Dustin loses Court Case

[Carrie]

The said:

Guys...

The suit has nothing to do with bad taste or amateur web design. Dustin Diamond sued over the rights to his name, since it is his name as the domain. Yes, it's true: the site design utterly sucks and reeks of amateur workmanship, but the point is the domain name may cause confusion among Dustin Diamond fans who might mistake the owner of the web site as the real Dustin Diamond (although there is a disclaimer, but that's not the point). It's the same rationale behind Microsoft suing a guy named Mike Rowe who registered the website mikerowesoft.com. It's a simple copyright suit over the rights to Dustin Diamond's name. Simply put, since his name is not an official government trademark, he lost the case. The guestbook has nothing to do with it. It's just a fansite who's domain shares the same name. Now, if Dustin Diamond chooses to sue over character misrepresentation, well, that's another story. <hint hint>

Nicely said and you are right. I think it is a definite case of misrepresentation. That might be a case he would win. As far as the sites design is concerned...I think if it was a website about Dustin in a positive way, for the the fans and a true fansite...he would have had no problems with it bearing his name.

[Barb]

Hmm...that sounds more reasonable. I'm not good with all the legal stuff....lol

[Barb]

Complainant claims common law trademark rights with respect to his personal name for performing, acting and other entertainment/media products and services, based on his leading role in the television show Saved by the Bell and related television movies and sequels, as well as his appearance in other movies, magazines, and newspapers and his videotape/DVD entitled Dustin Diamond Teaches Chess.


Respondent operates the website < dustindiamond.com>, and has continually used the website < dustindiamond.com> to portray himself as Complainant.


Respondent offered, over email, to sell the Domain Name to Complainant for $1,800. Complainant refused this offer.


Complainant sent a certified cease and desist letter to Respondent at a California address from the WHOIS database. The letter was returned as undeliverable. Complainant sent another certified cease and desist letter to Respondent at a New York address, which was also returned as undeliverable. Finally, Complainant sent a cease and desist letter to Respondent over email. Respondent refused to comply with the request until he received the letter by certified mail. Complainant mailed certified letters on two separate occasions. Respondent has refused to contact Complainant via phone or U.S. Mail despite several requests.


Complainant's common law trademark rights in his name have acquired secondary meaning, as evidenced by nationwide sale of his instructional video.


Complainant's widespread usage of his trademark dates back to 1987, well before the registration of < dustindiamond.com>.


The Domain Name < dustindiamond.com> is identical to Complainant's trademark.


Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, and has not made any legitimate use of the Domain Name.


Respondent is not using the Domain Name as a parody or other legitimate noncommercial fair use.


Respondent's sole use of the Domain Name is to misinform Internet users, tarnish Complainant's name and mark, and divert visitors to the website to a guestbook which includes racist comments, vulgar messages, and links to pornographic websites.


Respondent has not used and has not made demonstrable preparations to use the Domain Name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.


Respondent routinely portrays himself as Complainant on the website.


Respondent uses the email address [e-mail] to give the impression that he is Complainant.


Respondent modified the website to disclaim affiliation with Complainant and suggest that the site is a "fan club," but has on occasion reverted back to the prior text where Respondent portrays himself as Complainant.


Complainant has never given Respondent permission to use his trademark, and has no affiliation or association with Respondent.


Respondent has no legitimate, good faith explanation of his use of the Domain Name.


Respondent has no trademark rights in Complainant's name.

[The Animal]

Thanks, Barb!! Nice research!!

Oh, so his name IS trademarked!! In this case, Dustin Diamond should appeal the court's decision. If he used his name as a copyright for his celebrity publicity, then it's a definite case for copyright infringement. That, of course, does not include identity theft and Internet Privacy Acts, established over the last decade, that prevents people from assuming someone else's personality, celebrity or not. This should be interesting to follow.

[Carrie]

This is very indeed. I knew something was up with dustindiamond.com when he posted the disclaimer. If I read Barb`s quote in her post correctly Dustin was offered the option to but the domain...I think I would have purchased it. The legal fees probably far outweigh the asking price of $1,800.

[Barb]

Bulldog5747 said:

This is very indeed. I knew something was up with dustindiamond.com when he posted the disclaimer. If I read Barb`s quote in her post correctly Dustin was offered the option to but the domain...I think I would have purchased it. The legal fees probably far outweigh the asking price of $1,800.

Maybe he felt he shouldn't have to pay $1800 when he felt it was his territory on the net in the first place since it was his name?? Dustin may have though taking him to court would've just proved this Max guy wrong instead of just buying it off of him and kind of letting him win in a way....but that's just what I think.

[Timothy]

I think you're right, And if Dustin HAD won the case, this max guy would've had to pay him some money, because he used this copyrighted name for a while.

[Barb]

Timothy said:

I think you're right, And if Dustin HAD won the case, this max guy would've had to pay him some money, because he used this copyrighted name for a while.

Exactly

[lindsaybeth]

Max's site isn't a fan site at all. He's just using Dustin's name to get hits.

[screechpowers]

lindsaybeth said:

Max's site isn't a fan site at all. He's just using Dustin's name to get hits.

I agree.

[gzack]

I support Max - that site is supposed to be crappy he has other sites that are designed well. As for the content - all the outragous posts are for these peoples twisted sense of homour - you might not understand it, but some find it funny and they have a right to post that - they are not posting anything that is intended to slander - everything posted is known to be in humor and not taken seriously. I have also read real articles from people who have attended Dustins shows at several Universities and they all have said the same thing about his routine - he swears alot, says a lot of sexual things and does a spoof called "Shaved by the Balls" where he calls zack and slater gay and talks dirty of the characters on the show. This is not made up - many writers of school newspapers have confirmed this - so if you think Dustin is some sweet innocent guy - you are wrong - his homour seems to be similar to that of those who post on Max's site. Max got the domain before him, that's life deal with it Dustin- he had a chance to buy it - Max isn't making any money off that site - there are no ads on it - it's just a place for people to write what ever they want without being censored - no one who posts there wishes no harm to Dustin in any way - I understand if you don't understand that sort of homour - but they have just as much right to post as you do - no one takes them serious.

[Nick]

i still think Max is a jerk! even if he's not making money off of it, what's the point of using www.dustindiamond.com, its obviously not a fan site, he does not have a legitimate reason for running the site

[Erika]

GZack said:

I support Max - that site is supposed to be crappy he has other sites that are designed well. As for the content - all the outragous posts are for these peoples twisted sense of homour - you might not understand it, but some find it funny and they have a right to post that - they are not posting anything that is intended to slander - everything posted is known to be in humor and not taken seriously. I have also read real articles from people who have attended Dustins shows at several Universities and they all have said the same thing about his routine - he swears alot, says a lot of sexual things and does a spoof called "Shaved by the Balls" where he calls zack and slater gay and talks dirty of the characters on the show. This is not made up - many writers of school newspapers have confirmed this - so if you think Dustin is some sweet innocent guy - you are wrong - his homour seems to be similar to that of those who post on Max's site. Max got the domain before him, that's life deal with it Dustin- he had a chance to buy it - Max isn't making any money off that site - there are no ads on it - it's just a place for people to write what ever they want without being censored - no one who posts there wishes no harm to Dustin in any way - I understand if you don't understand that sort of homour - but they have just as much right to post as you do - no one takes them serious.

Fine. But use some other form of address. We know the kind of act Dustin puts on his comedy shows. It's an act. It's not who he is. I just don't think he appreciates that kind of filth surrounding the use of his name on an internet address. I think it's embarrassing. And puts down the talent that he is. And anyways, he fought for ownership of his name as a dot com. And yeah, I have a hunch he wouldn't tolerate that abuse on a website like that if he had won the case. Who would?

By the way, welcome to the board! I hope you read the rules...and happy posting!

[elliot]

That board should be shut down. I posted there the other day, requesting that it be cleaned up. All I got for my troubles was vulgar responses.

[Erika]

elliot said:

That board should be shut down. I posted there the other day, requesting that it be cleaned up. All I got for my troubles was vulgar responses.

Yeah. It's disgusting. But if you notice, the owner of the website owns the guestbook, as well. So, I highly doubt it will be taken down. If it were from a free based web provider, the guestbook would have been taken down a long time ago. Because it violates many rules.