Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chicago Law Firm Sues Over Hyperlink To Trademarked Name

Posted by timothy on from the quick-don't-ever-mention-any-company-names dept.

TheSpoom writes "Large Chicago law firm Jones Day are suing internet startup BlockShopper over the issue of whether linking to a business with their trademarked name should be legal. It would seem they are using trademark dilution as a tool to get BlockShopper to cease linking to their website. The EFF has filed an amicus curiae, as might be expected. If Jones Day wins this suit, anyone linking using a trademarked name may be in legal hot water."

21 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. News at 11. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next in news: all trademarked names sink on Google.

  2. Litigious bastards by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jones Day(TM) is going to have to get in line. SCO has existing use claims on linking litigious bastards, based on their extensive use of the mark between 2002 through present.

    It's too bad the legal system isn't more accessible to the common man or baseless suits with intent to crush or scare wouldn't get filed so often.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Litigious bastards by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who are Jones Day anyway? How could Jones Day be concerned with trademark dilution if nobody outside of their own damn office building knows who they are? If they were to become popular nationwide, i'd hope it'd be because of this discussion on slashdot - but would the Streisand effect be good or bad for Jones Day?

      p.s. Jones Day sucks.

    2. Re:Litigious bastards by PhreakOfTime · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, Ive had the same experience. A local real estate company sent me a Cease and Desist Letter in regard to domains that they wanted, but did not want to offer compensation for.

      The letter consisted of threatening to sue me, file CRIMINAL charges against me, and restraining orders. It also bordered on libel, as it stated for a fact that owning these domains was libelous and slanderous, without any court of law coming to that finding. The company who hired the, in my opinion, unethical attorney to send this letter was Caton Commercial

      Since they sent that letter, and I published it on-line for my lawyer to read, the results seem to have been that their company name 'Caton Commercial' now comes up with the second result in google pointing to the Will County website which lists all the current and pending legal cases they are involved in personally, and because of their business practices.

      Is there something about real estate where the blinders to the outside world are so intense, that they stop the line of thought the prevents a company from considering the 'law of unintended consequences'?

    3. Re:Litigious bastards by PhreakOfTime · · Score: 4, Funny

      You are correct. However, instead of actually looking up the name of the owner of these domains using a WHOIS, the lawyer who wrote the letter seemingly just opened up a phone book and found the same last name as me, and sent the letter there first. This was not my address.

      The letter was sent to SOMEONE ELSE first, then back to the attorney, who then finally figured out he had the wrong address. This took almost 2 months before it finally made its way to me. That is why on the letter I posted online, the address is blacked out, since it is one of a completely unrelated party. The only similarity was that they have the same last name as myself.

      These guys are on the ball, yes?

  3. Lawyers :::sigh::: by copious28 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Man, cant the lawyers fight something that is more useful, like crooked Wall Street firms? What a waste of the court's resources.

  4. How not to advertise your business by BeerCat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, let's get this straight. You'd like people to be attracted to your business, but you don't want them to use your Name....

    Kind of defeats the point in having a website, really.

    --
    "She's furniture with a pulse"
    1. Re:How not to advertise your business by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, no. They're fine with most people linking to them, just not the people they don't like. Unfortunatly, what they really want is the power to sue anyone who dares say bad things about them. They may as well make breathing illegal, that way anyone the police don't like can be charged and everyone else won't be.

    2. Re:How not to advertise your business by AlHunt · · Score: 5, Funny

      I had fun lately with some telemarketer calling to "update their database" - certainly not to try and SELL us anything. This is the last kind of crap we want.

      I asked for her fax number so I could fax her our "Database Inclusion Agreemnet". They'd need to fill it out and return it with either the $2,500 annual license fee to include our copyrighted corporate name in their database or the $25,000 "Lifetime License Agreement". I explained that by including us without such agreement and fee we felt they would be guilty of copyright infringement and be referred to our legal department.

      Not surprisingly, I got hung up on. I really need to get to work on that inclusion agreement. And get a legal department.

      --
      1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
    3. Re:How not to advertise your business by Darth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Copyright has no requirement to aggressively defend it.

      Trademark does, but using a trademark to identify the business that owns the trademark isn't an abuse of the trademark. It's the purpose of the trademark.

      --
      Darth --
      Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
  5. Jones Day Contact Form by DankNinja · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let 'em know what you think:

    http://www.jonesday.com/contact/contact.aspx

    --

  6. Re:I say we give 'em what they want. by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative

    They don't, actually. Jones Day is a law firm. The only sites they want linking to them are the ones that say, "This is a good lawyer to hire." ANYTHING else has the potential to shed light on the details of their business. Since law practice is not always clean and pristine (as this article demonstrates), Jones day is likely to be unhappy about drawing attention to their practices.

    Disclaimer: This post is an opinion and makes no factual statements. By reading this post you waive all rights to sue, counterclaim, issue official correspondence, or even look at AKAImBatman (User #238306) with a funny look on your face.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  7. Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    How would Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo! feel about this?

    1. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why, I agree good sir! It's a good thing Jones Day didn't patent it first!

  8. Dan Reidy by DankNinja · · Score: 5, Funny

    Better yet,

    contact the guy in charge:

    Daniel E. Reidy

    Tel: 1.312.269.4140
    Fax: 1.312.782.8585

    Email: dereidy@jonesday.com

  9. Interesting site, BlockShopper by Rurik · · Score: 5, Informative

    In reviewing the site, I can see how it pisses people off. You get someone mad and they'll find some way to attack. The site canvasses the real estate market in a few large cities and makes not of prominent people that buy or sell property. It then does a mini-bio on the person, sometimes with their picture example. The site is fully within their rights to do so, but I can understand the feelings of a person suddenly showing up on there with their life story just because they bought a house. So, they find loop holes to get it taken down.

    1. Re:Interesting site, BlockShopper by Altus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its not invasion of privacy to post publicly available information on the internet.

      The purchase and sale of property is a mater of public record and are generally listed in the classified section of your local news paper. Taking that information and combining it with the results of a google search on the buyer or sellers name is certainly not invasion of privacy, though it might make you re-think the kind of info you put on line.

      Im still not quite sure what the point of the web site is though.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

  10. Yes. by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Large Chicago law firm Jones Day are suing internet startup BlockShopper over the issue of whether linking to a business with their trademarked name should be legal.

    Yes, it should be.

    "RPGs? Try White Wolf or Wizards of the Coast."

    Trademarks exist to differentiate businesses. You have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to use somebody else's trademark to refer to them or describe their product. Any law that says otherwise is fundamentally flawed, and violates the first amendment.

    A trademark is a name, and names are fundamental to speech.

  11. Re:I say we give 'em what they want. by Altus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No doubt. If I, for some reason, had this law firm on retainer I would be looking for a new firm already. This whole fisasco has to make one question the firms grasp of technology and law. Worse, it makes it clear that they lack any forethought. Right or wrong, what did they think was going to happen when they filed this suit? Did they not think that it would end up plastered all over the internet?

    If I were one of their clients I would be questioning their judgment right now.

    --

    "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

  12. Re:Jones Day Is Based In Cleveland by andy1307 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Asshole

  13. Re:I say we give 'em what they want. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm looking at you funny. WHACHAGONNADOABOUTIT?

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.