I wrote about this recently on trademark thread,but will do so again as I think this case is important. I'm eInfoworld.com. A month ago, IDG, parent company of Infoworld, sent me a trademark infringement/dilution notice. Because I do not compete with them, because I am not text identical and because of the bad faith component of the trademark law and the sheer number of other "infoworlds" (74 in total) it was obvious I was not causing trademark dilution, especially when infoworld.org , a text identical name, was not contacted by IDG, nor was e-infoworld. A friend and I spent a week researching trademark law and put up a website rebuttal to IDG. We suggested a link to them was all that was necessary. Within 2 days they responded and agreed to withdraw the claim and asked us to link to them.
It's an amazing story of a corporate legal dept of a huge technology/news/information conglomerate - (they own Dummies, Industry Standard, PCWorld, etc) reacting swiftly and correctly to a situation. The whole story can be found on http://www.einfoworld.com I would hope this would become a role model for how people and corporations can work things out, no litigation, no money spent. If IDG can understand that I posed no threat to them, certainly others can also begin to understand that it is possible to find simple, straightforward solutions to situations, especially as the world of trademark law meets new territory.
I just had my own case. Two weeks ago a trademark infringement letter was sent to me by IDG, Inc, parent company of the Dummies books, The Industry Standard, PCWorld, MacWorld, LinuxWorld, Infoworld, Sunworld, etc, etc. They demanded I turn over my domain name to them immediately or go to court. I sent a rebuttal letter and put up a website proving I was neither infringing or diluting their trademark. Two days later they accepted my suggestion I link to them and agreed to drop the case. No litigation, no lawyers involved, no courts. I have all the information on my site and hope the word gets passed around how IDG corporate legal dept agreed to not pursue this reverse domain name hijacking. I'm hoping it could serve as precedent for others. I don't wish this experience on anyone. This took over my life and infuriated me, but the ending is good and I'm hoping it can help others. http://www.eInfoworld.com
Slashdot Mirror
I wrote about this recently on trademark thread,but will do so again as I think this case is important. I'm eInfoworld.com. A month ago, IDG, parent company of Infoworld, sent me a trademark infringement/dilution notice. Because I do not compete with them, because I am not text identical and because of the bad faith component of the trademark law and the sheer number of other "infoworlds" (74 in total) it was obvious I was not causing trademark dilution, especially when infoworld.org , a text identical name, was not contacted by IDG, nor was e-infoworld. A friend and I spent a week researching trademark law and put up a website rebuttal to IDG. We suggested a link to them was all that was necessary. Within 2 days they responded and agreed to withdraw the claim and asked us to link to them.
It's an amazing story of a corporate legal dept of a huge technology/news/information conglomerate - (they own Dummies, Industry Standard, PCWorld, etc) reacting swiftly and correctly to a situation. The whole story can be found on http://www.einfoworld.com I would hope this would become a role model for how people and corporations can work things out, no litigation, no money spent. If IDG can understand that I posed no threat to them, certainly others can also begin to understand that it is possible to find simple, straightforward solutions to situations, especially as the world of trademark law meets new territory.
I just had my own case. Two weeks ago a trademark infringement letter was sent to me by IDG, Inc, parent company of the Dummies books, The Industry Standard, PCWorld, MacWorld, LinuxWorld, Infoworld, Sunworld, etc, etc. They demanded I turn over my domain name to them immediately or go to court. I sent a rebuttal letter and put up a website proving I was neither infringing or diluting their trademark. Two days later they accepted my suggestion I link to them and agreed to drop the case. No litigation, no lawyers involved, no courts. I have all the information on my site and hope the word gets passed around how IDG corporate legal dept agreed to not pursue this reverse domain name hijacking. I'm hoping it could serve as precedent for others. I don't wish this experience on anyone. This took over my life and infuriated me, but the ending is good and I'm hoping it can help others. http://www.eInfoworld.com