Media Copyright Group Sues US Copyright Group Over Trademark Threat
from the that's-what-you-get dept
We had just written about the rise of a bunch of new pre-settlement shakedown shops, who send out massive amounts of lawsuits over claims of file sharing in order to get people to pay up. Just recently, some had noticed that these firms all seem to copy from each other, and now two of the firms may be heading to court over it. Seriously.
An anonymous reader passed along the news that the Media Copyright Group — which was set up recently by a divorce lawyer to work with porn providers — has filed for declaratory judgment against US Copyright Group, the offshoot of Dunlap, Grubb & Weaver (the firm that was the first to get attention for bringing these sorts of pre-settlement deals to the US). We had already noted that US Copyright Group appeared to have copied its website from a competitor, but apparently even though US Copyright Group thinks it’s okay to copy others, it doesn’t like anyone else copying it. A lawyer from Dunlap, Grubb & Weaver sent a cease and desist to Media Copyright Group, alleging trademark infringement. Media Copyright Group filed for a declaratory judgment that it is not infringing:
Filed Under: copyright, pre-settlement, trademark
Companies: media copyright group, us copyright group
Comments on “Media Copyright Group Sues US Copyright Group Over Trademark Threat”
I wonder if U.S. Copyright Group will counterclaim for copyright infringement for stealing direct quotes from their pleadings. Hope so. 🙂
Gotta love it
No so f*cking funny now that the shoe is on the other foot, is it? Scumbags.
arstechnica has the story too: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/10/p2p-law-firms-now-threatening-each-other.ars
reasonable solution
Obviously, the only reasonable solution for firms of nothing-but-blood-sucking-lawyers to settle their differences: Chainsaw cage-match! Live on Pay-Per-View, the winner(s?) keep a large portion of the proceeds, everybody wins.
: D
Re: reasonable solution
You just KNOW there will have to be a rematch to determine who gets the distribution rights!
Re: Re: reasonable solution
Of the limbs?
Re: reasonable solution
And by proceeds we mean they are considered the lawsuit winner, and have the prestigious glory of keeping their competitor’s dismembered body.
no such thing
There is no such thing as “intellectual property”.
There is only “Imaginary Profitables”.
Live by it.
Eureka! We shall call it "Silverlight"!
I think the best thing we can do to control copyright is look at pre-settlement shakedowns of people with unauthorized flash usage. This will make it so people can’t watch videos or listen to music while at work.
It solves a lot of problems and keeps people ignorant.
Mr Kettle...
Mr Pot would like a word with you. He has a baseball bat and cement, Armani suit, and a few “friends” to make sure you get the point.
The only thing I can say is that perhaps you should consider a new area for work. Preferably one that doesn’t involve writing with your left hand. You see, his friends are a little… itchy. And they can be quite thorough in making sure you understand every last word they say.
Just a comment to note that neither of these groups are engaged in anything I would even remotely call the practice of IP law. The fact they appear to be engaged in an IP matter does not mean they are actively engaged in the practice of such law.
Re: Re:
Practice of IP law, bastardization of IP law, at this point who can tell the difference?
There should be a fine plaintiffs pay for crap lawsuits that waste time and don’t have any positive effect on our society.
The way things are now, what do law firms really have to lose when a case is dismissed or when they fight each other like this? They pay filing fees, and documentation fees, sure, but who pays for the rest of it? The firms taking cases for Intellectual Property suits still get paid by the parties they represent, right?
If I was the judge hearing this case, I’d throw the case out and fine both of these parties for wasting the Court’s time. I’d set the fines at actual cost to the government of the proceedings and multiply by 1.5. Then I’d order that all funds be directed to an ad campaign dissuading the misuse of government resources for something so petty as using such generic terms as a name for which to conduct business, and expecting anything less than the confusion of uninformed consumers.
I think that NO ONE should be allowed to copyright or patent anything that uses generic terms.
what did the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy say about lawyers?
cant say its copyrighted
They are just like vultures all tearing at the same carcass. And like with vultures, they fight amongst themselves to see who gets to eat the biggest pieces of the (rotting) meat.
What if all the IP scammers send a letter to the same person?
Is there any protection from double jeopardy?
Innocent person: “Hey, I already beat so ‘n so lawyers in court for that crap.”
Other Lawyers: “That does not matter, we are suing you too.”
let the animals fight it out with any luck both will be vulture meat.
Eriq Gardner from THR, Esq. just tweeted: “US Copyright Group settles dispute with Media Copyright Group over trademark rights to name. Anti-piracy firms learn to co-exist.”
such irony
I’m always prowling for interesting IP law news for a class I teach. Last night was a news article about aggressive new “copyright” trolls. This one is classic. I’ll have to include it in the next class. Let the trolls beat each other up.