The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.
LEASE ACCEPTANCE CORP. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (CENTRAL ISLIP)
2:08-CV-04673
FILED: 11/19/2008
The question often arises as to what options, if any, exist once you have lost a UDRP arbitration. Within 10 days you can file a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment attacking the arbitration decision. After such time, although it is not widely understood among domain name owners, you can also file a lawsuit attempting to recover a domain name from someone who has prevailed in a UDRP proceeding and has already gained possession of the domain name.
The Plaintiff filed suit against Bank of America after Bank of America won a UDRP proceeding and the domain name "www.uscapitaltrust.com" was ordered to be transferred to Bank of America.
This is a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment that the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of the domain name and that the Defendant has no right to own or have the registration of the domain name transferred to it or the registration cancelled. No damages are requested. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1244.
BELLAGIO LLC, ET AL v. SMART ANSWER S.A. AND SUSANNA GONZALES
DISTRICT OF NEVADA (LAS VEGAS)
2:08-CV-01569
FILED: 11/13/2008
No matter where you are located in the world, the fact remains that U.S. laws can be applied in U.S. courts against those infringing on trademarks.
Bellagio, LLC owns and operates the Bellagio Resort Hotel Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Defendant is alleged to have purchased numerous domains containing the name of casinos owned by the Plaintiff between May 7th and May 18th, 2008 and linking those to a website that then provided links to an online gambling website. The Defendants appear to be residents of Panama.
The lawsuit is brought for alleged cybersquatting, trademark infringement, unfair competition under the federal trademark law, trademark dilution, Nevada state trademark infringement, Nevada State trademark dilution, common law trademark infringement, deceptive trade practices, and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. The Plaintiffs have requested compensatory, consequential, statutory, exemplary, and punitive damages, together with an award of interest, costs, and attorneys' fees, and the issuance of both temporary and permanent injunctive relief against the Defendant's continued use of the domain names. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1245.
WILCOX ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, ET AL v. XSPECT SOLUTIONS, INC.
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN (DETROIT)
2:08-CV-14695
FILED: 11/05/2008
Domain owners may think that the only risk is losing the domain name in a UDRP ICANN arbitration proceeding. In fact, a lawsuit can be filed against the owner of a domain name seeking significant monetary damages without resorting to a UDRP arbitration, or even after arbitration has been decided. When faced with an alleged "cybersquatting" claim more and more clients are finding that merely transferring the domain name does not solve the problem. A full and final release of all claims should be the objective.
The Plaintiffs are an affiliated group of companies in the business of providing, developing, manufacturing, and selling dimensional metrology products, a type of measuring machine. The Defendant is in the same business. The Plaintiffs filed an ICANN domain name dispute and obtained the transfer of 42 domain names that were registered by XSpect that allegedly infringed on the Plaintiff's trademarks. Xspect is alleged to have continued to maintain ownership of other domain names, and this lawsuit was brought by the Plaintiffs for damages.
The lawsuit alleges trademark infringement, false designation of origin, false advertising, cybersquatting, and common law trademark infringement. The lawsuit requests damages and entry by the court of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against the further use of these domain names, the Plaintiffs' related trademarks, and any domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to its trademarks. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1246.
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (CENTRAL ISLIP)
2:08-CV-04673
FILED: 11/19/2008
The question often arises as to what options, if any, exist once you have lost a UDRP arbitration. Within 10 days you can file a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment attacking the arbitration decision. After such time, although it is not widely understood among domain name owners, you can also file a lawsuit attempting to recover a domain name from someone who has prevailed in a UDRP proceeding and has already gained possession of the domain name.
The Plaintiff filed suit against Bank of America after Bank of America won a UDRP proceeding and the domain name "www.uscapitaltrust.com" was ordered to be transferred to Bank of America.
This is a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment that the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of the domain name and that the Defendant has no right to own or have the registration of the domain name transferred to it or the registration cancelled. No damages are requested. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1244.
BELLAGIO LLC, ET AL v. SMART ANSWER S.A. AND SUSANNA GONZALES
DISTRICT OF NEVADA (LAS VEGAS)
2:08-CV-01569
FILED: 11/13/2008
No matter where you are located in the world, the fact remains that U.S. laws can be applied in U.S. courts against those infringing on trademarks.
Bellagio, LLC owns and operates the Bellagio Resort Hotel Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Defendant is alleged to have purchased numerous domains containing the name of casinos owned by the Plaintiff between May 7th and May 18th, 2008 and linking those to a website that then provided links to an online gambling website. The Defendants appear to be residents of Panama.
The lawsuit is brought for alleged cybersquatting, trademark infringement, unfair competition under the federal trademark law, trademark dilution, Nevada state trademark infringement, Nevada State trademark dilution, common law trademark infringement, deceptive trade practices, and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. The Plaintiffs have requested compensatory, consequential, statutory, exemplary, and punitive damages, together with an award of interest, costs, and attorneys' fees, and the issuance of both temporary and permanent injunctive relief against the Defendant's continued use of the domain names. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1245.
WILCOX ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, ET AL v. XSPECT SOLUTIONS, INC.
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN (DETROIT)
2:08-CV-14695
FILED: 11/05/2008
Domain owners may think that the only risk is losing the domain name in a UDRP ICANN arbitration proceeding. In fact, a lawsuit can be filed against the owner of a domain name seeking significant monetary damages without resorting to a UDRP arbitration, or even after arbitration has been decided. When faced with an alleged "cybersquatting" claim more and more clients are finding that merely transferring the domain name does not solve the problem. A full and final release of all claims should be the objective.
The Plaintiffs are an affiliated group of companies in the business of providing, developing, manufacturing, and selling dimensional metrology products, a type of measuring machine. The Defendant is in the same business. The Plaintiffs filed an ICANN domain name dispute and obtained the transfer of 42 domain names that were registered by XSpect that allegedly infringed on the Plaintiff's trademarks. Xspect is alleged to have continued to maintain ownership of other domain names, and this lawsuit was brought by the Plaintiffs for damages.
The lawsuit alleges trademark infringement, false designation of origin, false advertising, cybersquatting, and common law trademark infringement. The lawsuit requests damages and entry by the court of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against the further use of these domain names, the Plaintiffs' related trademarks, and any domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to its trademarks. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1246.
No comments:
Post a Comment