MetaFilter posts tagged with legal and domains

VeriSign Can Be Sued for Losing Your Domain Name

mikewas — Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:33:13 -0800

VeriSign Can Be Sued for Losing Your Domain Name A Federal appeals court (Ninth Circuit) has ruled that the owner of the sex.com domain, who lost the domain when VeriSgin transferred it on the basis of a forged letter, can sue VeriSign for damages resulting from VeriSign's mistake. The sex.com case is worth millions, but anyone who has lost a domain name due to VeriSign's incompetence may now be able to draw their pound of flesh straight from those entrusted with making sure the registry process works.

Zool — Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:16:35 -0800

Network Solutions faces 'hoarding' allegations. "Networks Solutions Inc. has illegally restrained trade and willfully maintained monopoly power over expired domain names, according to a class-action lawsuit recently filed by an Alabama businessman."

daddyray — Sat, 30 Sep 2000 18:40:22 -0800

Who owns your name? I could not find this story on the web. I saw it in print. It appeared in an article by Geoffrey Vanderburg in the Friday Sept. 29th Edmonton Journal.
Here's an excerpt. "An internet company with links to the National Firearms Association has been ordered to give up a Web site using Justice Minister Anne McLellan's name. Smartcanuk Internet Services has been told to transfer control of annemclellan.com to Canada's justice minister, McLellan's Edmonton lawyer said Thursday"
Al Green, owner of Smartcanuk... says the ruling sets a "very very dangerous precedent."
"Sandra Sellers, an eResolution arbitrator...., decided Monday to grant transfer of annemclellan.com and annemclellan.org to McLellan."
McLellan was able to demonstrate that the domain name was identical or similar to a trade-mark, that Green had no legitimate interests in the name, and that the name was being used in bad faith....
Green argues McLellan is not a trademark, she's not famous and his use of the Web site does not constitute "bad faith"
I think I have to agree with the arbitrator on this one. If there is one last sacred domain we should be entitled to it is our own names. Although in the case of the John Smiths of the world that position is likely to take some heat. Any thoughts people?

Mark — Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:01:23 -0800

DaimlerChrysler is taking the Webmaster of DodgeViper.Com to court after he tried selling it on eBay. What gets me is that the owner of the site claims he had to defend himself, because he couldn't afford an attorney, yet he says he owns a Dodge Viper? Just another dispute on who can own what domains, and what they can do with them.

luke — Tue, 08 Feb 2000 23:32:54 -0800

Page 33 of the latest Red Herring is a full-page ad for Morrison and Forrestor, attorrneys at law. What's great is that in big, yellow print is the firm's URL: mofo.com. Now, they have to be aware of the multiple meanings here, but they appear to be playing it straight, and the site is full of MoFo news and MoFo history.