What is Digg?Sponsored by adult swim
Aqua Teen Hunger Force view!
adultswim.com - Carl sings "I'll Be Home This Christmas" from the new Aqua Teen CD. Click here to watch. You almost kind of feel sorry for the guy.
147 Comments
- daveddd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+117Wouldn't they prefer a good game of chess?
- drollia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+89this guy is not cybersquatting though. He is running a Business that sells board games and computer games.
- sleze, on 10/12/2007, -13/+78I hate cybersquatting but I hate bullies even more. Big companies that throw their weight around make me sick.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+55He was selling games.
He was not cybersquatting - charlief, on 10/12/2007, -1/+44As the article states.. there are people out there that don't defend their domain. However this guy is defending it costing him time and money. If he keeps defending it he will either 1) run out of money and give in. or 2) win the case and keep his domain. Either way, it's still a waste to defend against these grabbers over their greed for a domain they never registered. Maybe the Digg effect will encourage others to write to MGM or at least the lawyer to give them the right idea of what is going on.
- catch-22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+41sounds like the only winning move is not to play
- john179781, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31just ask Uzi Nissan at www.nissan.com.
- insomniac8400, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29How is it cybersquatting if he has a legit site that the url is used for? If anything MGM is trying to cybersquat. They want to waste a good url on a crappy movie promotion site for a crappy movie. All they need to do is post a trailer on youTube, no need to waste a url.
- empeethree, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26www.wargamesmovie.com , now that is cyber squatting. I hope this guy wins.
- drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23Just to add a little to that. The author should include the fact that the phrase war game is considered a noun and has been in the English language since 1820. I think that should have some defense because the purpose of his website has NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR MOVIE and uses the domain because of its association with the actual English word. I don't see how he could lose this one with that defense but you never know, I think the US courts are a prime example of justice failing recently.
- trealtney, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Another good one is the guy that owns and runs nissan.com. Uzi Nissan started his company when Nissan Mortor was Datsun. So far he's been able to hold onto it.
- repins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19I did not think you could trademark common words or phrases? The military has been using the term Wargames for a long time, I bet way back before even 1983 :)
- krinthekuz, on 09/16/2008, -1/+16don't negotiate... thats where nissan.com and vw.net got screwed. the vw.net guys said "we could sell it to vw" and the nissan.com guy said he'd take x million, and they turned around and slapped him with a 60something page lawsuit.
- glock22ownr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Flash Flash Bling Bling... got your attention? Drop the bastards a line!
http://www.mgm.com/help.do
I left 'em my nastygram. - SEN5241, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13You might want to call the good folks at Delta Faucet and ask them how they dealt with Delta Airlines. I remember that was a big fight back in the late '90s.
Good luck to you, sir, and stick it to the man! - hometoast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Are you new to this world? He may be /right/, but that doesn't mean he'll /win/.
- drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"Although it may sometimes be possible to take legal action to prevent the use of a mark in relation to products or services outside this range, this does not mean that trademark law prevents the use of that mark by the general public."
That is a quote from wikipedia. Although of course its not the best source it does give us an idea about the legality of suing for trademarks. In this case as long as the judge is at least somewhat competent this guy should win. He should win becuase the trademark itself is in the public domain as a common english phrase that no business has exclusive rights to and trade mark law specifically protects the general public from this kind of abuse. - thezonie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Also, IIRC, you have to consistently defend your trademark or else you basically have no claim to it.
If they really cared about the trademark to WarGames they should have come after him soon after he started the site. Just because they're going to be making a sequel doesn't mean that they can pick and choose when they want to defend their trademarks. - SEN5241, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11>> ...But aren't YOU the man?
No, I'm a faceless cog in the giant wheel of the world. - Wisgary, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1230,000 might seem cool bucks, but if this site has an established customer base, and running this site is something he sees himself doing, 30,000 might seem nothing compared to the living he could make off of it in the long-term. Switching domains like that cuts off a HUGE amount of customers, and forces him to basically start over.
- vhold, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I agree with djlosch. Asking for money is basically admitting that you have the domain for cybersquatting purposes and don't have your own legitimate use. That's pretty much an instant loss.
- circumlocution, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10This is nothing short of corporate intimidation. MGM won't give a crap after their crummy little sequel does a little direct-to-dvd pirouette.
The guy really needs a legal defense DONATE button on his website. - Ludwig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"I agree with djlosch. Asking for money is basically admitting that you have the domain for cybersquatting purposes and don't have your own legitimate use. That's pretty much an instant loss."
That's not admission to squatting, rather, a basic realization that you have something someone else wants.
Unless his goal when registerring the domain was to eventually sell it to MGM, which does not appear the case, it would just be him saying he could part with the domain, stop getting hassled by some company with a big ego, and make a bit of money at the same time. - happygiraffe88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Look at what MGM did with the Rocky.com site that apparently they used the same attorney to get:
It just forwards to http://www.mgm.com/rocky_balboa
MGM probably isn't even planning to use the Wargames.com domain to host a site - it will just be a redirecting domain. - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8A sequel for War Games is being filmed right now, and it's directed by the same guy as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It's going to be a tragedy.
Please don't let them get the domain. Anything that stands in the way, no matter how little, is a good thing. They're about to ruin the legacy of one of my favorite films of all time. - billydisaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The legal system works? What world is that in, you must be rich.
- LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Hey they're filming War Games 2 in my area. They shot some of it in my school. My locker is in the movie!
I feel famous. - hometoast, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9DO NOT try to sell it to them; that would just validate their (currently unfounded) claims of cybersquatting.
cyber-squatting
The practice of registering famous brand
names as Internet domain names, e.g. harrods.com, ibm.firm
or sears.shop, in the hope of later selling them to the
appropriate owner at a profit. - Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8He's had the site for 8 years now, and that means the store is fairly mature, whether or not it's highly profitable (probably not). I can see a good reason to defend it to the death.
I also think his only chance is to get the wargames.com case to be a household name, which has started with it being dugg.
if everyone knows about it, MGM could get itself into a sit-in on all its sites and boycotts on all its movies (if you think this is totally impossible, google "etoy sit-in". Protests legally drove a large online toy retailer (etoys.com) bankrupt in 12 days time for their unethical takeover of etoy.com, a pre-existant art site.
I feel bad for this wargames.com guy, and the term "wargame" placed on the games sold at the site predates the movie. Popular or not, if he loses, someone should legally make MGM suffer somehow. I'll admit I'm not the first person to know how. The only way to beat actions like this is to stop them. Anyone with a domain is at risk to lose it to someone making a movie of the same name and suing for it, unless their domain is www.ftaghn.com - swollentiki, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6If he says he will sell it to them for x amount of dollars, MGM will turn around and use that against him by accusing him of cyber squatting.
- Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6And hopefully it'll be on the front page TOMORROW because it's actually -important- unlike the whole "Ubuntu vs Windows" or "Mac FTW" articles. This is about precidents which is about the future of domain rights. Because the domain administration is in the US, a pre-dating foreign site can be stolen by rich american companies to be used for future websites. It's the opposite of cyber-squatting... it's taking a legitimate site because you can afford a claim at it.
- iamhrh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6sounds like the nissan.com thing may happen again..
- brokekneck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6 Where is our government when you need them. Why are companies allowed to bullie people around like this.
- Kugellehr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Its just bullying and wrong....Wargamers need everything they can get we're a dying breed :(
- vhold, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7http://duggmirror.com/tech_news/My_Battle_with_MGM_Over_Wargames_Com_Is_this_related_to_a_Wargames_Sequel/
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5[computer synthesized voice] WOULD YOU LIKE TO BUY A DOMAIN NAME? [/csv]
:) - swollentiki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I can't get his site to load, but if what he says is true, he's isn't cybersquatting. His business isn't related to the movie in any way. I remember reading an article years ago that was a good rule of thumb when it comes to cybersquatting. If you register a domain name, take nike.com for example, and make it about your dog named Nike, then it would be hard for the actual Nike company to bring a case against you. However, if you used the site to sell shoes, then the company could get the domain.
- dknighton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Problem is, these crazy-ass lawyers don't think he is owed anything. They think he is stealing their intellectual property, so why would they negotiate with him? Sure...if a PR person got wind of what was going on, THEY might see the benefit in working a deal, but lawyers are evil, and aren't concerned with public opinion...only which big case is going to help them buy their next penis-compensating sports car.
- slanted, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@bog
To get attorney's fees, if entitled, you have to make it to the *end* of the trial. If you go bankrupt before then, tough.
Money *can* buy cases. - thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Not to mention...
When was this "defense of this trademark" begun? If it's only recently, they probably don't have a leg to stand on because he's been using it for a good while without them trying to defend it. - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's absolutely a store. If http://www.wargames.com isn't up at the moment, go to the Google cache to see for yourself:
Edit, the cache link I did didn't work - but do the search yourself, you'll see - eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The move MGM is making is called "Reverse Hijacking"
- ihlemic10, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4If you read the blog, you would know that he said he only had the skills and ability to have a store recently this year. That would explain no store in the past.
- Dustin00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Crazy thought:
AFTER winning (don't say anything about this before hand as it may look like cybersquating):
Make an offer to MGM to update your homepage to be for the movie. Give them a fixed time frame (The movie must be in theaters within 6 months of them taking over your home page AND you get the page back 6 months after the first day the movie runs). Offer the same, possibly tighter time frame, deal for the DVD release. All that you ask for is a link at the bottom that points to your game store so you can keep running while they promote their film.
I would think it would be a nice boon to your little internet company, and then when they're done, you get your site back and put a link on it to their DVD and/or IMDB, MGM home page, etc.
If they see this as reasonable, then maybe you can work the same deal for Wargames 3+ without the lawyers/UDRP mess. - zequel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I'm not a lawyer but I think he's using it for a legitimate purpose - Selling war games. So he's not cybersquatting imo. MGM would probably have a case if the guy was making a movie called war games or registered mgmmovies.com. I'd say, and this is from my common sense not law, he has *more* of a right to it. It's much more related to what he's doing with the site than some random movie that's gonna be a terrible remake. I don't think he was cashing in on the popularity (20 years old, moderate hit) of the movie like the other legal cases he mentions the opposing lawyer was involved in, dellsite.com and dellsite.net, wwwalienware.com.
PS The guy seriously needs to work on his HTML coding. - Butros, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7boxlight,
It's not for sale at the price they're willing to pay for it. What the ***** is wrong with you, "it's just business" is the most bogus cliche out there. Businesses ARE people. Numbnuts. - b04155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm surprised a precedent hasn't been set already that negates most of this crap.
- profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ boxlight
"It's not personal, it's business. By the looks of the comments, the digg readers are way too emotional and personal about this sort of thing. MGM is this scenario is not his friend, they're his customer. I read "stick it to the man" instead of "you have something of value a rich customer wants to buy from you". This emotional reaction is very puzzling to me."
The thing is that they don't want to buy the domain name back from him. They want to _take_ it from him using legal arbitration, basically by claiming that they "own" the word "Wargames". It's obvious that this man has put a lot of time and thought into getting this business off the ground, and for MGM to come up and say, "Oh, you can't have that domain name," to me that seems a little *****-ish, especially since it will have absolutely ZERO to do with the movie, or MGM. - tomdiggery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3concurred: It is very suspicious that it took nearly 8 years to actually post something on his website. I understand it can take a few years of development to actually get your business of the ground, but there is nothing listed at that site until sometime in 2006. I am quite sure that his client base is not that large and he probably should have just quietly accepted the first 30,000. Under the circumstances that 30k looks more than generous.
- SEN5241, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3>> I've spent at least 1,000 hours developing Wargames.Com and have rejected dozens of offers over the years to sell the domain, including one for $30,000. My goal is to turn the business into something I can give my sons when they're old enough to run it.
I don't know what stinks, but I think he lays out his reasons for wanting to keep the domain pretty clearly. -
Show 51 - 100 of 147 discussions
