The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.
FRACTIONAL VILLAS, INC. v. DESERT QUARTERS, ET AL.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN DIEGO)
This is one of 5 lawsuits filed with the same allegations. Note the references to duplicate content and the allegation relating to the value of the creative aspects of the pages allegedly stolen by the Defendants. The relationship between the exact terms, the location of those terms in relation to other words, the formatting and presentation of the page, and other SEO elements are now finally working their way into the subject matter of lawsuits as it relates to damages and the intellectual property included on a webpage.
The Plaintiff is the author of certain creative works protected by US copyright registration which comprise the "fractionalvillas.com" website. The site offers fractional ownership of high end luxury properties. The Defendants are alleged to have reproduced the work protected by the copyrights and launched competing websites selling fractional ownership in luxury property. Plaintiff alleges that its "business and reputation were irreparably harmed by the confusion caused by the dual publication of the infringed material to web search engine results from Google, Yahoo, et al."
The lawsuit claims copyright infringement, federal unfair competition, California unfair competition, and requests the entry of temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, permanent injunctions, the award of statutory damages of not less then $150,000.00 per copyright infringement, and other relief. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1220.
FEARS/NACHAWATI, PLLC v. GETTY IMAGES (US), INC.
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (DALLAS)
This is a classic example of why demand letters create an inherent risk and it is important to consider the implications of the words used. The response in this case was for a declaratory judgment to be filed in the lawyer's hometown and puts the law firm in a better position to resolve this matter on favorable grounds.
Plaintiff is a law firm located in Texas and the Defendant, Getty Images, asserted a claim of copyright infringement against the law firm for the alleged unauthorized use of images on its website.
The law firm filed a lawsuit in its own jurisdiction for a declaratory judgment that it was not infringing on the Getty Images' photographs. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1221.
TECHNOMARINE SA v. AUTHENTICWATCHES.COM INC AND JOHN DOE 1 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (FOLEY SQUARE)
Very common problem today online. The Defendants stole the Plaintiff's website and, as savvy Internet business people know, a replica website cannot only divert traffic away but also "sandbox" or otherwise penalize the organic search results generated by the original website. So the theft of a website is a double edged sword that has more than one direct business consequence.
Technomarine is a Swiss based corporation famous for its watches and the worldwide owner of the "Technomarine" trademark. The defendant allegedly copied all or portions of the website of Technomarine and started selling "grey market" Technomarine-branded watches for sale to the public.
The lawsuit is brought for "federal unfair competition", trademark infringement and copyright infringement under the US Trademark Act. Damages, attorney's fees, triple damages, punitive damages, and other relief is included in the prayer for relief by the Plaintiff's for "Defendants use of copies of the copyrighted work". Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1222.
DESIGN BUREAU CORP. v. JEWELL E. COLVIN, ET AL.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA (MIAMI)
Liability is being extended to third parties through claims of "conspiracy" and traditional notions of "vicarious liability" and "contributory liability" in the context of torts and intellectual property infringements. These types of claims establishing potential significant liability on the shoulders of third parties will dramatically change, over the coming years, the conduct of businesses in the world of the Internet. The natural consequence of these risks will be to "self police" more attentively the practices, policies and procedures of businesses internally and increase the care given in selecting business partners and customers.
The Plaintiff registered a state trademark and service mark in the term "adbportfolios.com" in 2002 and developed a website for which it claims copyright protection. Due to various disputes, the Plaintiff obtained a court order in 2004 validating its ownership of both the content of the website and the domain name for which it held a state trademark registration. Defendant is alleged to have copied the Plaintiff's website in its entirety, obtained the domain name "adbportfolio.com" and launched a competing website. A third Defendant, Reed Presentations, Inc., a New Jersey corporation, allegedly acquired the website and is alleged to have conspired with the other Defendants.
Plaintiff has brought an action for federal trademark infringement, federal copyright infringement, Florida state trademark infringement, Florida deceptive and unfair trade practices act violations, tortious interference with prospective business relationships, and civil conspiracy. The relief requested includes $100,000.00 for each trademark infringement, $150,000.00 for each copyright infringement, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs, and extensive injunctive relief addressing the claimed misconduct of the Defendants. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1223.