sites that I bought the same
> day/week/night that they changed to their new site.
>
> So! How much did all of this advice cost me from PPL?
>
> Seventeen dollars! that's all. I get unlimited legal advice on any
> matter personal, or business, for the price of my monthly member****p.
That's great, but you can bet they wouldn't have defended you in
litigation for 17 bucks. :) Fortunately, you did the prudent thing
and gave up.
>
> It's not that Jingus didn't know what he was talking about because he
> did.
>
> The fact remains, I don't let complete strangers online handle legal
> matters for me.
Of course not. No one should. But at least Jingus pointed you in the
right direction so you realized you might have a problem.
>
> Try and go to an attorney in your city, fax them al the stuff I had to
> send them and will be sending in a few minutes. Spend about 45 minutes
> on the phone discussing the matter with them, and then see if the bill
> they send you is only $17.00
No doubt the bill would be much higher in most situations. However,
your case was very easy; if it had taken some real work to arrive at
the right advice, your own bill might have been different.
Joe Ramirez
|
