Divergence: Online developer files lawsuit over fraudulent DMCA takedown

Tags

, , , ,

Here’s a case of first impression in Oregon. Plaintiff, developer of the popular online game Divergence: Online, has brought an action against a disgruntled designer for a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 512(f). In other words, Plaintiff claims that Defendant filed a fraudulent DMCA takedown notice. The allegedly false takedown notice had resulted in Plaintiff’s game being removed from Steam (a game distribution platform) for several days, costing Plaintiff “potentially thousands of dollars in sales.”

As general information, a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) Takedown is a procedure by which copyright owners can have infringing content removed from a website by providing notice to the internet service provider/hosting company. 512(f) was included in the DMCA to prevent fraudulent takedown reports, but it has rarely been enforced until recently. Copyright owners making a false DMCA notice are responsible for “any damages” incurred as a result of their action.

The Steam takedown (and eventual return) made gaming news and this lawsuit will likely do the same, as fraudulent DMCA takedowns have become a recurring problem in the online realm. Last year saw the first-ever award of damages for a fraudulent DMCA takedown under 512(f).

Stay tuned for updates.

512(f)

Stained Glass Llama, Corp. v. Bonner

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00253-MO
File Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Plaintiff: Stained Glass Llama, Corp.
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell, Drew P. Taylor of Crowell Law
Defendant: Robert William Bonner
Cause: Violation of 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) (False DMCA Notice)
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael W. Mosman

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – House Spirits Distillery v. Pilot House Spirits

Tags

, ,

This trademark dispute involves Plaintiff’s registered HOUSE SPIRITS trademark and Defendant’s recently adopted PILOT HOUSE SPIRITS trademark.

Some background on the lawsuit: Astoria Distillery That Just Changed Its Name Gets Sued Over New Name

House Spirits Distillery LLC v. Pilot House Spirits LLC

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00141-BR
File Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Plaintiff: House Spirits Distillery LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Steven M. Wilker, Eric Beach of Tonkon Torp LLC
Defendant: Pilot House Spirits LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Anna J. Brown

Complaint:

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Evox Productions v. Chrome Data Solutions

Tags

, , , , , ,

Evox Productions, LLC v. Chrome Data Solutions, LP et al

Court Case Number: 3:2016-cv-00057 3
File Date: Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Plaintiff: Evox Productions LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Anna Sortun of Tonkon Torp LLP
Defendant: Chrome Data Solutions, LP, Chrome Systems Inc., Does 1-10
Cause: Contributory Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Breach of Contract, Contractual Indemnity, Accounting, Declaratory Relief
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Webb v. Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al

Tags

, , , , , ,

Webb v. Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al

Court Case Number: 3:2015-cv-02380
File Date: Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Plaintiff: Vincent L. Webb
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen J. Joncus of Joncus Law LLC
Defendant: Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al
Cause: Violation of the Permanent Injunction, Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Trademark Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Fraud
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Stacie F. Beckerman

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Blue Sky Wellness Studio v. Blue Sky of Portland

Tags

, , , ,

Bridgit Beasley, P.C. d/b/a Blue Sky Wellness Studio v. Blue Sky of Portland, LLC

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-02327
File Date: Monday, December 14, 2015
Plaintiff: Bridgit Beasley, P.C. d/b/a Blue Sky Wellness Studio
Plaintiff Counsel: Thomas E. Scanlon
Defendant: Blue Sky of Portland, LLC
Cause: Federal Unfair Competition, State and Common Law Trademark Infringement, State Unlawful Trade and Business Practices
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John Jelderks

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. TRB Acquisitions

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

This adidas lawsuit involves its triangular “Badge of Sport Mark” and “RBK” trademarks. The alleged infringer is a New York-based company and its products are allegedly sold side-by-side with adidas products in retail stores. The Complaint shows a photograph allegedly taken at TJ Maxx.

Screen Shot 2015-11-12 at 8.21.22 AM

adidas America Inc. et al v. TRB Acquisitions LLC

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-02113
File Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG, Adidas International Marketing B.V., Reebok International Ltd.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: TRB Acquisitions LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, State Trademark Dilution, Injury to Business Reputation
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael H. Simon

Complaint:

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Versatop Support Systems v. Georgia Expo et al

Tags

, ,

This lawsuit involves knockoff “support structures for displays that are used at trade shows, entertainment, educational, political and promotional events.”

Versatop Support Systems, Inc. v. Georgia Expo Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-02030
File Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Plaintiff: Versatop Support Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: David P. Cooper, Owen W. Dukelow of Kolisch Hartwell PC
Defendant: Georgia Expo Inc., Topfinger Equipment (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
Cause: Copyright Infringement, False Designation of Origin
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: John Jelderks

Complaint:

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Synopsys files DMCA action against counterfeit licensees

Tags

, , ,

Plaintiff Synopsys, the fifteenth largest software company in the world, offers a suite of software solutions for designing and testing computer processor chips. The software is made available by Plaintiff only under the terms of their limited license. Defendants, residents of Oregon, have allegedly “used counterfeit keys obtained through hacker websites” to access and use Plaintiff’s software in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Synopsys Inc. v. Chiyeu Yeu Chao et al

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01953
File Date: Thursday, October 15, 2015
Plaintiff: Synopsys Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Brenna K. Legaard of Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt
Kristin S. Cornuelle of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Defendant: Chiyeu Yeu Chao, Jongru Ru Guo, Paul Hua, Hao Shang, Does 1-10
Cause: Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael W. Mosman

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. Cougar Sport

Tags

, , , , ,

adidas is back with more “Three-Stripe” litigation, this time against Cougar Sport, a New York-based clothing company selling apparel with four stripes (2 light, 2 dark). adidas has a history of attempting to expand its “Three-Stripe” trademark rights beyond, well, just three stripes. Three can also mean 2 stripes and, if adidas has its way here, 4 stripes.

Screen Shot 2015-10-07 at 8.34.17 AM

Screen Shot 2015-10-07 at 8.36.05 AM

The Three-Stripe mark is so famous and distinctive, as adidas frequently reminds us in its Complaint, there must certainly be an argument made that consumers would immediately recognize that 2 and 4-stripe apparel are obviously NOT adidas products.

Earlier this year, fashion designer Marc Jacobs was set to test adidas’ rights to “four stripes,” but adidas voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit shortly after filing the Complaint. Perhaps Cougar Sport should hire Marc Jacobs’ attorneys…

adidas America Inc. et al v. Cougar Sport Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01856-SI
File Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc., adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Cougar Sport Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael H. Simon

Complaint

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America et al v. Skechers USA

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

adidas has a long history with Skechers. In 1994, adidas filed suit for trademark infringement over Skechers‘s Karl Kani footwear. The companies entered into a settlement agreement the following year (the “1995 Agreement,” attached below). Under this agreement, Skechers acknowledged that adidas is the exclusive owner of the THREE STRIPE DESIGN, agreed not to use the THREE STRIPE DESIGN or any mark confusingly similar thereto, and agreed to cease distribution of its KARL KANI sport shoe.

Between 2008 and 2013, adidas and Skechers allegedly entered into five separate confidential settlement agreements about infringements and dilutions of the Three-Stripe Mark. This most recent complaint from adidas claims that “notwithstanding the 1995 Agreement and the subsequent 2008-2013 Agreements–and in continuing, blatant disregard of adidas‘s rights–Skechers yet again is . . . selling footwear . . . bearing a confusingly similar imitation of the adidas Marks.”

adidas is especially aggrieved about a shoe that is (allegedly) confusingly similar to their famous Stan Smith shoe and claims that Skechers intends their “Stan Smith Knock-Off” shoe to be confusingly similar to the adidas Trade Dress and offers evidence that the Skechers website included the terms “stan smith” and “adidas original” in the source code.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Skechers USA Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01741-JE
File Date: Monday, September 14, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc.adidas AGAdidas International Marketing B.V.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Skechers USA Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark and Trade Dress Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark and Trade Dress Dilution, State Trademark Dilution with respect to the Three-Stripe Mark, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Breach of Contract
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge John Jelderks

Complaint:

1995 Agreement:

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 175 other followers