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

71–80 of 243 posts

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#71

Post by akira2501 »

inopinatus wrote: post #55
mmaunder wrote: post #15

This is why you want to remove as many intermediaries between your content and your audience as possible. Ideal scenario is your own ASN and a pipe with a commit and your own physical box. The only takedown target is your upstream bandwidth provider. From there you’re adding takedown targets: hosting provider, edge cache/firewall provider, commercial CMS, etc. So pick your middle ground carefully. I’d suggest that ch…

In this case Cloudflare, in a spasm of comprehension failure, soiled themselves further by proving unable to distinguish between a trademark complaint and a copyright complaint, and erroneously labelled the former as the latter. Irrespective of the fair use merits on display, the DMCA simply does not apply to trademark disputes.

Since this is "their core business" it's hard to believe that this material misrepresentation wasn't knowing or willful. I believe they've partially opened themselves to a counter suit on this point.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#72

Post by Dalewyn »

cj wrote: post #33

FWIW: CSC is a company that other companies hire to act on its behalf. It's very likely that the company you work for uses CSC as it's registered agent in the State of Delaware for administrative purposes (CSC doesn't really do anything other than exist on paper and file annual forms to satisfy legal and compliance requirements necessary for companies to exist in the US). I wasn't aware they file DMCA requests on beh…

> Seems to be having the opposite effect for Crowdstrike considering they paid to have their brand "protected" and now this guy's site is getting lots of traffic!

Streissand Effect.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#73

Post by airstrike »

SXX wrote: post #66
actionfromafar wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next up - Cloudstrike.com?

AirStrike.com - considering downtime of so many airlines.

Sadly I know from personal experience that that's been registered for a long time...

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#74

Post by richbell »

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.

When I opened that link, I didn't except to be captivated by what is otherwise a boring procedural document.

Shame on SCIPIO.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#76

Post by rhabarba »

eftychis wrote: post #36
MarkusQ wrote: post #31

CrowdStrike definitely has the chops when it comes to taking sites down, I'll give them that.

I guess this site is using Linux or BSD and they had to venture outside their usual modus operandi to DMCA... /s

Don't forget that Clownstrike took down Linux systems in April.

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#77

Post by akira2501 »

mistercow wrote: post #23

> I’m most definitely not trying to put CloudFlare in the middle on this… so I told CloudFlare that I will take the site off of CloudFlare; however, it is staying on the internet… I mean that’s kind, but the whole point of DMCA safe harbor provisions is that they aren’t in the middle of this. They send along the notice, you file a counter notice, and that’s it for their involvement, yeah? If CrowdStrike wants to pres…

I think he's attempting to point out that CloudFront's basic value proposition is meaningless if a random third party company can automatically destroy your websites with a single letter.

Worse still, the letter is obviously incorrect for a trademark dispute, possibly illegal as a result, and should have never made it to the customer before being reviewed or followed up on by internal staff.

My read was "sorry you guys don't want to do your job so I'll just take my business elsewhere. goodbye."

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#78

Post by [deleted] »

akira2501 wrote: post #71
inopinatus wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case Cloudflare, in a spasm of comprehension failure, soiled themselves further by proving unable to distinguish between a trademark complaint and a copyright complaint, and erroneously labelled the former as the latter. Irrespective of the fair use merits on display, the DMCA simply does not apply to trademark disputes.

Since this is "their core business" it's hard to believe that this material misrepresentation wasn't knowing or willful. I believe they've partially opened themselves to a counter suit on this point.

[deleted]

Re: CrowdStrike representatives issue trademark infringement notice to ClownStrike

#79

Post by xyst »

Lawyers making bank on the billables for these bullshit DMCA claims. Unless it’s their internal/inhouse submitting these claims.

The brand/rep of crowdstrike is already tarnished. Why let the pain continue via the Barbara Streisand effect?

Not only are they technically incompetent, but now they are also petty. Poor decision making to be honest.

(note: “csc” also owns crowdstrike.sucks and clownstrike.sucks)

Post reply on HN