- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 18, 2007 at 12:19 pm #604992AnonymousInactive
ok, I registered harrahs-casino-online.com and harrahs-onlinecasino.com as well as the same with MGM looking down the road.. think I will have a large issue with these names if it happens from the casinos?
September 18, 2007 at 12:26 pm #749093vladcizsolMemberI think you will receive a letter from their attornies demanding you surrender the domains and threatening a lawsuit for damages if you dont.
They have done this several times before and protect their trademarked names vigorously.
I am currently involved in a legal dispute with eHarmony for similar issues. Larger companies have legal teams on retainer who do nothing but comb the internet and registrars daily looking for any reference to their clients. They then contact you via registered letter and email and demand you turn over the domains at the very least and threaten to seek a judgement for damaging their clients position or violating their trademarked names or images.
You are playing with fire.
September 18, 2007 at 12:39 pm #749096AnonymousInactiveI love a little fight here and there lol..
they also relize paying a few K is a lot easier than a lawsuit..
welp, well see what happens in the next year or so!
September 18, 2007 at 12:48 pm #749098AnonymousInactivethey also relize paying a few K is a lot easier than a lawsuit..
It will cost them about 1200 to get a domain through UDRP, and you don’t really have a defendable case. That also doesn’t stop them from a lawsuit afterward. I think to some extent, it depends on how much you have to lose.
I’m involved in a dispute myself right now, where I have a very defendable case. The domain isn’t really worth fighting for, though, so I’ll probably just let the bully win this time. Although, they’ll have to agree that the transfer will act as a full resolution of their claims. Otherwise, I’m still open to later actions, and just letting them have it won’t look so good.
September 18, 2007 at 12:49 pm #749099AnonymousInactive@allfreechips 139095 wrote:
I love a little fight here and there lol..
they also relize paying a few K is a lot easier than a lawsuit..
welp, well see what happens in the next year or so!
Vegas casinos are particularly aggressive about trademark infringement in domain names. As far as realizing that paying a few k is a lot easier than a lawsuit, I wouldn’t count on it. The 1st time I ever deal with a domain infringement issue with a Vegas casino, I didn’t get a letter. I was served with papers and a court date.
There is 1 particular law firm in Vegas which specializes in these issues, and they don’t seem to mind the inconvenience of a lawsuit at all.
Good luck to you.
PS – BTW, Lou – I own eharmony.name but never did anything with it. Kinda glad now.
September 18, 2007 at 12:58 pm #749102vladcizsolMemberAllfreechips if you search CAP there was another affiliate who didnt think MGM would do anything if he owned a domain with their name it. He also felt safe since he was in Australia.
They filed a lawsuit for damages against him and he shit his pants. Again these law firms are ON RETAINER. That means they get paid a yearly fee. They have to justify this cost to their clients so they DO go after anyone they can VIGOROUSLY.
Just remember I warned you.
Randy here is my last correspondance with eHarmony. Note the law firms name. I guarantee you will hear from them. I owed multiple eHarmony names and they came after me on EVERY one and even assigned different attornies to the cases!
Quote:Dear Lou,I have copied Aaron Zink from eHarmony.com on this e-mail. He will be working with you to facilitate the transfer of the domain name. Thank you once again for your understanding and cooperation. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Thayer
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 11:47 AM
To: Preece, Thayer M.
Subject: Re: eHarmony.com / Dispute rePlease send me forwarding details and I will initiate transfer.
Original Message
From: “Preece, Thayer M.”
Sent: Aug 13, 2007 1:42 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: “Milstein, Harold J.” , “Saldivar, Selina”
Subject: eHarmony.com / Dispute reDear Lou,
Pursuant to our phone call last week, I spoke with eHarmony about the possibility of resolving the dispute over your domain name by enrolling in their affiliates program. While we appreciate your desire to work with eHarmony to promote their service, unfortunately, the affiliate agreement specifically states that affiliates may not register domain names that contain the EHARMONY trademark. Accordingly, we must continue to insist upon the removal of the web site and transfer of the domain to eHarmony.
Please confirm that you will cooperate with eHarmony in this matter. We look forward to your response.
Truly,
ThayerThayer Marie Preece | Attorney | HellerEhrmanLLP | 275 Middlefield Road | Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel: +1.650.324.7184 | fax: +1.650.324.6638 | email: [email protected] | web: http://www.hellerehrman.com================================================
This email is sent by a law firm and contains information that maybe privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,please delete the email and notify us immediately.
================================================September 18, 2007 at 1:07 pm #749104AnonymousInactive@Randy 139098 wrote:
The 1st time I ever deal with a domain infringement issue with a Vegas casino, I didn’t get a letter. I was served with papers and a court date.
What wound up happening?
In my situation, the domain only makes about $120 per year. If I had to have a lawyer make an appearance, it makes it not worth owning. My domain lawyer told me to keep it, but I figure it like this… if they want to play in the court system, I’m not going to risk other things I own to satisfy a judgement, and I don’t have much confidence that a judge would believe some dork citing domain case law (me) over a huge company with highly paid lawyers.
September 18, 2007 at 1:15 pm #749105vladcizsolMemberI did some research and it was The Mirage that sued an affiliate in Australia.
Las Vegas Casinos dont play games.
September 18, 2007 at 2:24 pm #749115AnonymousInactiveYeah i founf a case where Harrah’s sued a guy owning harrhas.com lol
September 18, 2007 at 3:21 pm #749131AnonymousInactiveThey agreed to drop the case if I turned the domain name over and agreed to not register any more domains infringing on their trademark. (This is in response to the earlier poster who wanted to know what happened when I got sued.)
September 18, 2007 at 5:45 pm #749162AnonymousGuestthink I will have a large issue with these names if it happens from the casinos?
ya. I think you’ll have you’re hands full. might be best to contact them first ….before they contact you ….and ask if they’d like to purchase … at a reasonable price…. just my opinion.
September 18, 2007 at 5:50 pm #749166AnonymousInactiveAfter reading a bit I may just cancel them lol
ty for the feedback guys..
now.. a friend of mine worked at sherwin williams, they let the domain expire and an it was bought.. after a lot of legal cost consideration they just paid 30K for it back.. those were the good old days
September 18, 2007 at 7:27 pm #749188AnonymousInactiveThis might be off topic —
I think you can own a website or domain containing a trademarked name, followed by the word “sucks.” e.g. walmartsucks.com, disneysucks.com, microsoftsucks.com, etc. I think there was a court ruling that protected a website owner’s freedom of speech in a case like this. The “sucks” represented the domain owner’s opinion of the company, and therefore it was protected…
This article might do a better job explaining the issue: xhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/07/15/sucks_com_issue_rears_ugly/
September 18, 2007 at 9:20 pm #749202AnonymousInactiveI think you’re right, but I think it also has to do with intent. If you’re trying to trade on the name of the organization in order to make money, this might not hold true.
@Engineer 139202 wrote:
This might be off topic —
I think you can own a website or domain containing a trademarked name, followed by the word “sucks.” e.g. walmartsucks.com, disneysucks.com, microsoftsucks.com, etc. I think there was a court ruling that protected a website owner’s freedom of speech in a case like this. The “sucks” represented the domain owner’s opinion of the company, and therefore it was protected…
This article might do a better job explaining the issue: xhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/07/15/sucks_com_issue_rears_ugly/
September 19, 2007 at 11:24 pm #749356AnonymousInactiveDean received a letter from Harrahs regarding our site http://www.wsopsatellites.net
I see they already have the site, guessing Dean couldn’t get any money out of them, hell we had that site for several years. -
AuthorPosts