Hot answers tagged

38

I'm not sure of the term but it's similar to coming out with a soda and calling it Koka-Kola and hoping you can get away with it. You won't. If you are going to compete, compete with superior products and service instead of trickery.


29

Let me be clear. There is one thing I know fairly well, it is copyright law. I am not a lawyer, however, knowledge of copyright was a constant requirement of my consultancy for 30 years. As an added bonus, I consulted primarily to telecos and often worked with subscriber data and data analysis and presentation of said data for sale and re-use. I am at least, ...


23

First, as already pointed out, it's trickery and unlikely to serve you well. Someone typing in a specific domain name knows what site they want, and it isn't yours; how do you suppose they'll react to being duped? I certainly can't imagine it'll be a positive reflection on your business. And do enough people actually type a URL into the address bar to ...


22

I've been on the other end of this scenario. It was a couple of years ago, but I can't imagine much has changed. We held the trademark on the domain name—let's say we were ExtraSpecialVeeblefetzers.com, so a competitor opened up ExtraSpecialVeeblefetzers.co.uk. So I dashed off a letter that we were going to file a complaint, not with the trademark office, ...


21

Copyright applies to content. So copyright would not apply here since the content is uniquely yours (assumption) and that the theme is available for use by many. Trademarks should be registered (generally). Unless you are using a trademark that is not yours, this does not apply. However, too much similarity may still be considered trade infringement ...


17

Okay. This is a rather odd one, but not as tragic as you would think. I am not sure what the payoff would be. This makes absolutely no sense to me as to why someone would do this. I cannot see an advantage for the hacker at all. The good news is the visitor is reaching your site. However, there will be a hit from an SEO standpoint so you want to fix this ...


14

You've really got two licenses there: The Apache License 2.0 and the MIT License. Both have restrictions that require copyright and other notices to remain intact. As indicated here for the Apache License under Licensing conditions: in every licensed file, any original copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices in redistributed code must be ...


12

This completely depends on your contract. If you have a contract with them stating they will build a website and manage it for you, but they retain the rights, then no you can not rebuild it. There are two separate issues. One is the code to build the website, and one is the design. It is the Design related contract that determines if you can rebuild ...


12

You may not use embedded YouTube videos behind a paywall. That is prohibited by YouTube in section 4 of the YouTube terms of service: D. You agree not to use the Service for any of the following commercial uses unless you obtain YouTube's prior written approval: the sale of access to the Service; Youtube does make exceptions for using the ...


11

Kim Dot Com was a German operating servers in New Zealand and yet the FBI still raided him. Despite the raid being deemed entirely illegal in hindsight, that data and business was destroyed regardless. Basically you can not avoid the US claiming jurisdiction wherever they please unless you work in countries like China because the US has no regard for ...


10

They are technically all correct because the proper usage of a copyright notice is to inform its users there is a copyright license or agreement on the website in question, therefor regardless of the usage they are all correct assuming they all mean the same thing... i.e these are all the same: © Business Name Copyright Business name 2015 © Business Name ...


9

First off, how are you going to get traffic to that domain? Google aren't going to index it if it simply redirects to your domain. If you use any other means to promote traffic to your site through this other domain you're running the risk of being guilty of fraud. Secondly, Nominet (the UK registry) have strict rules about malicious domain registration; ...


9

1) Yes ii - Unknown, but it may help to keep the information under seal in the court records instead of being accessible to anyone who requests the records of the case. c. I wouldn't at this time. This has very little to do with you personally. The plaintiff is attempting to show that Google acted in an arbitrary or capricious fashion when they closed his ...


8

The first fines specifically for cookie law compliance failures have been handed out by the Spanish Data Protection Authority. They were given to two companies running a number of jewellery websites, one of which was an online store. Further Reading


8

According to Judge William A. Fletcher's opinion on Office Depot v. Zuccarini, the jurisdiction over a domain name is dependant on the jurisdiction of the domain name registry. The registry for .com domains is VeriSign, which is headquartered in Virginia, USA. Assuming that the judge's opinion is still applicable, this means the jurisdiction of .com domain ...


8

No it is not legal. It is copyright infringement to copy and republish any article without the proper license to do so. Noting the source and adding a canonical does not in any way limit your legal liability. It sounds like you want to republish all articles as if they were licensed under the Creative Commons attribution license. Content that is ...


7

Here is a list of policies: Permissions. If your issue isn't covered in these, I suggest you Contact Them via email.


7

As per my comments, it would be unwise to solicit the sale of example.com directly to the owner of example.net, as that might be interpreted or argued as a sign of bad faith, and/or that you don't have any legitimate interests in example.com, which are two of the three elements necessary for successfully wining a Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy ...


6

One thing that doesn't seem very clear in the other answers here... Whether it's "legal" or not, first and foremost, depends on the country. If we're talking about the United States, for example, then using the data itself is not illegal. However, I'd advise you to use the real data from the US Census. They offer tons of data through what they call TIGER ...


6

Your find a lot of information by searching on Google, with any website if the website is accessible by a country or regional zone then you most comply with their rules and laws, if you don't agree then you should make attempts to notify users or block those users from your website. Hosting a website in X, a domain in X doesn't mean it can't break laws in ...


6

This is unfortunately a common practice on the internet and so there is a generally accepted process which many domain owners avail themselves of and that is to contact the registrar of the offending similar domain name with a trademark infringement, in most instances the domain registrar will either disable the offending domain name and quarantine it, or ...


5

Technically, you can get sued (at least in the United States). The logo images are owned by social networks. They have copyright on them. You have to have a licence for to use them at all. (Generally, the sites give a licence to use them for social sharing buttons when unaltered.) They generally have policies against modifying the logo images in any way: ...


5

While closetnoc has discussed the issue of the data itself, there's a larger legal concern: you are not authorized to access the API offering the data. The baseline for most computer crime laws involves the notion of "unauthorized access to a computer system". You should not confuse this reference to authorization in the legal sense with the concept of ...


5

The short answer? No. Speaking from a U.S. perspective: In order for anyone to file a complaint and recover a registered domain, you would have to knowingly register a trademark as a domain name. The term knowingly is a high standard to meet. The trademark owner has to prove that you intentionally and knowingly used a trademark. There are other ...


5

Depends what you do with it. If it's an innocent use that has nothing to do with the family in question, you are probably fine. I'm sure there are people with the given name Trivago out there. They don't get any rights to the Trivago trademark. If someone "took it personally" and tried to sue you, they'd get spanked out of court, possibly with ...


5

Morgan Lewis is a law firm with offices in the UK and they have published information (as of 2012 which is the most recent authoritative publication I can find on the subject) on the ICO's guidance on deleting personal data under the DPA 1998. According to their legal assessment of the guidance the ICO recognized the difficulty in deleting electronic data ...


5

No. You cannot. Copyright and trademark law applies no matter what you are using it for or for whom. But just ask for permission. This removes all ambiguity. Promoting their product that you are selling is in their best interests, too, so marketing may help you. That said, some companies still want to protect how their product is presented and may not want ...


4

The good news for you is that it is usually far cheaper for you to bid on your own trademarks than it is for competition to do so. In my experience, you can usually bid on your own trademarks and get the top position for 1 cent or 2 cents. This is because: The click through rate will be higher for you because you are the official site The content on ...


4

It probably depends on the nature of the data. Pure data (think telephone directory) cannot be copyrighted. So a list of cities from an API should be fair game to copy and show to users. However, if that API has descriptions of the city those descriptions would fall under copyright law and you wouldn't be able to use them without violating copyright. If ...


4

Happened to me (designer/coder/hoster) before – and will happen again. My approach always was that it's of course sad to see clients go, but of course it's ok if they take their website with them. And if that means they want to re-write the code but keep the layout I rather feel flattered, than angry. So my point of view is that your website is your website ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible