- Impact
- 3,028
Another case of overactive laywers racking up as many billable hours as possible under the guise of getting something for nothing for their hapless client. (imho) Hope this guy sticks to his case even if he doesn't have a lawyer.
All this fuss over a silly .biz name.
Operating Co. files suit over Web domain name
By: HEATH HIXSON and JIM BELEW, Villager/Courier staff August 21, 2003
James Nelson recently discovered just how much some companies value Web domain names.
The Woodlands Land Development Co., L.P., is suing the 36-year-old pizza deliveryman from Spring over a domain name company lawyers say infringes on the business' trademarked name of The Woodlands.
"I am not trying to take away from anyone else," Nelson said. "I am just trying to provide a service."
In November 2001, Nelson registered the domain name of thewoodlands.biz for use as The Woodlands Business Directory Web site.
Since then, he and the company have argued over the site. The argument even prompted a ruling by the World Intellectual Property Organization, which allowed Nelson to keep control of the name. But the WIPO ruling also left open the possibility that the company had legal rights under trademark laws.
In June, company lawyers filed a lawsuit in federal court in Houston. Nelson contends he is only providing a desired service to area residents. But the company claims his ownership of the domain name is "cyber squatting."
"He is using our federally and state-registered trademark without our permission," said Paul Lazzaro, vice president of marketing and public affairs for TWOC. "The most valuable thing you have as a business or a person is your name."
Nelson owns IFICS, a Web site design company that provides locating services to companies through various directory Web sites it owns. He hopes to develop the site into a moneymaking enterprise and charge companies $35 annually to list their information.
Thewoodlands.biz was launched in December 2002, shortly after the WIPO decision. In January, documents show the company offered a compromise agreement that included a portion calling for a $30,000 payment for the domain name or threats of a lawsuit.
But when Nelson denied the offer, documents dated in February and provided by Nelson show company lawyers claimed the payment provision to be an incorrect version and called the clause an "extraneous paragraph," denying any such offer was ever made.
"The next day," Nelson said, "I received a letter that stated that the entire paragraph was basically a big typo and there should not have been an offer included."
Lazzaro rejected any claim that a financial offer was ever made and called the inclusion of the January agreement "a mistake" by Winstead Sechrest and Minick, the law firm representing the Operating Company.
The company's next action was to file the lawsuit. Nelson said he must figure out a way to find $30,000 to defend himself, a price that puts it far out of the range of his $6-per-hour financial resources.
"If I had a lawyer to talk to, I'd fight it. I want to fight it," Nelson said. "The whole reason they're doing it is because they know I can't fight it."
"We (the Operating Company) are adamant on protecting our brand," said Lazzaro, who called Nelson "a cyber squatter who is trying to profit off of our name."
Lazzaro predicted the company would be successful in protecting its trademark name.
Nelson's first legal documents in the lawsuit are due by Aug. 28 and Nelson said he isn't sure what he is going to do. He said his Web site has 194 members, including many who have encouraged him to continue the legal battle. One member, he said, even sent him a check for $500.
James McBride, the attorney now handling the case for Winstead
Sechrest and Minick, said the WIPO arbitrator found that Nelson did not use the name in bad faith, but left open the possibility that Nelson was infringing on trademarks.
"The arbitrator has no standing, no rights to enter an order against Mr. Nelson regarding whether or not he is infringing on trademark rights," McBride said. "Therefore, the only remedy is to go to either the Southern District of Texas or a Texas state court and try to get that remedy of infringing on the trademark rights of The Woodlands. So that's what we've done."
At this point, McBride said, "We're not asking for anything other than giving up the rights" to the domain name.
"I can tell you from my standpoint, The Woodlands, what they want to do is just ensure that they protect their trademark," he said.
©The Villager 2003
All this fuss over a silly .biz name.
