Archive Bucknuts is threatening to sue me...

Heretic

Posts: 18,820

Mar 8, 2010 12:18am

http://www.hereticsworld.com seems to be open!

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Mar 8, 2010 12:30am

www.ljhasagiantwang.com is open as well

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 9:30am

JJHuddle is not a registered trademark.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 9:30am

I'm fighting this bitch.

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Mar 8, 2010 1:06pm

Let me know if you need some money. With a graduating gf that hasn't accepted a job yet and her student loans from undergrad coming due in June, I can only spare a bit,but anything to help.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 1:22pm

I just got off the phone with Coach_Sampson. He wanted to discuss the issue with me. He brought up a good point. Remember http://www.ohhuddle.com? You think BuckNuts is suing them? I highly doubt it.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 2:01pm

Just got off the phone with their attorney. What a dick.

He admitted they do not have a registered trademark yet they are still trademarked because they've been around for so long.

Bull fucking shit.

Fly4Fun

Posts: 7,730

Mar 8, 2010 2:04pm

LoL... if it's not a registered trademark they have no case. Go back to freehuddle.com imo.

Even if JJHuddle was a trademark... the word Huddle itself is not and can be used.

Fab1b

Posts: 12,949

Mar 8, 2010 2:24pm

Fuck them assholes!!! I am down with whatever you choose Justin, I don't blame ya if its not worth the time and money it may take to fight them, however if you decide to fight I will do what I can to certainly help!

Heretic

Posts: 18,820

Mar 8, 2010 2:27pm

What fab said. "It's not officially trademarked...but it really is because it's been around so long!"

BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! That guy must have gotten his legal expertise from the same place Mike Clark learned his people skills.

sej

Posts: 540

Mar 8, 2010 3:27pm

I walked by the building today. I'm STILL thinking my idea is the best approach

But seriously, if there's anything I can do to help out, let me know. I'm not above picketing. I'll even dress scantily...not that it will be different from any other day

GoChiefs

Posts: 16,754

Mar 8, 2010 3:34pm

wes_mantooth

Posts: 17,977

Mar 8, 2010 3:36pm

I am down for a good legal fight....I will paypal you $3.72

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 3:41pm

I'm having another call with my attorney friend tonight to get some more advice in light of the recent revelations. I plan on meeting up with a local attorney at some point this week to discuss things as well.

wes_mantooth

Posts: 17,977

Mar 8, 2010 3:47pm

This site went from serious business to severly serious business. I love that we just kind of dicked around with the idea of this site on facebook a few months back, now you have to have legal council over it.....crazyness.

wes_mantooth

Posts: 17,977

Mar 8, 2010 3:51pm

Also, how long before they sue all of us for using the same usernames as we had over there?...lol.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 3:56pm

The Lanham act is one thing they are claiming I am violating.

To prove infringement of a mark pursuant to the Lanham Act, a claimant must demonstrate the following:

1. it owns a valid mark mark, i.e., the mark, registered or not, is entitled to protection;

2. the defendant is using the mark, or a confusingly similar mark, in commerce;

3. without permission;

4. the defendant's use of the mark in commerce is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to who actually is the source of either the plaintiff's or the defendant's products; and

5. the defendant has no valid defense.

Fab1b

Posts: 12,949

Mar 8, 2010 4:01pm

Ok so now my question becomes does a simple name change end this ordeal or do they basically want you to cease at all cost of operating an online message board?

Fly4Fun

Posts: 7,730

Mar 8, 2010 4:15pm

So basically... their argument would be that the word "Huddle" is their mark, "whether registered or not" and that we are confusing people.

So it appears the simple solution of having the warning "This website is in now way associated with Bucknuts, JJHuddle or any of it's products" or whatever was mentioned earlier would solve that problem.

It would clearly clear up the idea that there could be any confusion whatsoever.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 4:15pm

A name change and ceasing using the domain freehuddle.com completely, i.e. it can no longer point here will end it.

So what happens if I sell the domain to, say my mom, for $1 and then she points it here? Ain't shit they could do then.

jjhacker has http://www.jjhuddle.net pointing here.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 4:17pm

Fly4Fun wrote: So basically... their argument would be that the word "Huddle" is their mark, "whether registered or not" and that we are confusing people.

So it appears the simple solution of having the warning "This website is in now way associated with Bucknuts, JJHuddle or any of it's products" or whatever was mentioned earlier would solve that problem.

It would clearly clear up the idea that there could be any confusion whatsoever.

Yes, to all points.

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Mar 8, 2010 4:18pm

justincredible wrote: The Lanham act is one thing they are claiming I am violating.

To prove infringement of a mark pursuant to the Lanham Act, a claimant must demonstrate the following:

1. it owns a valid mark mark, i.e., the mark, registered or not, is entitled to protection;

2. the defendant is using the mark, or a confusingly similar mark, in commerce;

3. without permission;

4. the defendant's use of the mark in commerce is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to who actually is the source of either the plaintiff's or the defendant's products; and

5. the defendant has no valid defense.

Going back to this, I've bolded the part that I think makes their claim bullshit. What "commerce" is going on here? I am not selling a good or a service. In fact, I'm not selling a fucking thing. Free beer for everyone!

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Mar 8, 2010 4:19pm

How can they claim the Lanham act when your users are not giving you anything in exchange for your product?

You are not using the site for commerce. I'm assuming a lawyer has brought that to your attention correct?

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Mar 8, 2010 4:19pm

Fuck, I think we share the same brain....

Fly4Fun

Posts: 7,730

Mar 8, 2010 4:21pm

justincredible wrote:
justincredible wrote: The Lanham act is one thing they are claiming I am violating.

To prove infringement of a mark pursuant to the Lanham Act, a claimant must demonstrate the following:

1. it owns a valid mark mark, i.e., the mark, registered or not, is entitled to protection;

2. the defendant is using the mark, or a confusingly similar mark, in commerce;

3. without permission;

4. the defendant's use of the mark in commerce is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to who actually is the source of either the plaintiff's or the defendant's products; and

5. the defendant has no valid defense.

Going back to this, I've bolded the part that I think makes their claim bullshit. What "commerce" is going on here? I am not selling a good or a service. In fact, I'm not selling a fucking thing. Free beer for everyone!

LJ wrote: How can they claim the Lanham act when your users are not giving you anything in exchange for your product?

You are not using the site for commerce. I'm assuming a lawyer has brought that to your attention correct?

This is also a great point. Although, I'm not sure if any donations made would affect this.