During my Cyberlaw class, my lecturer was telling us the story of Julia Fiona Roberts (a.k.a Julia Roberts, the actress) Vs Russell Boyd. In this domain name conflict case, Boyd has simply registered the domain name “juliaroberts.com” and placed the domain name up for auction on E-Bay. Boyd was then found guilty because he has created a domain name which is confusing for the users, he has no legitimate interest in using the domain name and he has used the domain name in bad faith.
Recalling to that story, I have found a quite similar story on the same case. This time, it was the Washington Speakers Bureau Inc Vs Leading Authorities Inc. It was known that Leading Authorities was a direct competitor of Washington Speakers Bureau (WSB) and they have registered variety of domain names incorporating parts the WSB trademark. The court then has found out that the registration and use of these domain names has constituted trademark infringement and the court has ordered Leading Authorities to release ownership of the registered domain names.
However, Leading Authorities has got something on their mind. They have requested a stay of the order pending appeal. This is because, the domain names could be registered to a third party stranger if released. On the other hand, if the stay was not granted, the registered domain names will be returned to the registrar and will be available for any interested takers on the first-come-first-serve basis.
Initially, the court granted the stay, but then they have reconsidered and denied the stay. In the end, Leading Authorities was ordered to let go the ownership of the domain names plus they have to notify WSB the correct and precise date on which it released the domain names to provide WSB the good chance of registering these names if they want.
No comments:
Post a Comment