Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

clownstrike.lol

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 243 posts

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#211

Post by account42 »

tyingq wrote: post #186
_heimdall wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were any of those success for violation of copyright or trademark when used in parody? I don't know if it would hold up, or how long it would even be between a domain registrar handing it over and having a day in court, but there does seem to be a good case for this being a protected use of CrowdStrike's protected branding.

Untied.com lasted for a a really long time, but did eventually get taken down based on copyright. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untied.com

That ruling is only relevant if the operator of clownstrike.lol is in Canada. The US in particular has much better protections for parody than most countries.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#212

Post by account42 »

wlesieutre wrote: post #123
fxtentacle wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow, they sued someone who used his last name as a domain name because they feel like their trademark should allow them to prohibit him from using his family name ... And obviously they registered their trademark after he started using his name.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Motors_v._Nissan_Comput...

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#214

Post by account42 »

sophacles wrote: post #122
ronsor wrote: post #28

Judging by the amount of upvotes this post has received, I believe CrowdStrike has made a major PR mistake.

I believe the brand reputation company made a mistake on behalf of crowdstrike. I doubt anyone at crowdstrike was involved directly.

Does it matter? If they authorized a brand reputation company to harass random third parties without runnit it by them firs then it's still their fault.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#215

Post by Y_Y »

arp242 wrote: post #134
new299 wrote: post #10

I wonder to what extent companies consider the reputational damage these kinds of enforcement actions cause. I recently came across this when googling for information on a small Biotech startup: https://udrp.adr.eu/decisions/detail?id=65fab3e46fc02956a010... Will probably be the first thing I remember when I hear their name.

He was even willing to sell it for €5,000. If they had just paid that relatively small sum instead of getting all triggered that someone might ask money they would have had the domain. Hilarious. Good on this Christian fella for winning. What a bunch of idiots. This does bring up a question though; I've had arp242.net for a long time, and obviously that's not my actual name. Can some company register "arp242" as a tr…

For the record, common law generally doesn't have a solid concept of actual/legal/"real" name, if you're known by a name then it's your name.

My birth cert, bank accounts, passports etc. are issued in various jurisdictions with various names. I'm not an international man of mystery or tax cheat, but I'm known by various equally legitimate names. It is a bit of a bother when someone around they must all be identical, but there's no crime or deception.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#217

Post by account42 »

bitslayer wrote: post #60
jsheard wrote: post #5

CrowdStrike/CSC has owned at least clownstrike.com and clownstrike.net since 2012, but they weren't on the ball with those new TLDs it seems.

I worked at company_name when the .xxx top level domain became available, and my boss was sure that we should buy company_name.xxx. I talked them out of it. Luckily no one has maliciously registered company_name.xxx all these years later. I guess it could happen any day now.

Does rule 34 apply to corporations?

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#218

Post by Daviey »

account42 wrote: post #209
batch12 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where they may have messed up is with the use of crowdstrike's branding. I've worked for a company that had a near 100% success rate with taking over domains that used their branding. Not just taking down the site, but taking ownership of the whole domain.

Trademark is about protecting customers not for companies to protect their image.

Sorry, do you mean morally, by intent/design or legally?

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#220

Post by arp242 »

Y_Y wrote: post #215
arp242 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was even willing to sell it for €5,000. If they had just paid that relatively small sum instead of getting all triggered that someone might ask money they would have had the domain. Hilarious. Good on this Christian fella for winning. What a bunch of idiots. This does bring up a question though; I've had arp242.net for a long time, and obviously that's not my actual name. Can some company register "arp242" as a tr…

For the record, common law generally doesn't have a solid concept of actual/legal/"real" name, if you're known by a name then it's your name. My birth cert, bank accounts, passports etc. are issued in various jurisdictions with various names. I'm not an international man of mystery or tax cheat, but I'm known by various equally legitimate names. It is a bit of a bother when someone around they must all be identical,…

That is perhaps true in some Common Law jurisdictions (US?), but not for much of the world, including some Common Law jurisdiction such as the UK and Ireland. The first name I use daily is different from what's on my passport and I've gotten into trouble with this in both the UK and Ireland.
Post reply on HN