Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
e-Commerce Docket Sheet
District Court Dismisses Copyright Infringement Claims Against Grokster, StreamCast
File-sharing services Grokster and StreamCast are not liable to copyright owners for their users' infringement. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc v. Grokster, Ltd., No. CV 01-08541-SVW (C.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2003). The District Court granted summary judgment to the two file-sharing services on the plaintiff movie studios' and record companies' contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims. On the issue of contributory infringement, the court held that the defendants were generally aware that many, if not most, of their users used the software to infringe copyrighted works. However, the court found that neither defendant provided the “site and facilities” for direct infringement; ie, if either defendant deactivated all the computers within his control, those users “could continue sharing files with little or no interruption.” On the issue of vicarious infringement, the court held that although the defendants derived a financial benefit from their users' infringement, they lacked the ability to supervise and control the infringing conduct. The court emphasized that its opinion concerned only current versions of Grokster's and StreamCast's products, and did not cover the Kazaa software distributed by defendant Sharman Networks.
No Trademark Dilution Created By Licensee's Link To Objectionable Site
A trademark dilution claim may not be brought by a trademark holder against a franchisee-trademark licensee based solely on a hyperlink from such franchisee's site to an adult-oriented site. Voice-Tel Enterprises, Inc. v. Joba, Inc., No. 1:01-CV-3359-TWT (N.D. Ga. Mar. 31, 2003). The District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claim under the Lanham Act that licensee tarnished the mark by associating it with adult-oriented material, noting that the link initially led to a legitimate Web site that was later taken over by a distributor of adult material, and that the licensee had no knowledge of that change. Further, the plaintiffs offered no evidence that their mark was materially impaired. Finally, the court cited cases where a defendant's domain name tarnished a trademark by associating it with adult material, and suggested that tarnishment under the Lanham Act could not exist as a matter of law in the “hyperlink” context.
Tiger Woods Establishes Sufficient Trademark Rights To Obtain Domain Names
A Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) complainant has common la
w trademark rights in his name for purposes of obtaining transfer of a similar domain name if he can establish sufficient secondary associations with the name. ETW Corp. v. Mallamo, No. FA0302000145284 (NAF Apr. 17, 2003). In this case, the panelist transferred the domain names “tigerwoodsfoundation.org” and “tigerwoodslearningcenter.com” to the complainant, a licensing agent for golfer Tiger Woods that owned and used similar marks in relation to Woods' golf activities and charitable events. The panelist also found that complainant had sufficient common law trademark rights in the famous name “Tiger Woods” because of the name's secondary association with complainant.
Domain Name Registrar May Be Liable For Redirection To “Coming Soon” Page
A domain name registrar may be liable under New York law for redirecting its new customers' not-yet-developed Web sites to a “Coming Soon” Web page containing advertising and other links under the registrar's control. Zurakov v. Register.com, 2003 NYSlipOp 13230 (N.Y. App. Apr. 22, 2003). In 2001, the trial court dismissed a domain name registrant's suit alleging, inter alia, that the registrar's usurpation of his domain name in such a manner breached their contract's implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and constituted an unfair business practice under New York's General Business Law. The appellate division reversed and reinstated these claims, holding that while the parties' registration contract did not expressly grant a registrant exclusive control or the exclusive right to use the domain name, the benefit to the registrant under a contract would be “rendered illusory” if this were not the case.
Docket Sheet was written by Julian S. Millstein, Edward A. Pisacreta and Jeffrey D. Neuburger, partners in the New York office of Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner LLP.
Docket Sheet was written by Julian S. Millstein, Edward A. Pisacreta and Jeffrey D. Neuburger, partners in the New York office of Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner.
District Court Dismisses Copyright Infringement Claims Against Grokster, StreamCast
File-sharing services Grokster and StreamCast are not liable to copyright owners for their users' infringement. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc v. Grokster, Ltd., No. CV 01-08541-SVW (C.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2003). The District Court granted summary judgment to the two file-sharing services on the plaintiff movie studios' and record companies' contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims. On the issue of contributory infringement, the court held that the defendants were generally aware that many, if not most, of their users used the software to infringe copyrighted works. However, the court found that neither defendant provided the “site and facilities” for direct infringement; ie, if either defendant deactivated all the computers within his control, those users “could continue sharing files with little or no interruption.” On the issue of vicarious infringement, the court held that although the defendants derived a financial benefit from their users' infringement, they lacked the ability to supervise and control the infringing conduct. The court emphasized that its opinion concerned only current versions of Grokster's and StreamCast's products, and did not cover the Kazaa software distributed by defendant Sharman Networks.
No Trademark Dilution Created By Licensee's Link To Objectionable Site
A trademark dilution claim may not be brought by a trademark holder against a franchisee-trademark licensee based solely on a hyperlink from such franchisee's site to an adult-oriented site. Voice-Tel Enterprises, Inc. v. Joba, Inc., No. 1:01-CV-3359-TWT (N.D. Ga. Mar. 31, 2003). The District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claim under the Lanham Act that licensee tarnished the mark by associating it with adult-oriented material, noting that the link initially led to a legitimate Web site that was later taken over by a distributor of adult material, and that the licensee had no knowledge of that change. Further, the plaintiffs offered no evidence that their mark was materially impaired. Finally, the court cited cases where a defendant's domain name tarnished a trademark by associating it with adult material, and suggested that tarnishment under the Lanham Act could not exist as a matter of law in the “hyperlink” context.
Tiger Woods Establishes Sufficient Trademark Rights To Obtain Domain Names
A Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) complainant has common la
w trademark rights in his name for purposes of obtaining transfer of a similar domain name if he can establish sufficient secondary associations with the name. ETW Corp. v. Mallamo, No. FA0302000145284 (NAF Apr. 17, 2003). In this case, the panelist transferred the domain names “tigerwoodsfoundation.org” and “tigerwoodslearningcenter.com” to the complainant, a licensing agent for golfer Tiger Woods that owned and used similar marks in relation to Woods' golf activities and charitable events. The panelist also found that complainant had sufficient common law trademark rights in the famous name “Tiger Woods” because of the name's secondary association with complainant.
Domain Name Registrar May Be Liable For Redirection To “Coming Soon” Page
A domain name registrar may be liable under
Docket Sheet was written by Julian S. Millstein, Edward A. Pisacreta and Jeffrey D. Neuburger, partners in the
Docket Sheet was written by Julian S. Millstein, Edward A. Pisacreta and Jeffrey D. Neuburger, partners in the
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.