[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-b] Leonardo et al
From: eileen kent <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> hello again to the defunct wg-b.
Hmmm... how about "non-working group B" or "relaxing group B".
For the truly bizarre in trademark owner shenanigans, note that "cello.com"
now appears on the eResolution docket.
The cello.com domain name was the subject of an ACPA action earlier this
year. Cross motions for summary judgment were denied, with the judge stating
that trying to sell "apple.com" is a different kettle of fish than trying to
Subsequently, the case was dismissed with prejudice.
The plaintiff has now brought a UDRP complaint. When informed that
eResolution is being used as an instrumentality for contempt, the case
administrator said, "It doesn't matter." So, as far as they are concerned,
the UDRP supercedes an order of a U.S. federal court.
It has been debated whether a proper action pursuant to rule 4(k) would be a
contract action or a trademark DJ action. Contempt is surely an