Worst C&D ever...

**dvdrip** · 12-17-2009, 07:02 AM

I got a C&D saying this:

The <xxxxxxxxxx> domain name currently resolves to a parked page with commercial payper-click links. These links point to websites offering goods and services that are unrelated to those that xxxxxxxxxx company provides.

Ok. Thanks for the tip...

**south** · 12-17-2009, 07:14 AM

**PRED** · 12-17-2009, 07:33 AM

lol
frame it

**loudbeats.com** · 12-17-2009, 07:59 AM

lol

**domaindot** · 12-17-2009, 10:59 AM

Any chance of seeing a scanned image/screenshot?

**draggar** · 12-17-2009, 11:17 AM

Youy might want to talk to a lawyer about suing for damages after you fall off your chair laughing over this one.

**dvdrip** · 12-17-2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by domaindot

Any chance of seeing a scanned image/screenshot?

Sorry but no.

I forgot to say that after the quote above (unrelated links) they said that visitors might be confused because of this. So they prefer me to have related links so people aren't confused???

**draggar** · 12-17-2009, 11:34 AM

So they're upset that you're not infringing on their TM? I guess they really want to file a WIPO!

**stock_post** · 12-17-2009, 11:40 AM

You may need to keep this email for records if they ever issue a WIPO you can say they asked for it.

**David G** · 12-17-2009, 11:41 AM

Even if you have always used the name in a totally non-competing way you can still get sued for TM infringemnt in court on the grounds you were getting typein traffic really intended for a famous trademark and also based on the fact they can present evidence you tried to sell the name where the price was based on the strength of their mark, even if in a diverse category.

**PokerPie** · 12-18-2009, 10:47 AM

Might be a trick to get you to put up relevant ads - then they'd have a WIPO case.

**Mike Cruz** · 12-18-2009, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by PokerPie

Might be a trick to get you to put up relevant ads - then they'd have a WIPO case.

As dumb as a strategy this would be, I wouldn't doubt it.

**domaindot** · 12-18-2009, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by dvdrip

Sorry but no.

I forgot to say that after the quote above (unrelated links) they said that visitors might be confused because of this. So they prefer me to have related links so people aren't confused???

When I saw this thread for the first time, I had just a smile on my face. Now everytime I see this thread rise to the top, I can't stop giggling.

This is a first. Hey seriously - once the dust settles down, do consider posting the letter here. At least, for historic purposes.

**David G** · 12-18-2009, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by domaindot

When I saw this thread for the first time, I had just a smile on my face. Now everytime I see this thread rise to the top, I can't stop giggling.

This is a first. Hey seriously - once the dust settles down, do consider posting the letter here. At least, for historic purposes.

Not the first in court. As I said before, you can be sued even if the name is being used in a totally non-competing way having nothing to do with the Trademark category.