- Joined
- Feb 26, 2004
- Messages
- 1,503
- Reaction score
- 0
I was advised that I won the WIPO case against me for a HUGE name by a HUGE multi-billion dollar complaintant. I won on the premise that the name was not acquired in bad faith because at the time, we were a "licensee" of this big company. They have since revoked the license (after the name was acquired). In any case, the name is one of their trademarks and our attorney is suggesting:
"In order to avoid an anti-counterfeitting and/or anti-cybersquatting action (and the high related costs) before the US Courts (in our opinion, according to the US jurisprudence, they would risk to lose such trial for the same reasons), we suggest to settle the case by, [and they go on to say twe should sell to them at our cost plus legal expenses, which incidently was what we offered prior to their WIPO action].
What do the legal gurus think about this? Should we wait to see what their response is first? Can we sell at a profit to them? If we hold on to the name and not use it do they still have legal recourse to pursue the name (nissan.com comes to mind).
Please advise urgently.
"In order to avoid an anti-counterfeitting and/or anti-cybersquatting action (and the high related costs) before the US Courts (in our opinion, according to the US jurisprudence, they would risk to lose such trial for the same reasons), we suggest to settle the case by, [and they go on to say twe should sell to them at our cost plus legal expenses, which incidently was what we offered prior to their WIPO action].
What do the legal gurus think about this? Should we wait to see what their response is first? Can we sell at a profit to them? If we hold on to the name and not use it do they still have legal recourse to pursue the name (nissan.com comes to mind).
Please advise urgently.