• Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

~ Trademark and Copyright Law Updates in Indiana

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

Tag Archives: Cybersquatting

Project management company files trademark lawsuit against potential scam artists

09 Monday Oct 2017

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Passing Off/Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Cybersquatting, Declaratory Relief, False Designation of Origin, Trademark Infringement

Plaintiff operates a project management training company called “Project Management Academy.” Plaintiff has used the trademark since 2009 and owns several related federal trademark registrations.

The Defendants are accused of operating a similar company (some call it a scam) using the “Project Management Academy” or “PMA” trademarks.

Educate 360, LLC v. Patchree Patchrint et al.

Court Case Number: 4:17-cv-00078
File Date: Friday, October 6, 2017
Plaintiff: Educate 360, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: William P. Kelley, David M. Stupich of Stuart & Branigin LLP
Defendant:  Patchree Patchrint a/k/a Patty Jones and Anthony Christopher Jones
Cause: Declaratory Relief, Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Cybersquatting, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Passing Off/Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: TBD
Referred To: TBD

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Fishers sign company sues competitor for cybersquatting

13 Wednesday Jul 2016

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Indianapolis, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Contributory Trademark Infringement, Conversion, Cybersquatting, Deception, False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Dilution, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Indiana Crime Victim's Relief Act, Jane Magnus-Stinson, Matthew P. Brookman, Violation of the CyberPiracy Prevention Act

Plaintiff, based in Fishers, Indiana, is in the business of graphic design, sign manufacturing, metal fabrication, and creating promotional material and apparel.

Plaintiff’s website is located at www.eye4group.com.

Defendant is in the business of sign making and associated tools and products and is a direct competitor of Plaintiff in the Indianapolis area.

Defendant allegedly registered the domain “www.eyefourgroup.com” on October 1, 2015 and directed all traffic to its own website. That’s a no-no.

The domain is currently not active.

Screen Shot 2016-07-13 at 4.55.16 PM

Eye 4 Group, LLC v. Indianapolis Sign Works Inc. et al.

Court Case Number: 1:16-cv-01864-JMS-MPB
File Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Plaintiff: 
Eye 4 Group, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel:
 Jennifer L. Mozwecz of SRM Law, Joe Duepner of Duepler Law, LLC
Defendant: Indianapolis Sign Works Inc., Andrew Chapman
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Contributory Trademark Infringement, Deception, Conversion, Indiana Crime Victim’s Relief Act, Cybersquatting, Violation of the CyberPiracy Prevention Act
Court:
 Southern District of Indiana
Judge: 
Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Matthew P. Brookman

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Oak Motors, Inc. (Indiana) v. Oak Motors, Inc. (California)

21 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Cybersquatting, Declaratory Judgment, False Description, False Designation of Origin, Jane Magnus-Stinson, Litigation Update, Mark J. Dinsmore, Unfair Competition

Plaintiff has been operating as “Oak Motors” since 1985, buying and selling automobiles and providing financial services related to the purchase and sale or automobiles. Plaintiff has five primary physical locations and also advertises via its website.

Defendant, a California company providing similar services, began operating as “Oak Motors” in February 2014. Plaintiff first learned of Defendant’s adoption of the name in March 2015 and sent a cease-and-desist letter citing its prior rights and federal registration. Defendant allegedly first agreed to discontinue use of the “Oak Motors” mark but did not follow through and continues to use the trademark (and similar domain names), hence this lawsuit.

Oak Motors, Inc. (Indiana) v. Oak Motors, Inc. (California)

Court Case Number: 1:16-cv-00595-JMS-MJD
File Date: March 16, 2016
Plaintiff: Oak Motors, Inc. (Indiana)
Plaintiff Counsel: Jonathan G. Polak, Zach Gordon of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
Defendant: Oak Motors, Inc. (California)
Cause: False Designation of Origin, False Description, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Cybersquatting, Declaratory Judgment
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Mark J. Dinsmore

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Indiana Cybersquatting Litigation Update – BidPal v. Intermediaone et al

07 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Cybersquatting, Mark J. Dinsmore, Richard L. Young, Trademark Infringement

Plaintiff, BidPal, Inc., owns a federal trademark registration for BIDPAL. Defendant owns several BidPal-formative domain names, including Bidpal.com, Bidpal.org, Bidpal.info, Bidpal.biz, Bidpal.mobi, all of which are GoDaddy parked pages. Plaintiff made several attempts to contact Defendant but was unable to reach him.

Screen Shot 2014-02-07 at 10.45.14 AM

Plaintiff’s Complaint makes an interesting assertion that, since Defendant owns all of the domains listed above, Plaintiff was forced to adopt ” the far-inferior domain name www.bidpalnetwork.com.” In the age of search, where bidpalnetwork.com ranks 1st on the Google search results for “Bidpal” and none of Defendant’s domains rank at all, do you agree that there’s such a thing as a “far-inferior” domain name? Or just preferred and non-preferred domain names?

Plaintiff may be hoping for a Default Judgment if Defendant doesn’t decide to defend himself. This case may also help determine whether Indiana courts will rule that “parked” domains can constitute cybersquatting. Stay tuned for updates.

BidPal Inc. v. Intermediaone et al

Court Case Number: 1:14-cv-00168-RLY-MJD
File Date: Wednesday, February 05, 2014
Plaintiff: BidPal Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Paul B. Overhauser of Overhauser Law Offices LLC
Defendant: Intermediaone, Intermediaone-AGB, Peter Peterre, Bidpal.com, Bidpal.org, Bidpal.info, Bidpal.biz, Bidpal.mobi
Cause: Cybersquatting, Trademark Infringement
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Richard L. Young
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore

View this document on Scribd

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – North American Van Lines v. North American Master Lines

05 Monday Aug 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, Cybersquatting, False Designation of Origin, John E. Martin, Litigation Update, Philip P. Simon, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

North American Van Lines Inc. v. North American Master Lines Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:13-cv-00792-PPS-JEM
File Date: Friday, August 02, 2013
Plaintiff: North American Van Lines Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Edward A. Sullivan III, Daniel Tychonievich of Faegre Baker Daniels LLP
Defendant: North American Master Lines Inc.
Cause: Cybersquatting, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Common Law Unfair Competition, Common Law Trademark Infringement
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Chief Judge Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Magistrate Judge John E. Martin

View this document on Scribd
← Older posts

Categories

  • Artists (20)
  • Authors (18)
  • Bloggers (36)
  • Branding (25)
  • Business Law (4)
  • Copyright (250)
  • Dear KLF Legal (4)
  • Defamation (5)
  • Entertainment Law (14)
  • Estate Law (2)
  • Family Law (2)
  • Fashion (4)
  • Federal Initiatives (33)
  • Indiana (462)
  • Indianapolis (41)
  • Intellectual Property (514)
  • Just for Fun (25)
  • KLF Legal (19)
  • Legislation (34)
  • Litigation (452)
  • Musicians (10)
  • Nonprofit (5)
  • Northern District of Indiana (141)
  • Patent (41)
  • Privacy (15)
  • Right of Publicity (8)
  • Social Media (53)
  • Southern District of Indiana (258)
  • Stories from the Week that Was (42)
  • Supreme Court (13)
  • Tech Developments (119)
  • Trade Dress (11)
  • Trade Secret (10)
  • Trademark (266)
  • What I'm Reading (8)

Bloggers Copyright Federal Initiatives Indiana Indianapolis Intellectual Property Legislation Litigation Northern District of Indiana Patent Social Media Southern District of Indiana Stories from the Week that Was Tech Developments Trademark

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel