Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
1–10 of 11 posts
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#2> A San Francisco judge awarded Pinterest $7.2 million in damages and legal fees ... against Qian Jin, a Chinese cybersquatter
Uhm... so that's a US judge awarding damages against a Chinese person. What does this translates to practically speaking? This guy won't be able to enter the US. What else? Will it be up to the domain registrar to comply with the US court decision? What if the registrar is not US-based?
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#3> A San Francisco judge awarded Pinterest $7.2 million in damages and legal fees ... against Qian Jin, a Chinese cybersquatter Uhm... so that's a US judge awarding damages against a Chinese person. What does this translates to practically speaking? This guy won't be able to enter the US. What else? Will it be up to the domain registrar to comply with the US court decision? What if the registrar is not US-based?
[deleted]
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#4> A San Francisco judge awarded Pinterest $7.2 million in damages and legal fees ... against Qian Jin, a Chinese cybersquatter Uhm... so that's a US judge awarding damages against a Chinese person. What does this translates to practically speaking? This guy won't be able to enter the US. What else? Will it be up to the domain registrar to comply with the US court decision? What if the registrar is not US-based?
[deleted]
The domains were impersonating pinterest. Perhaps the damages factored in lost traffic and damage to the brand.
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#5It says "Order granting default judgement", does that mean that the guy didn't show up or have an attorney present to represent him? That sounds like he didn't try fighting the suit and Pinterest won by default (same thing happens civil suits when the defendant pulls a no-show).
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#6It says "Order granting default judgement", does that mean that the guy didn't show up or have an attorney present to represent him? That sounds like he didn't try fighting the suit and Pinterest won by default (same thing happens civil suits when the defendant pulls a no-show).
Exactly. From the article: "since the defendant didn’t even respond to the complaint, it’s not exactly clear whether he will pay up."
So not only is this a default judgement, but the $7.2 million will probably never materialize because the defendant is in China. However, I'm guessing that Pinterest will get control over the domains (which, to them, is probably more important) because the registrars are US-based.
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#7> A San Francisco judge awarded Pinterest $7.2 million in damages and legal fees ... against Qian Jin, a Chinese cybersquatter Uhm... so that's a US judge awarding damages against a Chinese person. What does this translates to practically speaking? This guy won't be able to enter the US. What else? Will it be up to the domain registrar to comply with the US court decision? What if the registrar is not US-based?
They're .com addresses, supposedly the court can get Verisign to pull them.
http://blog.easydns.org/2012/02/29/verisign-seizes-com-domai...
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
The domains were impersonating pinterest. Perhaps the damages factored in lost traffic and damage to the brand.
Not really impersonation, but trademark dilution. Pinterest argues that their mark is famous and instantly recognizable brand name, which gives them extra trademark protection against infringement.
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#9Seems like the defendant is just a "shell company". Qian Jin in Chinese is 金钱, or gold.
Re: Pinterest Wins $7.2M and Injunction Against Cybersquatter
#10there you go... Who owns The Switch?