closed Google lawyers C&D

[Sharpy]

This is not my site, just posting it for member interest.

Google lawyers have sent a cease and desist email to Booble.com. They claim trademark violation and dispute Booble's claims that the site is simply a parody... which under law is protected free speech.

Here is a copy of the email sent to Booble:

========================

Via Email to: BOOBLE.COM
RE: Infringement of Google's trademarks and trade dress: http://www.booble.com (Our ref.: 4.614)
Dear Sir or Madam:

Google is the owner of the well-known trademark and trade name GOOGLE, as well as the domain name GOOGLE.COM. As you are no doubt aware, GOOGLE is the trademark used to identify our award-winning search engine, located at http://www.google.com. Since its inception in 1997, the GOOGLE search engine has become one of the most highly recognized and widely used Internet search engines in the world. Google owns numerous trademark registrations and applications for its GOOGLE mark in countries around the world.

Google has used and actively promoted its GOOGLE mark for a number of years, and has invested considerable time and money establishing exclusive proprietary rights in the GOOGLE mark for online computer services and a wide range of goods. As a result of its efforts, the GOOGLE mark has become a famous mark and a property right of incalculable value.

Google has developed a distinctive layout and design for its Google website. Over the years since its inception, Google has invested considerable time and money establishing exclusive rights in this layout and design. By virtue of these efforts, the layout and design of Google's website are recognized by visitors as originating with Google. Google aggressively protects and polices its intellectual property rights, including the various trademark and service marks used for its search services and related goods and services, the distinctive trade dress used to present its services to Internet users, and the copyrighted material on its website.

We have recently become aware of your website at http://www.booble.com (the Domain Name). This Domain Name is confusingly similar to the famous GOOGLE trademark. Your web site is a pornographic web site. Your web site improperly duplicates the distinctive and proprietary overall look and feel of Google's website, including Google's trade dress and the GOOGLE logo.

Your use of the Domain Name and corresponding web site constitutes trademark infringement and dilution of Google's trademarks and unfair competition under federal and state laws. Further, your improper duplication of Google's trade dress on the web site will mislead consumers into believing that some association exists between Google and you, which tarnishes the goodwill and reputation of Google's services and trademarks. Your registration and use of the Domain Name is in bad faith pursuant to the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP") and is clearly designed to appropriate the goodwill associated with the famous GOOGLE mark in violation of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA"). In addition, you would not be able to demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name because you are using it to tarnish the GOOGLE mark.

We note that you have given interviews to the press in which you state that you intended booble.com to be a parody. We dispute your assertion that your website is a parody. For a work to constitute a parody, it must use some elements of a prior author"s composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on the original author"s works. See Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569. Your website does not comment on the Google website at all; it merely uses the Google look and feel and a similar name for a search engine.

In view of your infringement of Google's rights, we must demand that you provide written assurances within 7days that you will immediately:

1. Disable the http://www.booble.com website and discontinue any and all use of the Domain Name;
2. Take steps to transfer the Domain Name to Google;
3. Identify and agree to transfer to Google any other domain names registered by you that contain the GOOGLE or are confusingly similar to the GOOGLE marks;4. Permanently refrain from any use of the term GOOGLE or any variation thereof that is likely to cause confusion or dilution;
5. Immediately and permanently cease and desist from using the Google trade dress.

Sincerely,

The Google Trademark Enforcement Team

 

[Nexus]

Well. No offense, but you're certainly monetizing the hell out of the parody...

~ Nexus

 

[David G]

Is that you name and site Sharpy?

Sorry, I strongly agree with Google. The web-site is definately ripping off the lock and feel of Google. Doing that only makes all domainers look bad and why we are all thought of as being cybersquatters.

Please give them the name. This is particularly grievous since it seems to be a porno site, and you are a Mod here and could make others negative toward DNF also.

 

[Sharpy]

I'ts not my site, I was just posting it for members interest. Guess I should have said that in first post, didn't occur to me that people would think it was mine, sorry guys.

Got it from here: http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=12801

 

[David G]

Originally posted by Sharpy I'ts not my site, I was just posting it for members interest.

Why did you not say that Headline in the original post?

 

[Sharpy]

Originally posted by RealNames


Why did you not say that Headline in the original post?

Originally posted by Sharpy
I'ts not my site, I was just posting it for members interest. Guess I should have said that in first post, didn't occur to me that people would think it was mine, sorry guys.

Got it from here: http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=12801

Agreed

 

[Kid Kool]

i have to disagree with the others as i see it is obvious parody.

It's no different then when they make adult film "spin offs" of popular movies like "Jurassic Pork" and "American Booty".

Should be a win for the defense if they decide the domain is worth keeping.

 

[RMF]

The name is an obvious ripoff of google.com, however, if used properly it could be fine, but as you can see, the site is a total ripoff of google.com, so I think booble.com is in the wrong.. (wow, that was a long sentence :-D )

RMF

 

[Nexus]

Anyone heard of Googley?

Seems to have vanished, but I've been stumlbing across it's echoes. Google even seems to still have it in its cache.
"We now have over 4000 registered members for our email and community. We thank you for choosing an @googley.com email.

The Googley Team"

So odd. Such an obvious infringement on GOOGLE, yet they apparently were really working it.

~ Nexus

 

[Sharpy]

Taken from http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=12837

Booble has now responded to Google's request that Booble.com be handed over to Google.

Here is a copy of their letter to Google which was sent earlier today:

===============================
Dear Trademark Enforcement Team,

We are intellectual property counsel to Guywire, Inc. This letter responds to your e-mail message of January 20, 2004 to our client via domains by proxy.

As your communication recognizes, our client adopted and uses the BOOBLE and booble.com designations to parody the Google web site. Our client's web site is in fact a successful parody, which simultaneously brings to mind the original, while also conveying that it is not the original. See, e.g.,Jordache Enters., Inc. v. Hogg Wyld, Ltd., 828 F.2d 1482, 1486 (10th Cir. 1987) (finding no likelihood of confusion between LARDASHE for oversized jeans, despite its obvious similarity with, and parody of, the well-known JORDACHE mark for jeans). Cf. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F. 3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001) (finding a domain name parody was unsuccessful because Internet users had to view the web site before they were able to discover that it was not the original). Obviously, the Booble web site brings to mind the Google web site, at the same time that it underscores its unique identity as a parodic adult search engine.

In trademark law, parody is a defense to trademark infringement. Eveready Battery Co. v. Adolph Coors Co., 765 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ill. 1991) (holding that a commercial advertisement of a well-known actor in a bunny outfit, banging a drum, was an effective parody of the plaintiff's mechanical toy rabbit advertising character). In the present case, consumers are highly unlikely to be confused as to the source of services for several reasons, including the following:

1. the domain names are entirely different;
2. the BOOBLE web site searches only provide content related to Adult web sites, including TGP sites, Adult stores, and Adult-related products like browser cleaners, pop-up filters, etc.; and
3. the BOOBLE mark is distinct from the GOOGLE mark in that it differs in sound, appearance, commercial impression, and other relevant aspects:
1. it features a woman's chest;
2. it uses the phrase, 'The Adult Search Engine;'
3. it posts a warning that the web site contains explicit content; and
4. it disclaims any association with Google.com.


Neither does the Booble trademark dilute Google's mark. First, the capacity of the GOOGLE mark to identify and distinguish its services is unchanged by Booble's use of its mark. See, e.g., Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 537 US 418 (2003) (requiring proof of actual dilution). In addition, Booble does not tarnish the Google mark. See, e.g., L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811 F.2d 26 (1st Cir. 1987) (finding that a sexually explicit parody of appellee's catalog did not constitute tarnishment). Moreover, Booble's web site is an adult search engine, not 'a pornographic site,' as referred to in your letter. In fact, entering the terms "porn" and "sex" in the Google search engine return 98,400,000 hits and 269,000,000 hits, respectively, while entering these same terms in the Booble adult search engine return 268 hits and 291 hits, respectively. Therefore, the Google mark - which has a longstanding association with pornographic terms and material - is obviously not tarnished.

In your letter, you refer to the Supreme Court decision in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994) (holding that a commercial parody may qualify as a fair use and is not presumptively unfair). As you may have recognized, this is a copyright case. Although some analytic similarities exist between copyright and trademark parody cases, Google neither claims copyright infringement in its letter, nor is any relevant portion of its web site copyrightable. Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc., 49 F.3d 807, 815 (1st Cir. 1995) (holding that literal copying of a computer command hierarchy does not constitute copyright infringement because it is an uncopyrightable method of operation). Therefore, while we feel that Campbell adequately supports the legality of Booble's parodic web site, we believe your reliance thereon is somewhat misplaced.

Finally, we note that Google does not object to numerous registered domain names and web sites, including the following few samples:

1. <www.booble.be/v2/index.php>
2. <www.elgoog.nl>
3. <www.elgoog.de>


Since the law does not appear to support Google's position, we ask that Google reconsider its objections and accept the Booble web site in the spirit that it was intended - as a parody. We hope that these comments will permit you to now close your file on this matter. However, if you wish to discuss it further, please feel free to contact the undersigned.

 

[OnSpec]

God I love a good dust-up :cheeky:

 

[rjerina]

booble will live. they have some smart people there working to keep their network safe from lawsuits like this

 

[namedropper]

Booble.com is going to get crushed, and deservedly so. You can't claim parody while at the same time running a commercial enterprise in the trademark owner's same field. That's just idiotic. The parody defense is for works of entertainment, not competing businesses. To top it off, with B being so close to G on the keyboard, Booble.com has very clear typosquatting problems.

The people at Booble.com have more balls than brains. The response letter they wrote to Google is just pathetic.

 

[HelloThere]

Well, right or wrong, I think it's funny!

Google should be grateful for the publicity. All those surfers who use the Booble site, will probably end up typing google the next time they want to do a search on a non-adult subject.

Booble should win their case, imo.

 

[namedropper]

Well, right or wrong, I think it's funny!

Google should be grateful for the publicity. All those surfers who use the Booble site, will probably end up typing google the next time they want to do a search on a non-adult subject.

Booble should win their case, imo.

Oh, RIGHT, because the people using Booble never heard of Google before and will now suddenly go use this totally unheard of search engine thanks to this well-known porn site...

Have you been living under a rock for the last several years?

 

[RMF]

Oh, RIGHT, because the people using Booble never heard of Google before and will now suddenly go use this totally unheard of search engine thanks to this well-known porn site...

Have you been living under a rock for the last several years?

lol, couldn't have said it better myself.

RMF

 

[HelloThere]

It's not about knowing about it before hand. It's about habits. People develop habits and continue to follow them even when there are alternatives. Grocery stores and retail stores are very familiar with this concept. It's the whole basis of having regular sale items. Get people coming into your store for sale items on a regular basis, and eventually they will get into the habit of going to your store for things they need that are not on sale. It gets people into a habit of going to your store, and keeping your store in the forefront of their minds.

Now if people start typing in Booble for adult searches, then they are going to get into the habit of typing in that pattern. This reinforces the typing pattern in the subconscious, which could naturally lead them, over time, to more frequently type in google when they need to do a non-adult search, instead of say Yahoo or some other search engine name, which is a different typing pattern.

Even the familiar look works for google, because there will be a subconscious link to self-gratification, which will make those adult searchers feel that familiar 'thrill' when they see google. Sex sells, and propels many of our motivations, so even though there is no direct link between the two companies, google will benefit from the subconsious 'sexual' response that may be associated with seeing their site design. Kind of the same way that a trained dog will salivate when it hears a bell, if it has been conditioned to associate the bell with food (ie. Pavlov's Dog).

It's about influencing and reinforcing search habits at a subconsious level. Since the adult market is so large, and the activity in this search area is so active, it just means that the potential for habit 'programming' or 'conditioning' is very large, and google will only benefit from this parody in the long run--assuming Booble really catches on.

 

[namedropper]

I see it's a very big rock...

 

[HelloThere]

Yes, it's the same rock that advertisers hide behind when they blast all those subconscious psycho-sexual messages at you in their television and print ads to see how you unaware consumers react like puppets when they pull the strings. It's a whole lot bigger and pervasive than you think...

 

[namedropper]

Subconscious messages pulling strings on puppets?

Perhaps I was too hasty. That rock I thought I saw may actually be a big tinfoil hat.