The publisher of BREAKING THE DA VINCI CODE has agreed to place a sticker on its cover indicating that it is a critique of THE DA VINCI CODE. Via MSNBC.
INTA’s book “Trademarks Law and the Internet” has now been updated. The book is edited by Neal Greenfield (who is affiliated with SchwimmerLegal, helping clients, among other things, manage their domain names); and Lisa Cristal (who comes by here for lunch sometimes). I co-authored a chapter for the supplement entitled “UDRP Trends” with Patrick Jones, of Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff (and UDRPLaw.net fame). Topics include ICANN, jurisdiction, ACPA, Web Abuse, and International Developments, authored by star cyber-practitioners in over 20 jurisdictions.
Sample chapters from the prior supplement, including mine on “Domain Names and the Commercial Market” are available online here.
Duck quote in this article.
At least two of the domain names mentioned in the press release, DINSEYLAND.COM and BOBTHEBIULDER.COM appear to have been registered by third parties and are pointing to pages of links.
How Google’s results compare to those of Yahoo’s when the search term is NIKE, via Langreiter.com. Thanks to Greg for this.
A judge has ruled that a lawyer should be awarded $300/hour for his courtroom work, but only $150/hour for his written work, which was “‘careless’ and ‘laden with typographical errors.’” Via NYLawyer.
Cache La Pourde has a federal trademark registration for PROFILE for animal feeds. Land O’Lakes has an application for LAND O’LAKES PROFILE for feed and is selling the feed depicted. Cache La Pourde has filed a $132 million trademark suit against Land O’Lakes.
Apple is promoting its iLife ’04 product with the slogan “It’s like Microsoft Office for the rest of your life.”
Inman Real Estate News reports on a web site hosting company specializing in create websties for real estate agents, that is allegedly holding customers’ domain names ‘hostage.’ The article states that some agents ‘suspected’ that the hosting company had registered the domain names in the company’s name rather than in the agents’ names.
A domain name registrant shouldn’t have to suspect anything. Go to Internic whois and find out who the registrar is. Go to the registrar’s whois and find out who the admin contact is. If it’s not you, and you can’t make it you by accessing an online account with the registrar, then you don’t control the domain name. As far as I know (and I would appreciate feedbakc on this), if you want to control a domain name then you have to control two things: (1) the email address of the administrative contact; and (2) the account with the registrar. The tech contact controls the deployment of the domain name but the admin contact controls who the tech contact is. The person who has the password to the account for that domain name can change the admin contact.
The entity identified in whois as the ‘organization’ to whom the name is registered is of interest but ultimately irrelevant. The entity that can change the admin contract is, in my view, the true owner of a domain name.